BlazeLime Strong and Moving!

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

jubilee77 Throughout his rather short life (33 years quite short for its time), Alexander the Great conquered much of the Middle East and a TV programme titled "In the Footsteps of Alexander the Great" by Michael Wood would provide a fascinating but complex insight and on whether one would consider him to be a hero or villain and even two films have been made and it may even explain why these have been so-sos.On the 1955 film starring Richard Burton, this one was a bit dreary and the likeliest reason for its failure was due to the inability of screenwriter, producer and director Robert Rossen to hold the story together and it sometimes became known as "Alexander the Bore" and Burton may have been miscast as the Greek warrior but the plus side of Burton playing Alexander was his remarkable voice and the fact is that it looked to be that Burton played Alexander the Great in a similar fashion as he did when starring as Marcellus in The Robe. The Oliver Stone version that was premiered in 2004 looked to be more promising but it's not necessarily better and had also been heavily criticised for a number of reasons. Therefore, the complicated history of a warrior whom conquered the middle east 2.300 years ago may explain the reason for the failure of those two films.

peejoui Amongst all the other 'greats' on show, this dreadful over-acting ham really scaled the heights of grotesque rubbish in this film. As always, he delivered his lines in that constipated, yet far too rapid way. Please also look at the scene where he stabs his father's killer.....if you need lessons in putrid acting, look there. The battle scenes were short and pathetic; the costumes laughable. Then there were the cities. Seems all the money went on the alcoholic, as there was little or no attempt at accuracy and/or grandeur. Michael Hrodern was OK though!Dire film capped by this dire little man. Along with that Brando creature and Olivier, this idiot goes to show how stupid, crass and ridiculous actors are. Oh, and their fans. Execrable filth.

jamesvaleri Great Quote: At Troy, Achilles found his Hector and he killed him. Who will be my Hector? TO THE GOD OF BATTLES! I thought the 1956 was long and boring but compared to the Stone version, it deserves 10 Stars! Oliver Stone has lost it, has he realized yet that he can succeed in 20th Century topics (JFK, Platoon and Wall Street)!!! Although Oliver Stone botched his attempt at Alexander, I do believe that there will someday be a great Alexander the Great film. It will probably be another 50 years before it is tried again. Oh, well! The story has been around for over 2,300 years. What is another 50 years. I just hope the next one works!

ed.bishop This film was recently shown on British TV. I remember seeing the original in St. John's Newfoundland during my national service in the US Army. It was impressive then but, alas, not now! It was just one of many Hollywood attempts to get people away from the TV set and back into the movie theaters. Burton was just starting his career and he seemed awed and somewhat subdued in this film.Unfortunately its main purpose today is as a source for laughter. Two early scenes, 2 handers, were played behind a mammoth statue with the statues rear end dominating the screen behind the actors! I guess Burton just did not yet have the clout to say "No way, Jose'"! Also spot some of the horrendous continuity errors and look out for the "dead" extra who moves his foot away from an advancing horse. Poor Harry Andrews (an excellent actor) as the dead Darius just carries on breathing as an intolerably long shot lingers on him. I don't blame him!