Now available is an all new and completely unrated version of Oliver Stone’s incredible epic film, loaded with nearly 40 minutes of additional never-before-seen footage, that takes the film to a new level of realism and intensity. Restructured and expanded into two acts with one intermission, Oliver Stone’s vision is delivered the way he originally conceived and intended. With the new, unrated and graphic battle scenes and unadulterated sensuality, it’s the movie you couldn’t see in theatres, now available on DVD for the very first time!
DVD Features:
Introduction
Theatrical Trailer
For better or worse (and in this case, it’s mostly for better), Oliver Stone’s Alexander Revisited should stand as the definitive version of Stone’s much-maligned epic about the great Asian conqueror. Following the DVD release of his previous Director’s Cut, Stone offers a video introduction here, explaining why he felt a third and final attempt at refining his film was necessary. Essentially, he’s using this opportunity to re-create the “road show” format of the Biblical epics of the 1950s and ’60s, with a three-and-a-half-hour running time (with an intermission at the two-hour mark) including 45 minutes of previously unseen footage. Stone has also significantly restructured the film, resulting in substantial (if not exactly redemptive) improvements in its narrative flow. Alexander (played in a torrent of emotions by Colin Farrell) is dying as the film opens, his final moments serving to bookend the film’s epic story, which incorporates flashback sequences to flesh out the Macedonian king’s back-story involving the turbulent battle of fate between his father, King Philip (Val Kilmer) and his scheming sorceress mother Olympia (Angelina Jolie, ridiculous accent and all), who insists that Alexander is literally a child of the gods.
In Stone’s final cut, epic battles remain chaotic (although Alexander’s strategy is somewhat easier to follow, with on-screen titles indicating left, right, and center during his army’s greatest maneuvers) and the ultra-violent battles are more graphically gory than ever (hence their “unrated” status). The animalistic lovemaking of Alexander and his barbarian bride Roxana (Rosario Dawson) is slightly extended (with Dawson as ravishing as ever), and Stone’s additional footage also improves the overall arc of Alexander’s relationship with his closest generals and male companions, although his most intimate homosexual encounters remain mostly discreet. As Alexander Revisited makes clear, the film’s weaknesses remain unavoidable, but Stone deserves credit for recognizing how a longer running time, and more disciplined narrative structure, would bring Alexander closer to the respect it never earned from critics and filmgoers alike. This is unquestionably a better film than it used to be, leaving us to wonder why it took three separate efforts to shape Alexander into its best possible presentation. –Jeff Shannon
Buy “Alexander, Revisited – The Final Cut “ For Only $6.00
February 1, 2006
#1
Troy came out in mid may and now set for winter this year, another Historical movie brought to 2004, i wonder if they’ll make a hitler movie next. Well i’m ok with the cast and the trailer seems fantastic so it’ll be a great release i hope, but don’t be too interested in this, the aim of this movie is not educational and it doesn’t focus in the historical events that happened, it just mostly shows us sex scenes with Cleopathra, what do you expect from Collin Farrell. This movie is great but don’t think it’ll win an oscar.
February 1, 2006
#2
with all the big names and big money, (a lot of extras, fancy props and sets gone to waste) I was shocked at the terrible result. The movie was biased more towards making sure every one knew that homosexuality existed in the ranks than it was with portraying historical accuracy and detail. It was more a political statement enforcing the mass acceptance of this practice in the modern world. The fact is that there is no ancient document that clearly attests that this was the way of things (at least in the “universal” degree portrayed in this film), therefore to included it so heavily in this film is an attempt to bias history in an unwarranted fashion. Unprofessional and unsuccessful, a sad reflection of our times – demoralized and disintegrating into darkness.
February 2, 2006
#3
This movie started out perfect. Alexander the Great is well known and should have been a perfect movie to depict the life and times of one so popular in his realm, but the amount of homosexual innuendos suggested in this movie made me sick. It ruined the entire movie for me and my family. YUCK YUCK YUCK
If you are sickened by extreme presentation of homosexuality, disregard this movie.
February 2, 2006
#4
Its one of the worst historical based movie I have ever seen. The implication that Alexander was a homosexual or bisexual does not cut it in terms of Macedonian society of the time period. There were strong friendships between men, which persist today, that have no sexual connotations. As a matter of fact men who dressed, painted themselves and acted as women were shunned by society and made fun of from Assirya in the east to Carthage in the west.The actress chosen for the part of Roxanne has no physical characteristics similar to her historical predecesor, except maybe her great body. But maybe casting a more ravishing woman in that part would have downgraded the supposedly homosexual relationship that Alexander is shown to have. The only good casting made was that of Alexander`s mother. I do not want to rehash other areas of criticism except to say that this is not a movie about Alexander The Great but rather of Alexander The Gay.
Maybe the director`s next movie will be making Richard The Lionhearted into Richard The Gayhearted, in which case he would again be sadly mistaken.
February 2, 2006
#5
The rating is based on the trailer. Hitler would be happy reading Hadi’s review. Nevertheless so many not’s, he gives 5 stars. It seems paranoic. And sex is part of our life.