Theres nothing great about Alexander

[Feraliminal Lycanthropizer]

What a gaye movie, emphasis on the gaye part. Can somebody who knows the story give a briefing on this "Legend", because I couldnt see it through all the man hugging and penisy rubbing. Those guys could be in a BM video with all eyeliner they wear.

This movie was total S H I T E

 

[Pessimism]

brief answer: alexander conquers the known world of the time, and dies young without an heir

the guy playing alexander (the overated actor whose name i dont care to know) doesnt even look fit enough to play someone of tha stature . . . . he looks like he should be sipping martinis in a gay toga club

 

[Evil Dead]

Alexander was a raging homo anyways, so I was wondering if they would show that crap in the movie, guess so.

was it as gay or gayer than Troy?

 

[Belgar]

Caligula had gay tendencies but at least he was vicious and sadistic heheheh I thought Alexander movie was coming out this wknd?
I think that leaving historical movies to Hollywood always calls for blunders. The only historical movies this country is good at making are WW2 and Vietnam movies. Now they have ruined great conquerors, first Troy and now Alexander. Troy was ok, but historically not accurate. Last real good roman area movies were Gladiator and Braveheart.

 

[Brainkisser]

Except Braveheart takes place about 1000 years after the fall of the Roman Empire... If we want to get picky, Gladiator wasn't totally acurate either. For example the whole turned thumb wasn't up or down for life or death. It was just sticking the thumb out to indicate death, direction didn't matter. Braveheart had problems like that as well; the battle at Stirling was really the battle of Stirling Bridge. They had to ditch the bridge because of time and money constraints. Of course any movie will make sacrifices of accuracy for a better plot, so what can you do.

 

[Belgar]

Except Braveheart takes place about 1000 years after the fall of the Roman Empire... If we want to get picky, Gladiator wasn't totally acurate either. For example the whole turned thumb wasn't up or down for life or death. It was just sticking the thumb out to indicate death, direction didn't matter. Braveheart had problems like that as well; the battle at Stirling was really the battle of Stirling Bridge. They had to ditch the bridge because of time and money constraints. Of course any movie will make sacrifices of accuracy for a better plot, so what can you do.

Ah yeah sorry about the Braveheart mishap. Gladiator wasn't accurate either but both movies had something about them that made them more appealing or more real whereas the other one like Troy had this bigger is better Hollywood style to it. If one would make a movie that is historically accurate then you end up having 10 hour long movies with parts that would bore people to death. I wouldn't mind.

 

[Feraliminal Lycanthropizer]

was it as gay or gayer than Troy?

when i mean gay i mean alexander made out with his bestfriends. It was too fucing long, not to mention my brother moaning in pain having to watch two dudes makeout...worst atmosphere ever.

 

[Celtik Militia]

very true, all war movies aren't accurate, you name it! stalingrad for example doesnt fit the real story which didnt take place in the whole city but just around a little factory the two snipers had to fight for.. unlike in apocalypse now, apparently, the army would never have ordered an execution of a deserted officer.. and they didnt play wagner whilst charging with the helicopters... etc.. actually, hollywood war movies can be financed by the US army if they respect "the beauty of the army", which helps them to recruit, hence they aren't totally true, all the ugly parts of war are taken away, but the producers who dont want the army to censor some scenes have to pay it all for themselves, but its never historically acurate cause it stays hollywood.

 

[Thorshammer]

One movie I wouldn't mind seeing is The Viking Sagas.

 

[Celtik Militia]

lol, i heard about this movie on a cool site called www.vikingblood.net
there's a list of all viking movies, and its quite a good site about vikings... under construction...

 

[asmallchild]

Alexander = sucked. And it was as gay as Asgath when he's giving his dad a reach around.

 

[Tyra]

There are TWO movies out about Alexander right now. Which one are we on about? I.e should I just not see both of them?

Bisexuality was an accepted thing in that society, as with many other "classical" societies of the past (and some not so "classical" ones today), so in a sense, that really is accurate. Having said that, you do not want to get me started on historical accuracy in Hollywood. It is pittyful. Big budget movies like Gladiator and Troy are absolutely riddled with inaccuracies in everything from props to plain old historical facts, never mind the atrocities they refer to as costuming and weaponry. For someone like myself who spends not only time at work studying historical facts and items, but who also "plays hard" in historical costume and with historically accurate weapons, these things are bad enough. When they then distort the "facts" (the series of events that took place) to suit their own agenda, it really gets annoying. The issue to me is where to draw the line as to what is just a movie billed for fiction, or one billed as "historical drama".... Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrruff!