I may have a million other things to do, but when Tristan Hughes comes on talking about a historic movie I simply have to put everything on hold and watch. Loved it.
Based on what I skimmed of the video, this is a typical Brit barbarian not pointing out that Greeks weren't blond like this Hellywood shit claims. See my series "Greeks, Latins, Iberians and Jews were, and are, NOT blond" where I defeat the garbage arguments in the replies to this comment.
Imagine being so pissed that you can't take a fortified island that you get your men to fill in the coast with soil and dirt to make a sandbar so you can attack by land. 😂😂
Or anything about Alexander on what is supposed to be The History Channel. Unless of course we have a season of UFOs and bigfoot helping Alexander conquer the Persians.
I worked on Alexander, Alexander was the best job I'd ever had and it paid so fkn well too, it was a joy. Last year I worked on Gladiator 2, you'll see it when you see it, I dont expect great things from it. What did I do, I made all the crest plumes, everyone of them, every plume, Colin Farrell's and all the background artists plumes were made by me and my workers. That is our speciality at The Plumery.
do u by any chance know the plot of Gladiator 2?, im not asking for the plot fyi, just askin if u know, or perhaps if u know u had to sign an agreement to not talk about it. mad respect to you sir, i cant fkin wait for gladiator 2, the first one was a banger, hope the second one is good aswell.
@@Jeremy0426 Sorry, they wouldnt show me a script, far too down the rankings. All I think is that it takes place immediately after the death of Commodus. Historically this is an interesting time, as it is a reign of 4 Caesars, and the last one to take power, and the most celebrated is Septimius Severus, the Emperor of colour who was born in Africa and half Italian and half Moorish. He was also Praetor of Britain where he had been campaigning when Commodus was assassinated. So there is massive scope for something brilliant to be delivered, with fascinating events and characters. But this is Ridley Scot, who thinks a historical event is a diversion from a good plot. It always goes the same way with Ridley, he says he'll make a historical epic, gets lots of historical advisors, ignores them, they walk off stage and he screams Im not making a fkn documentary. I will add that the actors and writers strike delayed filming massively, no idea what effect this will have on its delivery. We were all on a tight schedule to deliver all on time to Morocco which we did, and then no filming happened.
@@williamwallace4080 Although Geta from Leptis Magna which was a originally a Carthaginian city, by this period it was mostly inhabited by North Africans from the West part of N Africa as the Carthaginians had been cleared out by Numidians hundreds of years earlier, and so he was not Punic/Phoenician, more Mauritanian or Moroccan.
Alexander 2004, is one of my all time favorite historic movies. I specially like the longest version "Alexander. The final cut". This movie really portrays greatly the greatness of Alexander, but also his flaws at times. Its a real gem, one of a kind movie.
Totally agree. It's in my top 5 favourite movies of all time. Robin Lan Fox's book 'Alexander the Great' is I think a great companion piece as it feels like Fox is putting his research together for the movie in it. Also really like how Tristan picked up on the accents - the Northern/Scottish/Irish accents representing Macedon and English for the Greeks - Oliver Stone states that was his intent (I was a big sucker for director commentaries!)
I tried to watch it but I can't suspend my disbelief. Just based on Alexander's appearance alone: They have dyed his hair blonde but they forgot to dye his eyebrows so he looks like a man with black hair who has dyed his hair blonde. His hair is wavy, not curly and his eyes are brown not blue. All the armour looks plastic and fake. In my opinion the life of Alexander has everything to make a fantastic movie and they somehow managed to ruin it.
36:53 , Fun fact, When I was 10 years old I cut my wrist to the bone on a glass window, and for a few seconds as result of the shock, everything around me was coloured red while instinct and adrenaline took complete control over my body. That is also why that particular scene and this movie in general always resonated with me.
@@vanyadolly yes, there is. One time a guy at a bar bumped into me and spilled my beer, he tried to apologize (cvck) but I saw red and just started swinging. By the time I realize what happened everyone in the club was knocked out.
As an avid history enthusiast, I found this Ancient Historian's reaction to the 'Alexander' movie both insightful and captivating. His deep dives into the historical accuracies and inaccuracies shed light on the complexities of portraying such a legendary figure on screen. It's refreshing to see a nuanced analysis that combines scholarly expertise with cinematic appreciation.
Alexander like Napoleon and Julius Caesar is one of those legendary figures from history who would need a 10 hour film to do justice to his deeds. No film maker could do that and no public audience would go and see it.
You can do a movie about a single battle or campaign well enough, or even a single unit - the 70's film Waterloo does this for Napoleon's 100 Days, or the film Gettysburg. And even then they're 3-4 hours long, and somewhat light in developing characters. Glory does it a bit better, but I think that's slightly dramatized. Band of Brothers does the unit thing the best, but that's a whole series. (edit: corrected date of Waterloo film)
When this film was being made I don't think they realized how little history was being taught in public schools in the USA. When the audience doesn't know ANYTHING about the events being retold it important to lay the scenes out chronologically.
I mean, there is a whole lot of history and not really a lot of time to cover it, even if you're not trying to wrangle 30 kids. Heaven forbid people should ever learn anything on their own, outside of school.
The chronology of the movie is pretty obvious though. There are only two timelines. One starts at Alexander's childhood and the other starts at Gaugamela and they intercut one another at appropriate points of the story to draw connections, parallels or to mirror two scenes in his life. It's pretty much perfect in that regard. It's just sad that they had to omit such big junks of his story. It would have been even better had it been a series.
I worked with Capt. Dale Dye on a recent project. He was the military advisor on Alexander too. He told me that before this movie the accepted wisdom was that an assempled Macedonian phalanx could only move forward and backwards. He was able to show that they could do much more and pivot successfully, and that academics from across the world flew out to see how it actually could be done, in awe at the revelation.
@@crackshack2 as Dale related it to me, academics believed that manoevre was possible, but only in a very limited manner. He (proudly) told me that after he trained up the background artists they could do well beyond what was previously understood to be possible while staying in formation.
Can i ask what the recent project is? Always interested in hearing of any project with good historical advisors. Shogun is such a revelation in terms of authenticity and quality and i hope there’s more like it coming out
Four versions of the film exist, the initial theatrical cut and three home video director's cuts: the "Director's Cut" in 2005, the "Final Cut" in 2007, and the "Ultimate Cut" in 2014. The two earlier DVD versions of Alexander ("director's cut" version and the theatrical version) sold over 3.5 million copies in the United States. Oliver Stone's third version, Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut (2007), sold nearly a million copies and became one of the highest-selling catalog items from Warner Bros (as of 2012).
Same. My main issue was the back and forth throughout the movie. If you're not a historian, this movie is hard to follow - you have to watch it a few times to understand the timeline.
@@CK144this was not an accurate depiction of ancient warfare at any points. Wich part exactly was accurate? The garbage innacurate armour and weapons for persians? The talking heads claiming the companion cavalry was THE big bad thing about the macedonians or the ridiculous zoom ins during the battles where the troops of both sides are spread all over the place and dueling in the background like in a videogame instead of fighting in formation? Have we seen the same series?
Re the red colour at the final battle of the Hydaspes it’s symbolising the immense bloody career of Alexander now coming to its climax where Alexander and his men can go no further. Alexander being wounded his final on screen wound. His beloved Bucephalus dying just as Alexander’s dream of conquering the whole Eastern world is dying. It’s a visual metaphor. I know it’s not accurate but I think the director just wanted to show Alexander and his men had reached their limit. Even Alexander despite his legendary status in his own lifetime could not conquer all.
My thought was that it represented the red rage of his soldiers seeing Alexander wounded, which (in the movie scent) resulted in them sweeping the enemy from the field.
I could be wrong, but I read somewhere, when the movie came out, that the colour effect is actually due to one of the reels being x-rayed by mistake at airport. If anyone knows if this is in fact true, please illuminate me.
Im convinced if hed lived longer he would have taken every land he went to. The man was unstoppable at war. Never been a better military leader in my opinion
Finally someone gets the dialects right. When this came out I heard so many total idiots criticise the film for the accents thinking they were smart when it didn’t take a genius to work out what Stone’s point was ie when all characters are going to speak English the accent would denote their class within the Greek empire
Yep. People who just want to hate a film cuz they dont understand how to critique just scream about “they all have english and american accents!! Look, look, look how dumb this is, they speak english in a hollywood film and not the most pure ancient greek accent, therefore it is bad”. Its the most bullshit nitpick. If you’re showing a foreign world and want the audience to know wtf is going on, let the actors act, let them speak in their natural voice, the way Death of Stalin did, their respective dialects in English is perfectly symbolic of the different regional distinctions
@@williamwallace4080 Jolie's charachter didn't come from inside the Greek empire hence the accent. And it was mainly the Irish and Scottish accents they were complaining about
Wow, that was great. Lots of fascinating insights. Especially liked the comparison made between the horseman v elephant motif on a certain coin and the imagined battle between Alexander and Porus in the film.
Alexander is one of my all time favourite movies but Oliver Stone didn't do himself any favours by releasing 4 cuts of the film. If I recommend it to people there is a good chance they will watch the directos cut or the theatrical. My personal favourite is the 'revisited cut' with the full movie as a whole - there is an intermission in the movie lol. It's so good!
I tuned in and only really planned to watch 10 mins or so, but ended up watching the whole thing!😂 I absolutely love the history, it was much more entertaining for me than the actual film. Thank you!
This was one of the best movies I’ve ever seen in my life. I don’t know why it’s so overlooked and even criticised, as though everyone was a history master. I found it very captivating, historic, alluring and interesting and I liked the performances very much as well, especially that of Colin Farrell. As far as I’m concerned, they did a very good job with this project. I live in a geographic region in the Mediterranean which is amongst some of the many places that the actual Alexander had conquered and spread the Greek civilisation & culture during his times in the fourth century BC. I’ve done my own humble research. I’ve been to museums and sites. Personally I like this movie very much and will say that it’s a classic.
24:04 sorry, I do have to call this out. The Persians did not see their kings as Gods, in no actual Persian source does an Achaemenid King claim divinity, only that their right to rule comes from Ahura Mazda (no different than many monarchs today). The Greeks thought that the Persians did, but only through a cultural misunderstanding due to the Greeks only ever prostrating themselves as an act of worship, as opposed to the Persians who did it as an act of respect to the King of Kings. Ironically the Greeks would be the ones to actually deify one of their rulers, with the Cult of Alexander appearing after his death in Egypt.
Nah, this movie kind of sucks. Too long, really boring and filled with horrible over-acting. Still waiting for a movie to do the story of Alexander The Great justice.
This was nice. I haven’t watched this movie (just not doing the movies lately, I’ve been doing the actual history part), but this review has it on my leisure list
@@davidallen346my god the amount of research he apparently did for that film too, he was obsessive, he memorised all the major events of Napoleon’s life by heart and was planning everything out, and then Waterloo 1970 flopped and he had to abandon it. Stories of Kubrick’s true passion for history makes one all the more fucking bitter about Ridley Scott’s arrogance constantly whining ‘im not making a documentary’ and then hiring the shittiest screenwriter who doesnt know who or what Napoleon is outside of a wikipedia post. Its so extremely insulting, Napoleon is such a passionless movie, its well-shot, the artistry in production design and costumes is admirable, but Ridley Scott and David Scarpa are truly fucking corporate scum, such a twat the way Scott acts all high and mighty
@@davidallen346 the amount of research Kubrick did too, he was genuinely so passionate about the history, I remember seeing a documentary about his unfinished projects, he had memorised all the major events of Napoleon’s life and flashcards of what Napoleon was doing on any given day. Something crazy like that but it wouldn’t surprise anyone, Kubrick was a tough nut but he was passionate, he was sincere, Ridley Scott has lost that, he is so completely arrogant nowadays whining about ‘im not making a documentary’ yet constantly searching for iconic historical subjects to ruin cuz he thinks a well-known name will give him profits. He said he never bothered to read or research Napoleon, it shows, cuz it reads like a British propaganda film, and all of the statistics and info given in the film right out of wikipedia. Kubrick poured so much passion and love into Barry Lyndon because he couldn’t make the Napoleon film he wanted thanks to the failure of Waterloo 1970 (brilliant film), god i wish we had seen his movie so I didn’t have to listen to another filmbro wax lyrical about Ridley Scott for making the dullest most cliche historical epic ive ever seen.
I had a hard time assessing this movie. It's greatest strength was it's source, which was Mary Renault's classic trilogy of novels about Alexander. But I think also that there was a problem in doing a single movie out of three novels. They would have done better I think to make three movies (a la the Lord of the Rings), or a Netflix style mini-series. They had to leave out too many things and I think also this led to the confusing jumping backwards and forwards in the timeline of the story, which didn't bother me too much, but would have been totally confusing to anyone who wasn't familiar with the actual history. Renault's second book, for instance, "The Persian Boy", is told from the point of view of Alexander's Persian catamite Bagoas. In the movie Bagoas appears, not as he did in Renault's book (and I think also in the historical record) as part of the booty acquired by Alexander when he found Darius' body, but for some reason in Babylon. But he doesn't make much of an appearance after that. Incidentally, I thought before seeing this movie, back in the day, that the casting of Anglina Jolie as Olympias was inspired. Olympias was only a teenager when Alexander was born and she was supposed to be (and is certainly portrayed by Renault as) beautiful but somewhat unhinged. I was less impressed with Colin Farrell as Alexander. He's a great actor, but I thought they needed someone with more charisma. I remember seeing a movie about Alexander (on TV) that had been made in the 1960s back when I was a kid which cast Richard Burton in the role and, while I wasn't up to judging its historical accuracy at the time, I remember being impressed by Burton's performance. As an aside, while musing on this just now, I tried to imagine who had the charisma to pull of the role today and briefly thought about Brad Pitt. Then I realised what would have happened if anyone tried to cast Brad Pitt as Angelina Jolie's son! The decision to make the Macedonian's speek with an Irish accent, whuile I can see the logic of it, comes up about the innate associations we all have of different accents. Its a bit like when Tony Curtis, in Spartacus, portraying a Greek slave, describes himself as a "singer of songs" with a Brooklyn accent. Finally, I can only hope that someone makes a movie out of Renault's best historical novel, "The Last of the Wine" set in Athens during the Peloponnesian War. The love story at its core between two men would have macde this impossible a few decades ago (or even as recently as when Troy was made with Brad Pitt as Achilles getting all upset about his "young cousin" Patroclus being killed.
Oh yes! The whole Mary Renault trilogy could be made into movies and they would all be enjoyable. I also agree about The Last of the Wine. I hope someone picks it up.
personally i love the Hydaspes scene. there's such an intense feeling of dread and desperation to it. Colin did a great job of portraying Alexander as almost manic and insane, almost like the situation is going against him and he can't even conceive of a reality which does not serve his wishes. and being Alexander, his response is to make this audacious and impossible charge *directly* at the biggest, scariest obstacle in his path. as far as I know the battle wasn't anything like that, but it's a great scene
I agree. The movie is mostly historically accurate, but it's also using myth to illustrate Alexander, and that scene being the way it is works in the context of the story they're telling. It's also not crazier than him going over the wall in the siege of Malli to encourage his soldiers, which almost ended in his death.
I’ve heard people shit on this movie for years, even the razzies (however hypocritical and wrong they are usually), yet being reviewed here this look fantastic, critics apparently complained it is too much like a history documentary, well so be it, this is 100x better than the slapped-together Netflix documentary thats for sure, and the fight scenes and landscapes and sets look awe-inspiring. Will have to watch
The prevailing critique is Irish accents, blonde hair, and gay. Which is just sad. I'd like to think it would have a different reception if it was released now, but things haven't changed that much in the last 20 years.
@@vanyadollyidk how their upset with Alexander being gay, gay and straight are modern day concepts and way in ancient times it was more accepted for a man to be with another man and women were more looked at just to make another man
The wars of the diadochi are a fascinating story in themselves. I can't believe hollywood hasn't touched it, a good 5 epics at a minimum. Ptolemy did well to outwit Perdiccas in the battle to bury Alexander -- thereby soldifying legitimacy in Egypt. His descendant would go on to attain a historical lehacy of her own; mingling with the likes of Julius Caesar, Mark Antony & Pompey the Great. The location of Alexander's grave is one of the world's enduring mysteries.
My dream tv series would be the second punic wars,family dynamics of the barcid family and scipio would be epic,2 opposing views from hannibal and scipio would be amazing..
I love this Tristan! Took some time out of my day to watch. I personally love ‘Alexander’. I personally prefer the ‘Ultimate Cut’. It’s a fantastic movie that I believe does Alexander justice, even if it does have a lot of flaws. An Oliver Stone Epic!
27:00 I would appreciate if the historian would inform us about, say, Plutarch's opinion of Alexander. Considering he lived 100 years later and wasn't at the scene he's describing.
"Plutarch's Parallel Lives" is actually a pretty easy read and readily available for free online. They are short little biographies. Worth reading for sure.
but he says at one point that alexander's life in shrouded in myth and there's no way to know if these anecdotal stories are true. he simply praises the movie for following source material, whatever it is
@@kurhanchyk I should've worded my comment better. Plutarch is notorious for being opinionated, if he liked a person, you get all flowers and rainbows, and vice versa. I'd like to know if Plutarch liked or disliked Alexander.
"But you dream, Crateros!" That's my favoruite scene in the movie. People really like get hung up on the hair, but Colin Farrell is a fantastic actor. Whether Alexander intentionally marched the army home through the desert as punishment for disobeying him is also one of the most interesting questions about him imo.
Everyone pointing out the movie had problems. True. But not since the 50s had a director made a big romance but also a historical accurate (especially the battle at Gaugamela) one about Greeks. It also may be the one case where Oliver Stone's paranoia makes sense.
True, this movie had some problems but should be an example how to make a historical movie, love the setting, the details, the beheaviors and the batle
A little mistake of Tristan. Stageira (Aristotelis's home, is not near Athens, is near Halkidiki, near Thessaloniki and in turn near Pella. But overall great dive into the greatest Greek of all times.
I was about to comment that. Famously, Phillip II occupied and destroyed Stageira, Aristotle's birthplace and he later restored the city to get Aristotle to agree to tutor Alexander.
No the worst Greek of all times. Took the bravest and best of the Greek bloodline, got them killed, or insisted they didn't marry greek women guaranteeing the greek world was weakened. Not making Greece the centre of his empire. Got greedy, wanted the world because of some silly seers prediction he'd always be victorious, and got himself killed. With no heir and the empire, not under control from greece, broken up. It was all about him and his new worId order.
@@obadiahnormal8070 well, it's your opinion based on poor judgement. Alexander, was the start of the Hellenistic era. He was the first step for a brave new world based on the Greek Culture. The so called Renaissance would not be possible if Alexander didn't spread the Greek Culture centuries ago. Byzantine scholars would not be possible to be able to go to Italy to start a new Era after Constantinople fell. It's all connected. Christianity would not be able to spread so quickly if Greek language and culture was not paved by Alexander. AND SO ON AND ON.... GOT IT NOW? THAT'S WHY HE WAS CALLED THE GREAT. BECAUSE HE WAS.
I honestly loved this film and remember it well. I loved it more than 300. Vangelis’ score. The stories about the gods and Achilles. Aristotle. The young Alexander riding Bucephalus scenes The battles. The fight Alex has with ol’ Philip and Attalus. Angelina as Olympias. How sexy Rosario was in this 😅. 1:19: I don’t mind that. The flashback is a bread and butter technique of cinema and people probably would’ve complained about a linear structure too. 3:52: One of the most epic scenes ever. Those sweeping shots. The focus on tactics. The sarissas. “Zeus be with us!!!!” The whole battle of gaugamela (very unfortunately) was better than any battle in Ridley Scott’s Napoleon.
It’s hard to understand how people complain about this movie, they just say mistakes and mistakes bla bla… Bro, Colin Farrell performed more than our imagination of Alexander, battle scenes are full of people, not like street fighting. Just respect
The Battle of Gaugamela scene is one of my favourite battle scenes!! Actually seeing battle formations and some sense of tactical manoeuvre is refreshing on screen.
Seeing the phalanx organised into 16 X 16 blocks warmed my heart.
9 місяців тому+18
One of the best historical films ever made in Hollywood, with the best ancient battle ever filmed (Gaugamela), great care in details and setting; but at the same time overshadowed by poor script and character development decisions, added to a rather chaotic way of showing the chronology (especially for the majority of viewers, who have no idea about the life of Alexander the Great). It is without a doubt one of my favorite movies along with Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, The Last Samurai, 300 (although it is the least historical on the list), Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan (Band of Brothers too), Joan of Arc from 1999, the Man in the Iron Mask, Black Hawk Down, Glory, The Thin Red Line, the Patriot, We Were Soldiers, Pearl Harbor, Gettysburg (1993), the Last of the Mohicans, etc.The 90's and the early 2000's were very good in historical films.
One of the greatest historical movies has a poor script?
9 місяців тому+2
@@GhastlyCretin Well, actually the three things I say are related to each other, due to the decision to give a lot of focus to controversial points in Alexander's life and too much prominence to his relationship with his mother; but, I admit that I may be wrong in that assessment that you highlight, let's say that I did not know how to express it adequately in my comment and that in reality it is a regular script, where the bad points unfortunately weighed too much in the critics' reviews, unfairly.
@ I see. I remember when it was released and I still haven't watched it as a result of the bad reviews. However, you and a lot of other people say that while it's not perfect, it's a good movie. I might just check it out.
9 місяців тому+3
@@GhastlyCretin It is a HIGHLY recommended film for all lovers of good historical cinema, I know what I say is contradictory, but it is difficult to explain until you see it; However, do not pay attention to the reviews, most of them were unfair (although it is true that it fails in several things, which in the eyes of a critic and the general public weigh more than they should) and they did not know how to appreciate the good points like the setting and the unbeatable battle scenes. Of course, I recommend that you read a little about Alexander's life first (or watch a video on UA-cam) and then try to see the Director's Cut version.
@ You're absolutely right. There are plenty of movies that were panned by critics that I love so I really shouldn't put much weight in what they say. I think I will watch it as soon as I have time. Thanks for your recommendation ✌️
I loved the film, it inspired me to read (too!😂) many books about Alexander and historical fiction about him. He was obviously a complex person and a mixture of visionary and homicidal maniac! He was undoubtedly personally very brave and endured many hardships along with his troops. An incredible individual whatever way you view history.
11:21 , Stageira is not ''near Athens'', actually it is closer to Pella(the capital of Macedon) than what it is to Athens or any other well known Greek-city state of the south. Aristotle moved to Athens when he was around 17-18 years old to study at Plato's Academy, so hes accent wouldn't really be that reminiscent of an Athenian. But who knows really considering he did spend a good chunk of his life there, and the rest in other places before finally arriving at Philip's court. But my main complaint is with you mentioning Stageira as near Athens, I can understand you made a mistake, I just wanted to correct it.
There's a book called "Landscape Turned Red: The Battle of Antietam" wherein the author quotes someone else (famous author of the time, but I forgot who) as saying that the intense fear you experience in battle has the effect of seemingly turning the landscape red.
Not surprised, Oliver stone is a historian, and unappreciated, one of the great American directors. I say this as an Australian, you can see strong patriotism in his movies, only director to get raw emotion out of tom cruise in born on the 4th of July, say it again unappreciated
A small correction: Stageira is at the north of Greece, close to Pella, the capital of the Macedon Kingdom. However, Aristotle had spent most of his time in Athens.
If I'm not mistaken Cassander marries Alexander's half sister Thessalonike, and names the city he founded after her. Thessaloniki now is the regional capital of Macedonia in northern Greece.
Tristan you are the GOAT my man. Greetings from Thessaloniki. By the way you are the only one mentioning this unique in human history linearity of the SPAA.
Nice reaction, but I miss the bit where Alexander's army revolts and doesn't want to follow him into India... a very powerful moment and actually a real moment in his long military campaign
Historically is quite accurate, with the great exception being Alexander's last moments, but I can understand why they opted for a more... Mythological, almost godlike exit for Alexander because he was treated as a demigod when he was alive. In reality, he gave a very unclear answer because he said "To the best" when he was asked to whom he leaves the throne. Also it is important to mention that Stageira was not near Athens. It was at today's Chalkidiki region. Philip destroyed Stageira when he conquered the area, but rebuilt it later as part of the deal so that Aristotle would come to teach Alexander.
I legitimately would kill to see a limited series about the life of Alexander the Great. Make it only 4 seasons with the final few episodes taking place post Alexander the Great's Death and we see the crumbling of his empire.
Studios are willing to spend 200 million on that shitty Citadel series, or 500 million on Rings of Power yet are so deadly scared of doing anything historical again? Historical miniseries of the past are some of the most beloved, Rome for example, but Shogun, and Shaka Zulu, or the ww2 series, or all the historical-miniseries of the 80s and 90s that had huge viewership. I guess modern audiences arent interested idk
I'd rather see one of Philip, who was far, far more important to the story. Alexander didn't even have to follow the Macedonian army into Persia and it still would have won, that's how much of a perfected war-machine Philip had made it into.
@@GuineaPigEveryday my dad used to own that Zulu series on VHS,the Shogun Remake on FX is maybe the most acclaimed piece of Television of 2024,and Band of Brothers has yet to be topped with its follow up series The Pacific and Masters of the Air,and Rome will forever be held up as one of the most revered Historical Dramas ever made.
Surprising that this Historian says that Stageira, Aristotle's birthplace is near Athens. In reality, Stageira (original: Σταγείρα) is in Macedon, and Aristotle was a Macedonian just like Alexander was. He only came to Athens to study at Plato's "Academia". Other than that, and his mention of the "greek love" (an unhistorical term made up by some tawdry British), he proved to know a thing or two about ancient Greek history, and sketched a rather relaible portrait of the greatest Greek who ever lived.
11:21 Im sorry but Stagira where Aristotle is from is nowhere near Athens, its in Macedonia near the halkidiki peninsula. Just look it up on google maps. I would know since i grew up around there and theres an ongoing archaelogical site there where part of his town remains to this day.
Amazing movie, amazing review! Didnt know about the medallion with the Macedonian horse and the elephant! And i loved the fact with the dialects! I heard so many bad things about Colin's accent, but really was genius way to portray different accents and cultures within the Greek world. Bravo !
My biggest disappointment with this film was its portrayal of the Battle Of Hydaspes River. There are entire documentaries dedicated to that specific battle that show that it was almost NOTHING like what is shown in this film. The environmental setting for the battle was completely different to what the film shows, and there was also a HUGE amount of tactical planning both before and during the battle on both sides from both Alexander and Porus. It really ended up turning into a chess game between the two of them, where Alexander would make one move, and Porus would attempt to counter that move.
Wow!.. many thanks for sharing this podcast with us on UA-cam! This podcast will enable me to rewatch this film with a whole new level of understanding and appreciation! If this is not too inappropriate a question, is there a particular version of "Alexander" - of the three (3) that I am aware of - that is more wholly recommended?..
Can't speak on behalf of the producers of the video, but Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut (the third cut) or Alexander: The Ultimate Cut (the fourth cut) are the versions where Oliver Stone was given more complete control and allowed to include stuff the studio initially balked at like more historically accurate depictions of homosexuality ie Alexander's relationship with his eunuch manservant Bagoas, the strange relationship with his first wife Roxana, and just lots of other little bits and pieces the studio forced him to drop from the theatrical and the so-called "Director's Cut" (the second cut) which was actually titled so more as a marketing gimmick than because Stone had full control over the project. Check out Ultimate or Final for the richest experience. I'm personally biased towards Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut, but that may just be because it was the first version that I saw.
Love the directors cuts so much. Cult classics in my book and some of the best representations of ancient history put on 35 mm celluloid film. This was a great video. Thank you.
When i first watched the movie in theaters i didnt like it, it just felt like it was missing a lot of context, and most of the movie just felt like it was heavily edited, but when i finally watched the directors cut on dvd it completely changed my mind, i loved the directors cut, reminded me of the kingdom of heaven directors cut, finally all the context was there and it felt like a proper historical movie
Stageira? Near Athens? At the centre of the Hellenic world? Stageira is as far away from Athens as Aegae is. Stageira to Aegae, maybe 100 miles. Stageira to Athens, at least 300 miles. Actually, by road, Aege is closer to Athens than Stageira.
Love Tristan, check out the ancients podcast, it's amazing. So cool to see him doing a deep dive on movies. He has mentioned a few of these on the podcast.
Just one small thing I have to tell you I have been at the ruins of Stageira. It is located east of the Chalkidiki Peninsula near Amfipolis. That makes it part of Macedonia at least as a region at the time and today.
Roxanna was a noble from somewhere around present-day Tajikistan. Having Rosario Dawson portray Roxanna makes as much sense as having Lucy Liu portray Queen Victoria of Great Britain.
I assume that they just needed someone who looked exotic (to the Hellenes and especially the Macedonians). How many Tadjik actresses are available for casting, assuming that they were there at the time?
@@davidweihe6052 Populations in Central Asia were not black or Hispanic in appearance. Roxanna's portrayal in the movie is incredibly far-fetched, akin to a fantasy. They had numerous plausible options among Caucasian actresses and did not need to use Tajik actresses. Note that they also did not select Hollywood actors of Greek descent or from mainland Greece to portray historical Greeks. I personally think Nordicisising of ancient Greeks/Macedonians is another problem in itself. In reality the two sides did not look very different at all.
@IStevenSeagal Sogdians and Bactrians predate Turkic arrival by ~1000 years. They were NOT Mediterranean genetically; just check the various genetic studies that are public domain and available online. They instead had a large steppe ancestry. Present-day Yaghnobis and Tajiks show genetic continuity to ancient Central Asian populations. Even if we suppose that your assertion was correct, Rosario Dawson does not even look Mediterranean. Greece, on the other hand, is a Mediterranean nation with very long-standing links to the Mediterranean basin.
@@nickm7911 You do know north Africa is part of the Mediterranean, right? As is Spain, if it's Dawson's latin heritage you're upset about. People have been mixing across the Mediterranean since before the bronze age.
The fact that you pointed out the Irish-to-English being the film's Macedonian-to-Greek distinction in dialect is wild. Didn't realize that til now.
Indeed! People don't realize even to this day, different regions in Greece has different dialects. Like any country would have.
That's why movies about foreign history acted by American actors with foreign accents are stupid.
@@buca9696 Like Val Kilmer in Alexander? Oh, wait.
It was not a dialect, it was a whole language part of the same group, much like we have language groups now, like Slavic, Roman, Germanic etc
@@buca9696 How would you do it ? big budget movies need big actors for funding.
I may have a million other things to do, but when Tristan Hughes comes on talking about a historic movie I simply have to put everything on hold and watch. Loved it.
what about the ditch guy?
that's awesome! I'm so happy for you!
Based on what I skimmed of the video, this is a typical Brit barbarian not pointing out that Greeks weren't blond like this Hellywood shit claims.
See my series "Greeks, Latins, Iberians and Jews were, and are, NOT blond" where I defeat the garbage arguments in the replies to this comment.
Harsh title, man. Don't be so hard on yourself; you're not THAT old.
Ooof.
I was just going to comment: He doesn't look THAT ancient.
😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂
Haha. Beat me to it!
Siege of Tyre can be a movie in itself
One of my favorite stories from history!
Imagine being so pissed that you can't take a fortified island that you get your men to fill in the coast with soil and dirt to make a sandbar so you can attack by land. 😂😂
I think the story of his siege of Gaza might resonate.
@@andywomack3414The one brought about by the slaughter of hundreds of unarmed civilian Jews by islamo-terrorists? Yeah, good one.
So write the screenplay and sell it
One 40 min episode of History Hit is more informative and engaging than 6 episodes of Netflix drama.
Yeah that’s what different genres do..
Or anything about Alexander on what is supposed to be The History Channel. Unless of course we have a season of UFOs and bigfoot helping Alexander conquer the Persians.
Ofcourse it is.
I worked on Alexander, Alexander was the best job I'd ever had and it paid so fkn well too, it was a joy. Last year I worked on Gladiator 2, you'll see it when you see it, I dont expect great things from it.
What did I do, I made all the crest plumes, everyone of them, every plume, Colin Farrell's and all the background artists plumes were made by me and my workers. That is our speciality at The Plumery.
do u by any chance know the plot of Gladiator 2?, im not asking for the plot fyi, just askin if u know, or perhaps if u know u had to sign an agreement to not talk about it. mad respect to you sir, i cant fkin wait for gladiator 2, the first one was a banger, hope the second one is good aswell.
@@Jeremy0426 Sorry, they wouldnt show me a script, far too down the rankings. All I think is that it takes place immediately after the death of Commodus.
Historically this is an interesting time, as it is a reign of 4 Caesars, and the last one to take power, and the most celebrated is Septimius Severus, the Emperor of colour who was born in Africa and half Italian and half Moorish. He was also Praetor of Britain where he had been campaigning when Commodus was assassinated.
So there is massive scope for something brilliant to be delivered, with fascinating events and characters. But this is Ridley Scot, who thinks a historical event is a diversion from a good plot.
It always goes the same way with Ridley, he says he'll make a historical epic, gets lots of historical advisors, ignores them, they walk off stage and he screams Im not making a fkn documentary.
I will add that the actors and writers strike delayed filming massively, no idea what effect this will have on its delivery. We were all on a tight schedule to deliver all on time to Morocco which we did, and then no filming happened.
@@LouisPlumepunic not moorish.
@@williamwallace4080 Although Geta from Leptis Magna which was a originally a Carthaginian city, by this period it was mostly inhabited by North Africans from the West part of N Africa as the Carthaginians had been cleared out by Numidians hundreds of years earlier, and so he was not Punic/Phoenician, more Mauritanian or Moroccan.
That's really cool! And yes I am jealous you basically got a paycheck for wardrobe pieces
Alexander 2004, is one of my all time favorite historic movies. I specially like the longest version "Alexander. The final cut". This movie really portrays greatly the greatness of Alexander, but also his flaws at times. Its a real gem, one of a kind movie.
Totally agree. It's in my top 5 favourite movies of all time.
Robin Lan Fox's book 'Alexander the Great' is I think a great companion piece as it feels like Fox is putting his research together for the movie in it.
Also really like how Tristan picked up on the accents - the Northern/Scottish/Irish accents representing Macedon and English for the Greeks - Oliver Stone states that was his intent (I was a big sucker for director commentaries!)
I tried to watch it but I can't suspend my disbelief. Just based on Alexander's appearance alone: They have dyed his hair blonde but they forgot to dye his eyebrows so he looks like a man with black hair who has dyed his hair blonde. His hair is wavy, not curly and his eyes are brown not blue. All the armour looks plastic and fake. In my opinion the life of Alexander has everything to make a fantastic movie and they somehow managed to ruin it.
@@fireblade2681 completely agree. Unfortunately the whole movie is garbage.
lol Really? The run time would need to be cut in half to make a decent movie.
does the actual movie also jump around the timeline like that? I hate when they do that
36:53 , Fun fact, When I was 10 years old I cut my wrist to the bone on a glass window, and for a few seconds as result of the shock, everything around me was coloured red while instinct and adrenaline took complete control over my body.
That is also why that particular scene and this movie in general always resonated with me.
That's fascinating. i guess there's some truth to "seeing red"
@@vanyadolly yes, there is. One time a guy at a bar bumped into me and spilled my beer, he tried to apologize (cvck) but I saw red and just started swinging. By the time I realize what happened everyone in the club was knocked out.
@@PeterTeal77 And then everyone clapped?
@@PeterTeal77 damn, cool story bro
@@The101damnations he woke up
The Music in this movie is insanely good.
I agree 100%
So are the battle scenes.
It's composed by Vangelis, same guy who did the score for the original Blade Runner.
One of the main songs in the movie is an iron maiden song I always thought that was cool
The end credits song is epic
As an avid history enthusiast, I found this Ancient Historian's reaction to the 'Alexander' movie both insightful and captivating. His deep dives into the historical accuracies and inaccuracies shed light on the complexities of portraying such a legendary figure on screen. It's refreshing to see a nuanced analysis that combines scholarly expertise with cinematic appreciation.
Alexander like Napoleon and Julius Caesar is one of those legendary figures from history who would need a 10 hour film to do justice to his deeds.
No film maker could do that and no public audience would go and see it.
You can do a movie about a single battle or campaign well enough, or even a single unit - the 70's film Waterloo does this for Napoleon's 100 Days, or the film Gettysburg. And even then they're 3-4 hours long, and somewhat light in developing characters.
Glory does it a bit better, but I think that's slightly dramatized. Band of Brothers does the unit thing the best, but that's a whole series.
(edit: corrected date of Waterloo film)
@@draco84oz do you mean the 1970 film Waterloo starring Rod Steiger as Napoleon?
@@nigeh5326 Yes, that one - (activates google-fu) ok, so I did get the decades mixed up...
@@nigeh5326 Yes, that one - (activates google-fu) looks like I did get the decades mixed up...
Miniseries! It can be done, we just need people who care and are capable
When this film was being made I don't think they realized how little history was being taught in public schools in the USA. When the audience doesn't know ANYTHING about the events being retold it important to lay the scenes out chronologically.
I mean, there is a whole lot of history and not really a lot of time to cover it, even if you're not trying to wrangle 30 kids. Heaven forbid people should ever learn anything on their own, outside of school.
The chronology of the movie is pretty obvious though. There are only two timelines. One starts at Alexander's childhood and the other starts at Gaugamela and they intercut one another at appropriate points of the story to draw connections, parallels or to mirror two scenes in his life. It's pretty much perfect in that regard. It's just sad that they had to omit such big junks of his story. It would have been even better had it been a series.
@@BarelloSmith AH shut up.
@@weltraumaffe4155 Wtf? 😅
@@BarelloSmith ok
I worked with Capt. Dale Dye on a recent project. He was the military advisor on Alexander too.
He told me that before this movie the accepted wisdom was that an assempled Macedonian phalanx could only move forward and backwards.
He was able to show that they could do much more and pivot successfully, and that academics from across the world flew out to see how it actually could be done, in awe at the revelation.
that's cool! I watched Dale in a few historical documentaries but don't remember their names.
Academics? Did they never read Arrian, hpw a drilled phalanx could maneuver somewhat (of course not like a legion etc).
@@crackshack2 as Dale related it to me, academics believed that manoevre was possible, but only in a very limited manner.
He (proudly) told me that after he trained up the background artists they could do well beyond what was previously understood to be possible while staying in formation.
I teally never understood the "can only move forward and backward", it was never based on facts, any source and was a silly assumption.
Can i ask what the recent project is? Always interested in hearing of any project with good historical advisors. Shogun is such a revelation in terms of authenticity and quality and i hope there’s more like it coming out
Four versions of the film exist, the initial theatrical cut and three home video director's cuts: the "Director's Cut" in 2005, the "Final Cut" in 2007, and the "Ultimate Cut" in 2014. The two earlier DVD versions of Alexander ("director's cut" version and the theatrical version) sold over 3.5 million copies in the United States. Oliver Stone's third version, Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut (2007), sold nearly a million copies and became one of the highest-selling catalog items from Warner Bros (as of 2012).
Wait, what's this Ultimate Cut? How does that compare to the earlier Final Cut?
@starshipchris4518 the ultimate cut is shorter than the final cut
One of my favourite movies. I know it has lots of issues, but I love it.
same dude. one of the most accurate (to my knowledge) depictions of ancient warfare i've ever seen also
which version lol
Same. My main issue was the back and forth throughout the movie. If you're not a historian, this movie is hard to follow - you have to watch it a few times to understand the timeline.
compared to films like Gladiator and Napoleon, Oliver Stone's film is like a letter for letter from the annals of history...
@@CK144this was not an accurate depiction of ancient warfare at any points. Wich part exactly was accurate? The garbage innacurate armour and weapons for persians? The talking heads claiming the companion cavalry was THE big bad thing about the macedonians or the ridiculous zoom ins during the battles where the troops of both sides are spread all over the place and dueling in the background like in a videogame instead of fighting in formation? Have we seen the same series?
Re the red colour at the final battle of the Hydaspes it’s symbolising the immense bloody career of Alexander now coming to its climax where Alexander and his men can go no further.
Alexander being wounded his final on screen wound. His beloved Bucephalus dying just as Alexander’s dream of conquering the whole Eastern world is dying.
It’s a visual metaphor.
I know it’s not accurate but I think the director just wanted to show Alexander and his men had reached their limit.
Even Alexander despite his legendary status in his own lifetime could not conquer all.
My thought was that it represented the red rage of his soldiers seeing Alexander wounded, which (in the movie scent) resulted in them sweeping the enemy from the field.
I could be wrong, but I read somewhere, when the movie came out, that the colour effect is actually due to one of the reels being x-rayed by mistake at airport. If anyone knows if this is in fact true, please illuminate me.
Im convinced if hed lived longer he would have taken every land he went to. The man was unstoppable at war. Never been a better military leader in my opinion
Finally someone gets the dialects right. When this came out I heard so many total idiots criticise the film for the accents thinking they were smart when it didn’t take a genius to work out what Stone’s point was ie when all characters are going to speak English the accent would denote their class within the Greek empire
Yeah, one of the best directing choices and people had issues with it.
People criticised Angelina Julie's russian accent. I don't think they were idiots, you didn't understand what they were referring to.
Yep. People who just want to hate a film cuz they dont understand how to critique just scream about “they all have english and american accents!! Look, look, look how dumb this is, they speak english in a hollywood film and not the most pure ancient greek accent, therefore it is bad”. Its the most bullshit nitpick. If you’re showing a foreign world and want the audience to know wtf is going on, let the actors act, let them speak in their natural voice, the way Death of Stalin did, their respective dialects in English is perfectly symbolic of the different regional distinctions
@@williamwallace4080 Jolie's charachter didn't come from inside the Greek empire hence the accent. And it was mainly the Irish and Scottish accents they were complaining about
It's absurd how people complain about that. "Why are they Irish?" Why are they speaking English?
Vangelis’ score is awesome!!!
Wow, that was great. Lots of fascinating insights. Especially liked the comparison made between the horseman v elephant motif on a certain coin and the imagined battle between Alexander and Porus in the film.
Alexander is one of my all time favourite movies but Oliver Stone didn't do himself any favours by releasing 4 cuts of the film. If I recommend it to people there is a good chance they will watch the directos cut or the theatrical. My personal favourite is the 'revisited cut' with the full movie as a whole - there is an intermission in the movie lol. It's so good!
my new favorite channel! never realized how fascinating and compelling deep dives into these types of movies are. Great work!!
I tuned in and only really planned to watch 10 mins or so, but ended up watching the whole thing!😂 I absolutely love the history, it was much more entertaining for me than the actual film. Thank you!
Why don't you like this film?
This was one of the best movies I’ve ever seen in my life. I don’t know why it’s so overlooked and even criticised, as though everyone was a history master. I found it very captivating, historic, alluring and interesting and I liked the performances very much as well, especially that of Colin Farrell. As far as I’m concerned, they did a very good job with this project. I live in a geographic region in the Mediterranean which is amongst some of the many places that the actual Alexander had conquered and spread the Greek civilisation & culture during his times in the fourth century BC. I’ve done my own humble research. I’ve been to museums and sites. Personally I like this movie very much and will say that it’s a classic.
24:04 sorry, I do have to call this out. The Persians did not see their kings as Gods, in no actual Persian source does an Achaemenid King claim divinity, only that their right to rule comes from Ahura Mazda (no different than many monarchs today). The Greeks thought that the Persians did, but only through a cultural misunderstanding due to the Greeks only ever prostrating themselves as an act of worship, as opposed to the Persians who did it as an act of respect to the King of Kings. Ironically the Greeks would be the ones to actually deify one of their rulers, with the Cult of Alexander appearing after his death in Egypt.
You forgot to mention, that famous line that was asked by Alexander to Stateira was actually a dialogue between Alexander and Porus.
One of my favourite films of antiquity. Fantastic battles and grand scenes. Sterling cast and great director. Vastly underrated imo
Nah, this movie kind of sucks. Too long, really boring and filled with horrible over-acting. Still waiting for a movie to do the story of Alexander The Great justice.
This was nice. I haven’t watched this movie (just not doing the movies lately, I’ve been doing the actual history part), but this review has it on my leisure list
There is a lot Ridley Scott with his Napoleon movie could have learned from this Oliver Stone Alexander classic movie.
Agreed! Though it ain't that surprising since Oliver Stone is an admirer of Alexander.
What? Like vaguely following history?
The late great Stanley Kubrick was obsessed with making a Napoloeon movie, what could've been
@@davidallen346my god the amount of research he apparently did for that film too, he was obsessive, he memorised all the major events of Napoleon’s life by heart and was planning everything out, and then Waterloo 1970 flopped and he had to abandon it. Stories of Kubrick’s true passion for history makes one all the more fucking bitter about Ridley Scott’s arrogance constantly whining ‘im not making a documentary’ and then hiring the shittiest screenwriter who doesnt know who or what Napoleon is outside of a wikipedia post. Its so extremely insulting, Napoleon is such a passionless movie, its well-shot, the artistry in production design and costumes is admirable, but Ridley Scott and David Scarpa are truly fucking corporate scum, such a twat the way Scott acts all high and mighty
@@davidallen346 the amount of research Kubrick did too, he was genuinely so passionate about the history, I remember seeing a documentary about his unfinished projects, he had memorised all the major events of Napoleon’s life and flashcards of what Napoleon was doing on any given day. Something crazy like that but it wouldn’t surprise anyone, Kubrick was a tough nut but he was passionate, he was sincere, Ridley Scott has lost that, he is so completely arrogant nowadays whining about ‘im not making a documentary’ yet constantly searching for iconic historical subjects to ruin cuz he thinks a well-known name will give him profits. He said he never bothered to read or research Napoleon, it shows, cuz it reads like a British propaganda film, and all of the statistics and info given in the film right out of wikipedia. Kubrick poured so much passion and love into Barry Lyndon because he couldn’t make the Napoleon film he wanted thanks to the failure of Waterloo 1970 (brilliant film), god i wish we had seen his movie so I didn’t have to listen to another filmbro wax lyrical about Ridley Scott for making the dullest most cliche historical epic ive ever seen.
I had a hard time assessing this movie. It's greatest strength was it's source, which was Mary Renault's classic trilogy of novels about Alexander. But I think also that there was a problem in doing a single movie out of three novels. They would have done better I think to make three movies (a la the Lord of the Rings), or a Netflix style mini-series. They had to leave out too many things and I think also this led to the confusing jumping backwards and forwards in the timeline of the story, which didn't bother me too much, but would have been totally confusing to anyone who wasn't familiar with the actual history. Renault's second book, for instance, "The Persian Boy", is told from the point of view of Alexander's Persian catamite Bagoas. In the movie Bagoas appears, not as he did in Renault's book (and I think also in the historical record) as part of the booty acquired by Alexander when he found Darius' body, but for some reason in Babylon. But he doesn't make much of an appearance after that. Incidentally, I thought before seeing this movie, back in the day, that the casting of Anglina Jolie as Olympias was inspired. Olympias was only a teenager when Alexander was born and she was supposed to be (and is certainly portrayed by Renault as) beautiful but somewhat unhinged. I was less impressed with Colin Farrell as Alexander. He's a great actor, but I thought they needed someone with more charisma. I remember seeing a movie about Alexander (on TV) that had been made in the 1960s back when I was a kid which cast Richard Burton in the role and, while I wasn't up to judging its historical accuracy at the time, I remember being impressed by Burton's performance. As an aside, while musing on this just now, I tried to imagine who had the charisma to pull of the role today and briefly thought about Brad Pitt. Then I realised what would have happened if anyone tried to cast Brad Pitt as Angelina Jolie's son! The decision to make the Macedonian's speek with an Irish accent, whuile I can see the logic of it, comes up about the innate associations we all have of different accents. Its a bit like when Tony Curtis, in Spartacus, portraying a Greek slave, describes himself as a "singer of songs" with a Brooklyn accent. Finally, I can only hope that someone makes a movie out of Renault's best historical novel, "The Last of the Wine" set in Athens during the Peloponnesian War. The love story at its core between two men would have macde this impossible a few decades ago (or even as recently as when Troy was made with Brad Pitt as Achilles getting all upset about his "young cousin" Patroclus being killed.
Let me guess, you've been convinced by hook or crook that warriors were overwhelmingly queer in the past 😅
Oh yes! The whole Mary Renault trilogy could be made into movies and they would all be enjoyable. I also agree about The Last of the Wine. I hope someone picks it up.
Wish someone would do a film on her Theseus stories! Would love to see a recreation of Knossos and Minian Crete!
personally i love the Hydaspes scene. there's such an intense feeling of dread and desperation to it. Colin did a great job of portraying Alexander as almost manic and insane, almost like the situation is going against him and he can't even conceive of a reality which does not serve his wishes. and being Alexander, his response is to make this audacious and impossible charge *directly* at the biggest, scariest obstacle in his path.
as far as I know the battle wasn't anything like that, but it's a great scene
I agree. The movie is mostly historically accurate, but it's also using myth to illustrate Alexander, and that scene being the way it is works in the context of the story they're telling. It's also not crazier than him going over the wall in the siege of Malli to encourage his soldiers, which almost ended in his death.
I’ve heard people shit on this movie for years, even the razzies (however hypocritical and wrong they are usually), yet being reviewed here this look fantastic, critics apparently complained it is too much like a history documentary, well so be it, this is 100x better than the slapped-together Netflix documentary thats for sure, and the fight scenes and landscapes and sets look awe-inspiring. Will have to watch
The prevailing critique is Irish accents, blonde hair, and gay. Which is just sad. I'd like to think it would have a different reception if it was released now, but things haven't changed that much in the last 20 years.
@@vanyadollyidk how their upset with Alexander being gay, gay and straight are modern day concepts and way in ancient times it was more accepted for a man to be with another man and women were more looked at just to make another man
The wars of the diadochi are a fascinating story in themselves. I can't believe hollywood hasn't touched it, a good 5 epics at a minimum. Ptolemy did well to outwit Perdiccas in the battle to bury Alexander -- thereby soldifying legitimacy in Egypt. His descendant would go on to attain a historical lehacy of her own; mingling with the likes of Julius Caesar, Mark Antony & Pompey the Great. The location of Alexander's grave is one of the world's enduring mysteries.
My dream tv series would be the second punic wars,family dynamics of the barcid family and scipio would be epic,2 opposing views from hannibal and scipio would be amazing..
Hollywood hates sandal movies
It's not a mystery, we know it's somewhere under the modern city of Alexandria. But we can't just demolish a whole city and start digging.
I would love a multiple season HBO show about what happened after Alexander's death
I love this Tristan! Took some time out of my day to watch. I personally love ‘Alexander’. I personally prefer the ‘Ultimate Cut’. It’s a fantastic movie that I believe does Alexander justice, even if it does have a lot of flaws. An Oliver Stone Epic!
27:00 I would appreciate if the historian would inform us about, say, Plutarch's opinion of Alexander. Considering he lived 100 years later and wasn't at the scene he's describing.
"Plutarch's Parallel Lives" is actually a pretty easy read and readily available for free online. They are short little biographies. Worth reading for sure.
but he says at one point that alexander's life in shrouded in myth and there's no way to know if these anecdotal stories are true. he simply praises the movie for following source material, whatever it is
@@kurhanchyk I should've worded my comment better.
Plutarch is notorious for being opinionated, if he liked a person, you get all flowers and rainbows, and vice versa.
I'd like to know if Plutarch liked or disliked Alexander.
You didn't talk about Alexander's speech to his troops when they want to go home
"But you dream, Crateros!" That's my favoruite scene in the movie. People really like get hung up on the hair, but Colin Farrell is a fantastic actor. Whether Alexander intentionally marched the army home through the desert as punishment for disobeying him is also one of the most interesting questions about him imo.
Everyone pointing out the movie had problems. True. But not since the 50s had a director made a big romance but also a historical accurate (especially the battle at Gaugamela) one about Greeks. It also may be the one case where Oliver Stone's paranoia makes sense.
True, this movie had some problems but should be an example how to make a historical movie, love the setting, the details, the beheaviors and the batle
Would love to see Tristan Hughes react to the film Agora.
Probably too controversial lol
One of the best historical movies, even with that romance inserted
The number of anecdotes really made a familiar story much more enjoyable.
A little mistake of Tristan. Stageira (Aristotelis's home, is not near Athens, is near Halkidiki, near Thessaloniki and in turn near Pella. But overall great dive into the greatest Greek of all times.
I was about to comment that. Famously, Phillip II occupied and destroyed Stageira, Aristotle's birthplace and he later restored the city to get Aristotle to agree to tutor Alexander.
No the worst Greek of all times. Took the bravest and best of the Greek bloodline, got them killed, or insisted they didn't marry greek women guaranteeing the greek world was weakened. Not making Greece the centre of his empire. Got greedy, wanted the world because of some silly seers prediction he'd always be victorious, and got himself killed. With no heir and the empire, not under control from greece, broken up. It was all about him and his new worId order.
@@obadiahnormal8070 well, it's your opinion based on poor judgement.
Alexander, was the start of the Hellenistic era. He was the first step for a brave new world based on the Greek Culture. The so called Renaissance would not be possible if Alexander didn't spread the Greek Culture centuries ago. Byzantine scholars would not be possible to be able to go to Italy to start a new Era after Constantinople fell. It's all connected. Christianity would not be able to spread so quickly if Greek language and culture was not paved by Alexander.
AND SO ON AND ON....
GOT IT NOW? THAT'S WHY HE WAS CALLED THE GREAT. BECAUSE HE WAS.
Did anyone else hear the slight voice crack and chocking up by the historian when describing Alexander's death? that's real passion for history wow
I honestly loved this film and remember it well. I loved it more than 300. Vangelis’ score. The stories about the gods and Achilles. Aristotle. The young Alexander riding Bucephalus scenes The battles. The fight Alex has with ol’ Philip and Attalus. Angelina as Olympias. How sexy Rosario was in this 😅.
1:19: I don’t mind that. The flashback is a bread and butter technique of cinema and people probably would’ve complained about a linear structure too.
3:52: One of the most epic scenes ever. Those sweeping shots. The focus on tactics. The sarissas. “Zeus be with us!!!!”
The whole battle of gaugamela (very unfortunately) was better than any battle in Ridley Scott’s Napoleon.
If this were a series of movies, and done in proper chronological order, they'd be *PERFECT.*
I saw this movie in the theater 20 years ago, and it was one of the greatest historical movie I've ever seen.
Underrated movie in hindsight now. Everyone does videos on UA-cam about this movie all the time.
It’s hard to understand how people complain about this movie, they just say mistakes and mistakes bla bla… Bro, Colin Farrell performed more than our imagination of Alexander, battle scenes are full of people, not like street fighting. Just respect
This is good movie , I remember watch it in 2004 in cinema and fell in love with Colin Farrell and I’m in love with him since then
The Battle of Gaugamela scene is one of my favourite battle scenes!! Actually seeing battle formations and some sense of tactical manoeuvre is refreshing on screen.
Seeing the phalanx organised into 16 X 16 blocks warmed my heart.
One of the best historical films ever made in Hollywood, with the best ancient battle ever filmed (Gaugamela), great care in details and setting; but at the same time overshadowed by poor script and character development decisions, added to a rather chaotic way of showing the chronology (especially for the majority of viewers, who have no idea about the life of Alexander the Great). It is without a doubt one of my favorite movies along with Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, The Last Samurai, 300 (although it is the least historical on the list), Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan (Band of Brothers too), Joan of Arc from 1999, the Man in the Iron Mask, Black Hawk Down, Glory, The Thin Red Line, the Patriot, We Were Soldiers, Pearl Harbor, Gettysburg (1993), the Last of the Mohicans, etc.The 90's and the early 2000's were very good in historical films.
One of the greatest historical movies has a poor script?
@@GhastlyCretin Well, actually the three things I say are related to each other, due to the decision to give a lot of focus to controversial points in Alexander's life and too much prominence to his relationship with his mother; but, I admit that I may be wrong in that assessment that you highlight, let's say that I did not know how to express it adequately in my comment and that in reality it is a regular script, where the bad points unfortunately weighed too much in the critics' reviews, unfairly.
@ I see. I remember when it was released and I still haven't watched it as a result of the bad reviews. However, you and a lot of other people say that while it's not perfect, it's a good movie. I might just check it out.
@@GhastlyCretin It is a HIGHLY recommended film for all lovers of good historical cinema, I know what I say is contradictory, but it is difficult to explain until you see it; However, do not pay attention to the reviews, most of them were unfair (although it is true that it fails in several things, which in the eyes of a critic and the general public weigh more than they should) and they did not know how to appreciate the good points like the setting and the unbeatable battle scenes. Of course, I recommend that you read a little about Alexander's life first (or watch a video on UA-cam) and then try to see the Director's Cut version.
@ You're absolutely right. There are plenty of movies that were panned by critics that I love so I really shouldn't put much weight in what they say. I think I will watch it as soon as I have time. Thanks for your recommendation ✌️
The Final Cut is the best version! Really is the one you should be reviewing
I loved the film, it inspired me to read (too!😂) many books about Alexander and historical fiction about him. He was obviously a complex person and a mixture of visionary and homicidal maniac! He was undoubtedly personally very brave and endured many hardships along with his troops. An incredible individual whatever way you view history.
11:21 , Stageira is not ''near Athens'', actually it is closer to Pella(the capital of Macedon) than what it is to Athens or any other well known Greek-city state of the south.
Aristotle moved to Athens when he was around 17-18 years old to study at Plato's Academy, so hes accent wouldn't really be that reminiscent of an Athenian. But who knows really considering he did spend a good chunk of his life there, and the rest in other places before finally arriving at Philip's court. But my main complaint is with you mentioning Stageira as near Athens, I can understand you made a mistake, I just wanted to correct it.
Watch this then the Netflix doc on him and you’ll say “perhaps I judged you too harshly”.
There's a book called "Landscape Turned Red: The Battle of Antietam" wherein the author quotes someone else (famous author of the time, but I forgot who) as saying that the intense fear you experience in battle has the effect of seemingly turning the landscape red.
Not surprised, Oliver stone is a historian, and unappreciated, one of the great American directors. I say this as an Australian, you can see strong patriotism in his movies, only director to get raw emotion out of tom cruise in born on the 4th of July, say it again unappreciated
The music... just awesome!
They gave Olympia a more Russian/Slavic accent to try and show she wasn’t Macedonian she was an Epirote from Epirus.
A small correction: Stageira is at the north of Greece, close to Pella, the capital of the Macedon Kingdom. However, Aristotle had spent most of his time in Athens.
Such a great video!
If I'm not mistaken Cassander marries Alexander's half sister Thessalonike, and names the city he founded after her. Thessaloniki now is the regional capital of Macedonia in northern Greece.
Tristan you are the GOAT my man. Greetings from Thessaloniki. By the way you are the only one mentioning this unique in human history linearity of the SPAA.
Nice reaction, but I miss the bit where Alexander's army revolts and doesn't want to follow him into India... a very powerful moment and actually a real moment in his long military campaign
Historically is quite accurate, with the great exception being Alexander's last moments, but I can understand why they opted for a more... Mythological, almost godlike exit for Alexander because he was treated as a demigod when he was alive. In reality, he gave a very unclear answer because he said "To the best" when he was asked to whom he leaves the throne. Also it is important to mention that Stageira was not near Athens. It was at today's Chalkidiki region. Philip destroyed Stageira when he conquered the area, but rebuilt it later as part of the deal so that Aristotle would come to teach Alexander.
I legitimately would kill to see a limited series about the life of Alexander the Great.
Make it only 4 seasons with the final few episodes taking place post Alexander the Great's Death and we see the crumbling of his empire.
Studios are willing to spend 200 million on that shitty Citadel series, or 500 million on Rings of Power yet are so deadly scared of doing anything historical again? Historical miniseries of the past are some of the most beloved, Rome for example, but Shogun, and Shaka Zulu, or the ww2 series, or all the historical-miniseries of the 80s and 90s that had huge viewership. I guess modern audiences arent interested idk
I'd rather see one of Philip, who was far, far more important to the story. Alexander didn't even have to follow the Macedonian army into Persia and it still would have won, that's how much of a perfected war-machine Philip had made it into.
@@GuineaPigEveryday my dad used to own that Zulu series on VHS,the Shogun Remake on FX is maybe the most acclaimed piece of Television of 2024,and Band of Brothers has yet to be topped with its follow up series The Pacific and Masters of the Air,and Rome will forever be held up as one of the most revered Historical Dramas ever made.
Excellent review- a glorious deep dive into history. I'll watch the movie again.
Excellent video, but I'm biased - I loved the movie, but boy did it get tons of hate since it came out. Cheers!
Great reaction, love the long-form and going into depth.
I didn't see any albo-slavic comments claiming that ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ was albanian or west bulgarian slav...yet..
Thank the Gods...
Incredible score in this movie
Vangelis. A Greek band.
Surprising that this Historian says that Stageira, Aristotle's birthplace is near Athens. In reality, Stageira (original: Σταγείρα) is in Macedon, and Aristotle was a Macedonian just like Alexander was. He only came to Athens to study at Plato's "Academia". Other than that, and his mention of the "greek love" (an unhistorical term made up by some tawdry British), he proved to know a thing or two about ancient Greek history, and sketched a rather relaible portrait of the greatest Greek who ever lived.
The set pieces in this movie were amazing ill give it that much
11:21
Im sorry but Stagira where Aristotle is from is nowhere near Athens, its in Macedonia near the halkidiki peninsula. Just look it up on google maps. I would know since i grew up around there and theres an ongoing archaelogical site there where part of his town remains to this day.
Amazing movie, amazing review! Didnt know about the medallion with the Macedonian horse and the elephant! And i loved the fact with the dialects! I heard so many bad things about Colin's accent, but really was genius way to portray different accents and cultures within the Greek world. Bravo !
Greatest accurate battles brought to screen
Never understood why this film got so much hate. It's right up there with the best of the modern historical epics.
My biggest disappointment with this film was its portrayal of the Battle Of Hydaspes River. There are entire documentaries dedicated to that specific battle that show that it was almost NOTHING like what is shown in this film. The environmental setting for the battle was completely different to what the film shows, and there was also a HUGE amount of tactical planning both before and during the battle on both sides from both Alexander and Porus. It really ended up turning into a chess game between the two of them, where Alexander would make one move, and Porus would attempt to counter that move.
Excellent commentary. I appreciate the comparison of the historical records with the film.
Very good stuff. Just saw the movie for the first time recently
Best episode ever. Respect.
The crazy thing is Alexander was only 32 when he died! Amazing what he accomplished by then!
13:15 I would argue that Bucephalus was Alexander the Great’s, greatest companion. 🐎
I have one of the helmets used in the film.
Wow!.. many thanks for sharing this podcast with us on UA-cam! This podcast will enable me to rewatch this film with a whole new level of understanding and appreciation! If this is not too inappropriate a question, is there a particular version of "Alexander" - of the three (3) that I am aware of - that is more wholly recommended?..
Can't speak on behalf of the producers of the video, but Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut (the third cut) or Alexander: The Ultimate Cut (the fourth cut) are the versions where Oliver Stone was given more complete control and allowed to include stuff the studio initially balked at like more historically accurate depictions of homosexuality ie Alexander's relationship with his eunuch manservant Bagoas, the strange relationship with his first wife Roxana, and just lots of other little bits and pieces the studio forced him to drop from the theatrical and the so-called "Director's Cut" (the second cut) which was actually titled so more as a marketing gimmick than because Stone had full control over the project. Check out Ultimate or Final for the richest experience. I'm personally biased towards Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut, but that may just be because it was the first version that I saw.
@@BuffFockPounder Many thanks for all of the "inside info"!
All the best blessings to you, and to all of your family and friends.
Contempt for a world much older than ours. What a statement 👏
Amazing review. Love this movie.
The director's cut is shorter than the theatrical version isn't? He should have reviewed the Final cut
Yes. It is the shortest one. Agree. If someone wants to know the entirety of the film, they should choose The final cut
I loved this movie I’ve watched all four versions and own them on dvd/blu ray. I don’t know why everyone hates it. The battle scenes were amazing 🤘🏻🤘🏻
I was promised an ancient historian but this guy looks no more than 40 tops.
Love the directors cuts so much. Cult classics in my book and some of the best representations of ancient history put on 35 mm celluloid film. This was a great video. Thank you.
When i first watched the movie in theaters i didnt like it, it just felt like it was missing a lot of context, and most of the movie just felt like it was heavily edited, but when i finally watched the directors cut on dvd it completely changed my mind, i loved the directors cut, reminded me of the kingdom of heaven directors cut, finally all the context was there and it felt like a proper historical movie
Which director's cut? There's three more cuts besides the theatrical cut. 😂 Personally I love his third cut, Alexander Revisited.
@BuffFockPounder ahh yes I forgot about that one, yes I agree, revisited is definitely the best one, I have stashed away somewhere in my house
Great vid, great info, cheers.
Stageira? Near Athens? At the centre of the Hellenic world? Stageira is as far away from Athens as Aegae is. Stageira to Aegae, maybe 100 miles. Stageira to Athens, at least 300 miles. Actually, by road, Aege is closer to Athens than Stageira.
Love Tristan, check out the ancients podcast, it's amazing. So cool to see him doing a deep dive on movies. He has mentioned a few of these on the podcast.
I bet Alexander never said that his empire should go "to the strongest". He had a son. It is way to convinient for the usurpatores.
The answer 'to the strongest" is a myth since he had lost the ability to speak by then.
Just one small thing I have to tell you I have been at the ruins of Stageira. It is located east of the Chalkidiki Peninsula near Amfipolis. That makes it part of Macedonia at least as a region at the time and today.
Actually Aristotle's hometown Stagira is in northern Greece near Thessaloniki not Athens, it was an athenian collony at the time of Pillip tho.
So basicaly this movie is almost 100% historically acuratte and TOTALY UNDERRATED.
Brilliant!
42:25 not Herakles but Cassander poisons Roxana & Alexander’s son, Alexander IV
Roxanna was a noble from somewhere around present-day Tajikistan. Having Rosario Dawson portray Roxanna makes as much sense as having Lucy Liu portray Queen Victoria of Great Britain.
I assume that they just needed someone who looked exotic (to the Hellenes and especially the Macedonians). How many Tadjik actresses are available for casting, assuming that they were there at the time?
@@davidweihe6052 Populations in Central Asia were not black or Hispanic in appearance. Roxanna's portrayal in the movie is incredibly far-fetched, akin to a fantasy. They had numerous plausible options among Caucasian actresses and did not need to use Tajik actresses. Note that they also did not select Hollywood actors of Greek descent or from mainland Greece to portray historical Greeks. I personally think Nordicisising of ancient Greeks/Macedonians is another problem in itself. In reality the two sides did not look very different at all.
@IStevenSeagal Sogdians and Bactrians predate Turkic arrival by ~1000 years. They were NOT Mediterranean genetically; just check the various genetic studies that are public domain and available online. They instead had a large steppe ancestry. Present-day Yaghnobis and Tajiks show genetic continuity to ancient Central Asian populations.
Even if we suppose that your assertion was correct, Rosario Dawson does not even look Mediterranean.
Greece, on the other hand, is a Mediterranean nation with very long-standing links to the Mediterranean basin.
@IStevenSeagal You are obviously trolling at this point.
@@nickm7911 You do know north Africa is part of the Mediterranean, right? As is Spain, if it's Dawson's latin heritage you're upset about. People have been mixing across the Mediterranean since before the bronze age.