Oliver Stone's version or Baz Lurhmans version? IMO i would rather see the Stone version. Seeing that Luhrman will turn his into some sort of homosexual song and dance epic.
Anyway, they are starting shooting on Oliver Stone's version in June. Thats about 3 or four months before the Luhrman pic. I bet one of them gets canned (hopefully the Luhrman pic) seeing that they will be using most of the same locations and what not.
Stone has the screenwriter of "K-19: The Widowmaker" on his side; Luhrmann has Academy Award winner Ted Tally ("Silence Of The Lambs") on his. Hmmmmmm...
Quote from: Satcho9Seeing that Luhrman will turn his into some sort of homosexual song and dance epic.
What makes you think Stone's film won't deal with Alexander's homosexuality? I say he'd better cause it makes for a better story (see below).
Premise: Conquering 90% of the known world by the age of 25, Alexander the Great (Colin Farrell) led his armies through 22,000 miles of sieges and conquests in just eight years. Coming out of tiny Macedonia, Alexander led his armies against the mighty Persian Empire, drove west to Egypt, and finally made his way east to India. This film will concentrate on those eight years of battles, as well as his relationship with his boyhood friend and battle mate, Hephaestion. Alexander died young, of illness, at 33. Alexander's conquests paved the way for the spread of Greek culture (facilitating the spread of Christianity centuries later), and removed many of the obstacles that might have prevented the expansion of the Roman Empire. In other words, the world we know today might never have been if not for Alexander's bloody, yet unifying, conquest.
I'll go with whatever version adapts this:
How do we know Alexander was gay?
2,300 years ago men in Greece had wives, mistresses, and lovers of either gender. Alexander's father, Philip of Macedon, had male lovers and also many wives, a problem when half-brothers would fight to the death over the throne. Alexander refused to marry and beget an heir when he left Macedon to conquer the world.
Alexander loved his boyhood friend, Hephaestion. Both brilliant boys, they were tutored by Aristotle, with whom Hephaestion kept up a lifelong correspondence. Alexander and Hephaestion felt like the two heroes Achilles and Patroclus, from The Iliad, which was Alexander's favorite book.
Hephaestion started off as a regular cavalry soldier - Alexander did not play favorites - and rose through the ranks on merit and carried out the most important military and administrative assignments. Later, Alexander also fell in love with a courtier from the conquered Persian court, scandalous not because the courtier was male, but because he was Persian -- most Greeks thought that other people were barbarians. Alexander married a princess from a faraway mountain kingdom of Asia, but it's unclear if he loved her because their only child was born much later. He also married the defeated Persian king's daughter, a purely political marriage, and Hephaestion married her sister, since he and Alexander wanted their children to be cousins.
After they conquered Asia, Hephaestion died suddenly of typhus. Alexander's grief was monumental. He asked the oracles if Hephaestion was a god (back then people could become gods by achievement) and was told that Hephaestion was indeed a hero, a lesser type of god. Now Alexander, who had no doubt about his own divinity, knew that he would meet his beloved again in the Blessed Realm, where gods and heroes live. He got his first wife pregnant and died himself without waiting for the child to be born, all within eight months of Hephaestion's death, just as Achilles had followed Patroclus in the Iliad. He was 32 years old.
Baz Lurhman. I like his style better, and like Mac said, look who is screen writing. I for one think Oliver Stone is a tad overrated. I dont want either to be canned, I want to see both so I can compare them. Either way I look forward to both.
Thanks for the history lesson.
This is a tough call for me and I really can't make a decision on who would be better but see possibilities of failure for both projects.
The thing with Stone, is that he is always going into different periods of history to really bring himself into important roles. Comparisons have been made to Kubrick but I think Stone's purpose is really not as genuine as Kubrick's because when he speaks of his movie, he speaks of the delight of imagining himself as being the great general director who gets to live this period. This approach has provided mixed results from great films like Platoon and JFK to more mediocre films like The Doors. With him, you get a sense his approach may be too narrow sometimes where Kubrick wanted to change structures to fit accordingly to what subjects and fields he filmed on in order to get the deeper interpretation.
And also, I have become less and less trustful in screenwriters today to really trying to adapt a story as well as it can be adapted or more for just hitting the most exciting points of it, like Hitchcock saying movies are just life with the boring parts taken out. I love Hitchcock but his approach and methods to filmming stories have become more out of place today and are being used in not really the best way. Hitchcock's complete simplicity in telling the story doesn't hold up as well as other great filmmakers. I think for better examples of simplicity in telling a story, one can view a great Speilberg film like Jaws which is essentially a Hitchcock film.
Well, the more important thing in the Lurhman capacity is not whether he will direct the movie well or not, I really can't give an opinion because of his movies, I've only seen Moulin Rouge. The thing with Ted Tally is weird because he wrote for a great film in Silence of the Lambs but for Red Dragon, instead of trying to make a different film and explore a different killer who has a different world of demons, he more or less tried to remake Silence in most ways that hindered the movie completely because it was worthless in retelling a story and only tried to scratch the edges of the Fienne character and put that off as good enough.
The thing is, it will all depend on the writing and who knows.
~rougerum
Oliver writes all of his films, save U-Turn. He usually co-writes with various writers and historians, so I am not worried about the writing. The man has won an Oscar for best screenplay! (Midnight Express) Remeber Scarface?
I think both men will make interesting films, but I am pulling for Stone, one because he is my favorite filmmaker and two because this is his area. Nixon I think is his best film, so fucking well done, so bold and innovative as is all of his films.
It's interesting that the old American auteurs from the 70s and 80s are just now tackling projects with big budgets, with Scorsese doing Gangs and The Aviator, all over $100 mill. and now Stone. This will be his biggest budget ever, previous one being Any Given Sunday at $62 million.
I read an interview a while back with Baz who commented on Oliver's project. This was back in Sept. when the Stone Alexander movie was a little shaky, and he said something to the sort of "Well I know Oliver. He's a friend and has been a huge influence on my work. The truth is that he might not even do his movie. So we will have to see."
Stone seems to be out of juice... he's kind of overrated anyway.
Luhrman doesn't impress a hell of a lot either... while I enjoyed Mulan Rouge, I still think he's the type of director that will just overdo everything.
My feeling is that both movies are going to be over the top stylistically. With stone, it will be him trying to stay "Oliver Stonish" by reusing his old tricks over again. I don't have that much confidence that Luhrman would be able to tone it down enough to not let his over-styling affect the actual story.
So I'm going with Luhrman's solely based on Ted Tally.
Nixon bored me to death, and I hope Stone has some new tricks up his sleeve. I would rather see Baz's, but it has more potential to turn into an over the top, camera-sweeping extravaganza. So I dont know.
CAMERA DOLLIES IN TO AN EXTREME CLOSE OF UP ALEXANDER'S EAR.
The tiny flakes of wax in the ear begin a choreographed dance.
ALEXANDER
Yes.
Why does everyone get so mad about 'camera-sweeping extravaganza'? If it helps a narrative I am all for it. As long as it is not all style no substance (The rules of attraction) it's just how a filmmaker wants to tell the story. Wouldn't you rather watch interesting and innovative camera work and editing, rather than cookie-cutter static shot/reverse shot shit which is boring? I am glad that guys like Stone and Baz are inventive and take full force and advantage of the possibilites of the medium. I think visually both men will make profound pictures.
On the Boogie Nights commentary, PTA talks about the 'show-off moments' and he says something really great, that people should be excited about making a movie. The passion behind the work is so clear in PTA, Stone, and Baz's movies.
Quote from: cbrad4dWhy does everyone get so mad about 'camera-sweeping extravaganza'?
You have to pick out every single thing I say and criticize it. I like camera-sweeping shit, and I liked Rules of Attraction despite the lack of substance. It was cool to look at.
But Stone has lost his substance with his style... now it's just his lame ass signature.
Quote from: Duck SauceQuote from: cbrad4dWhy does everyone get so mad about 'camera-sweeping extravaganza'?
You have to pick out every single thing I say and criticize it. I like camera-sweeping shit, and I liked Rules of Attraction despite the lack of substance. It was cool to look at.
I wasn't attacking what you said. I couldn't come up with anything better, and I liked what you wrote (camera-sweeping extravaganza). Chill out.
How has Stone lost subtance?
Quote from: sphinxCAMERA DOLLIES IN TO AN EXTREME CLOSE OF UP ALEXANDER'S EAR.
The tiny flakes of wax in the ear begin a choreographed dance.
ALEXANDER
Yes.
That's actually quite brilliant.
I would love to see Baz's, just cause he would pull a Romeo + Juliet and modernize the whole thing...
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI would love to see Baz's, just cause he would pull a Romeo + Juliet and modernize the whole thing...
What good would that do?
The 'Great' race is shifting into high gear
(dated 1/16/03)
After landing Warner Bros. as domestic partner on "Alexander the Great," Intermedia has set a late June start for Colin Farrell and Oliver Stone.
"Barring accidents and natural disasters, this is a definite 'go' movie for us," said Intermedia chairman Moritz Borman. "Colin's deal has been made, he's juggled his dates and made time for training. We've not decided 100% where we are going to start, haven't made up our minds whether we'll sell territories ourselves, or to a studio like we did on 'Terminator 3.' The June date changes only in that Oliver might begin second unit shooting earlier."
Borman wouldn't disclose locations, but if his timetable is accurate, the pressure's on the rival pic from Baz Luhrmann and Dino De Laurentiis, who have backing from Universal and DreamWorks and Leonardo DiCaprio. De Laurentiis declined comment. Same subject picture races are common, but the victor is usually the first before the cameras. What financier could stand risking $140 million on the second film about the world conqueror?
The race is further complicated by its need to shoot in places like Morocco at a time when war is looming, affecting everything from completion bonds to insurance to stars reluctant to leave home.
"Maybe there is room for two Alexander films," said Borman, who'll be at the Golden Globes rooting for his pics "Adaptation" and "The Quiet American."
"This is not one-upsmanship. We've got the money and are going forward with blinders on. It was hard labor for Oliver to find the angle to tell the story, but when he turned in his script, it glowed in the dark. There's adventure, battles, doubt, conflict and glory. As the blueprint for an epic, it's all in that one character. Warners shared that passion, they've been a good partner on 'T3' and Oliver had good dealings with them. The pieces fit."
Great great great news!! Looks like the script is a winner too. Oliver shoots/edits extremely fast as well, so it shouldn't be too long before we see the finished product.
Ill bet 20 bucks that the Luhrman version gets canned. (Fingers Crossed)
Quote from: cbrad4dQuote from: Jeremy BlackmanI would love to see Baz's, just cause he would pull a Romeo + Juliet and modernize the whole thing...
What good would that do?
It would be fun, and he probably wouldn't glorify the bastard.
Colin Farrell Talks Alexander the Great
MTV talked to Colin Farrell about Oliver Stone's Alexander the Great to which he's attached, though not officially. The film is competing with Baz Luhrmann's similar project, to star Leonardo DiCaprio.
Colin Farrell couldn't care less what Leonardo DiCaprio's doing. He's ready to star in Oliver Stone's "Alexander" whether Leo's "Alexander the Great" flick happens or not.
"If it happens with Stone, I'm there, regardless of the other one," the Irish actor said.
Director Baz Luhrmann ("Moulin Rouge") has long labored to get "Alexander the Great" off the ground with DiCaprio in the conqueror's saddle, while Stone ("JFK") is working on a similar project called simply "Alexander". Both are scheduled to begin production later this year. Luhrmann's story reportedly focuses more on the bisexual Macedonian warrior's personal life, while Stone's will deal with a conspiracy theory surrounding his death, among other things.
"There seems to be this race going on," acknowledged Farrell, who recently topped the box office with "The Recruit" and co-stars in this week's "Daredevil." "But that's all for the other heads and the people that are involved in it on a different creative level and the business people to sort out."
Currently busy shooting "S.W.A.T." alongside Samuel L. Jackson, Farrell said he has yet to officially join the "Alexander" cast but has screen-tested for Stone. "I would love to do it, man. I'm not up on my business affairs. I am just kind of focusing on what I am doing at the moment. But I'd love to work with Stone. I'd love to do that 'Alexander' piece that he wrote, [it's] just a beautiful f---ing script."
Alexander the Great conquered most of the known world 2,300 years ago. The fact that playing a historical figure of such magnitude would require a great deal of preparation isn't lost on Farrell. "If it happens, I will [do the research]," he promised. "There is a lot of work to do if that happens."
Stone hopes to get moving on "Alexander" in June. Luhrmann, who previously worked with DiCaprio on "Romeo + Juliet," plans to begin shooting his project toward the end of the year. A spokesperson for DiCaprio recently described the "Gangs of New York" actor as "very interested" in taking the part.
One of these movies isn't going to get made. Remember Kubrick's Napoleon?
Well, for the Kubrick and Napolean reference to work, one would have to be made, released and fail before the other could even begin shooting. That was the deal there. I don't think Baz's will be made. Stone seems to have the heart to really do so while Baz is looming around with other projects that are taking center stage above this one. So for that, I want to see Stone's much more now than Baz's.
~rougerum
Colin Farrell is cool. The type of guy who will drink himself to death by the age of 30. I think if either gets made its Stones.
Man I am pumped. Every article I read about it praises the script. I'm just excited as hell, as obsessive about Stone as most of us are about PTA, so its a big deal for me.
Colin Farrel is an idiot... he may as well be in N-Sync.
Oliver Stone is washed up... I doubt he could make this a great movie.
I'm not a huge Baz fan, but I think he's closer to being able to make this good than Stone is now (I'm sure if it were ten years ago, I'd say differently).
Quote from: RegularKarateColin Farrel is an idiot... he may as well be in N-Sync.
he seemed like a nice guy to me... gave me a nice tip.
Quote from: RegularKarateColin Farrel is an idiot... he may as well be in N-Sync.
Oliver Stone is washed up... I doubt he could make this a great movie.
Ouch. Why all the hatred?
Quote from: Satcho9Ouch. Why all the hatred?
Didn't say I hated them... I do think that people give Oliver Stone way too much credit though... I think he's used all the talent he had and he should either quit or get a new game.
Colin Farrell, on the other hand is just a new "it" actor that doesn't deserve all the attention he gets. All he does is talk about drinking and sleeping around and acts like acting is just something he does on the side of being a celebrity.
Quote from: RegularKarateColin Farrell, on the other hand is just a new "it" actor that doesn't deserve all the attention he gets.
Agreed. I don't think he's truly proven himself to earn $8 - $10 mil a picture. From Entertainment Weekly:
Bad boy Colin Farrell is Hollywood's hot commodityIt's hard to know which rumor is a surer sign of Hollywood heat: scoring an $8 million-to-$10 million asking price or scoring with Britney Spears.
Until now, the reported Britney hookup may have been Colin Farrell's most newsworthy act (there was a supposed kiss with Demi Moore, but that's so yesterday). After all, the 26-year-old has gotten as much notice for his drinking, smoking, and smooching as for his roles, which have included a critically lauded turn in 2000's ''Tigerland'' and a gig opposite Tom Cruise in last year's ''Minority Report.''
What a difference a No. 1 box office bow makes. With the $16.3 million opening of ''The Recruit,'' in which Farrell costars with Al Pacino, audiences are focusing on more than the star's love life (or duds like ''American Outlaws''). That trend may continue with his scene-stealing role as baddie Bullseye opposite Ben Affleck in this month's ''Daredevil,'' and in April he gets a chance to prove he can open a movie on his own with ''Tigerland'' director Joel Schumacher's ''Phone Booth.''
Studios are banking big-time on the Dublin native. Farrell reportedly earned $5 million for ''The Recruit'' and $8 million for August's ''S.W.A.T.'', costarring Samuel L. Jackson. Why are so many putting their money where Britney's mouth may have been? First, there's screen presence: ''Daredevil'' producer Gary Foster describes Farrell as having ''one of the most infectious cases of charisma I've ever seen.'' Then there's his acting. ''He'd be saying 'Maybe'I should try this, maybe I should try that,''' says Foster, ''and [director] Mark Steven Johnson would say, 'I appreciate that you're thinking about all these intricacies, but he's just a guy who can pick up weapons and kill people.'''
Charisma, acting chops, sex appeal: Such triple threats are in short supply -- witness Farrell snagging the title role in Oliver Stone's upcoming ''Alexander the Great.'' ''There are so few possible leading men that when people find one, they're willing to pay -- and overpay,'' says ''S.W.A.T.'' producer Neal H. Moritz. ''After 'Tigerland,' he got lead offers right away,'' adds Schumacher. ''People start competing and throwing out more and more money. Are you worth it? If the market says you are, yes.''
Fox chairman Tom Rothman, who oversaw ''Daredevil'' and ''Phone Booth,'' thinks salary talk ''gets blown out of proportion -- that isn't the issue for the audience.'' Nor, it would seem, for Farrell: He made ''Phone Booth'' for scale, and he'll star in the indie (read: cheap) adaptation of Michael Cunningham's novel ''The Home at the End of the World.''
Even Farrell's party-boy persona probably won't cause a backlash. ''Making out with Britney and Demi doesn't hurt,'' says one agent. ''There's a double standard -- a man scoring with women makes him a commodity.'' And ultimately that's what counts. Says another agent, who isn't yet sold on Farrell: ''He's been in five or six bad movies and nobody cares. But his asking price is $8-to-10 million, so yeah, I'd love to rep him.'' Whatever his rep may be.
weird arguments on colin farrell.
Mad he makes 8 to 10 million a year when he doesn't deserve it?
who cares, thats the business people's deal.
He is an idiot because he talks of partying instead of focusing on his job?
Ah, do you know the history of most Hollywood actors, acclaimed and not?
I Like him, and his work has shown that because until recently, I thought he was American. That's impressive.
~rougerum
I think there are a lot less talented people who make more money we ought to be concerned with first.
Quote from: MacGuffin
Agreed. I don't think he's truly proven himself to earn $8 - $10 mil a picture.
that may be true, but i see some talent in him... maybe one day he'll get a role to show it.
Quote from: RegularKarate
Oliver Stone is washed up... I doubt he could make this a great movie.
wait.
See, I thought that everyone was gonna blow up about my comments about Stone.
I don't care how much money Farrel makes. I just think he's an actor that hasn't really proved himself that much. His attitude cries ego and it's just not deserved.
I'm just saying so far, he's overrated. Maybe he'll prove himself down the road, but not yet. Right now he's just a name.
what part of it cries ego though? he never says how he is the shit or best and talks of how everyone else around him is good. he mainly talks about he likes to have fun by partying and playing the field with women.
~rougerum
Attitude I said... Attitude
never said anything about words
"Fame...ain't it a bitch?"
-AJ Benza
Alexander Battle Would Benefit Robert De Niro?
Director Oliver Stone is waging an epic battle against Baz Luhrmann and Dino De Laurentiis to get his Alexander the Great off the ground first. If he does, it would actually benefit Robert De Niro...
Variety says the Stone is forging ahead with efforts to secure financing to make his biopic starring Colin Farrell. Warner Bros. will release the film domestically, and the project's originator, Intermedia, is closing in on its financing for the movie. Warners and Intermedia are looking to start production this summer.
If Stone gets his greenlight, it would upset Luhrmann and De Laurentiis' long-planned Alexander film, which is to star Leonardo DiCaprio. A co-production between Universal Pictures and DreamWorks, that epic was eyeing November for its start date.
That would be welcome news for De Niro, says the trade, who's preparing another DiCaprio film at Universal Pictures, the CIA saga The Good Shepherd.
"Shepherd" is a labor of love for De Niro, who plans to direct. It was originally scheduled to roll after DiCaprio's "Alexander" adaptation, but if the biopic gets shoved back, "Shepherd" could go first.
Universal says it's committed to both movies, but neither one has a finished script, and "Shepherd" is still being put together. Luhrmann is expected to deliver his script in June. But an Alexander the Great biopic starring DiCaprio or Farrell is a costly enterprise.
Id rather see two Alexander movies than another CIA thriller
I'd rather see two movies by men who really seem to have their hearts on making these movies. Lurhmann's action seems not very motivated to do this. As I read of him falling behind Stone, I hear of him advancing his career in Broadway somehow. And I know De Niro has been wanting to make this movie for years. I've read the reports over the years of how this movie has evolved in just trying to be made. Oliver Stone no question wants this, so good luck to him.
~rougerum
Hollywood hell-raiser Colin Farrell is looking forward to playing the role of Alexander The Great - even though he'll be performing sex scenes with men and women. The acting star will play the title role in Oliver Stone's forthcoming epic and, even though he's famed for his womanizing ways, he's not concerned about playing the sexually inquisitive conqueror. He says, "Alexander The Great was bisexual. It was just the way society existed back then. It was about making love to men and women."
Ya know what's so freaky super cool? It's that MacGuffin's words are coming out of Mogwai's po.... MMMMM MMMMMM (passes out... man with chloriform soaked cloth laughs from behind)
Alexander the Great Already Filming?
In the race to make an Alexander the Great film, Oliver Stone and Intermedia have begun shooting. Sort of...
Variety says Stone is way up in the mountains of Northern India, close to the Himalayas, filming background footage.
"It's bloody cold, but the sun is shining beautifully and the weather presented an opportunity we had to grab," said Intermedia chairman Moritz Borman. "Even though they're up 14,000 feet, Oliver insisted on shooting the footage himself."
woohoo!
now let us all celebrate this good news with the adding of chocolate to milk.
I would much rather see the Oliver Stone biopic since he's the better visionary. I bet it'll look like a wonderful period piece that will probably remind many of Herzog's "Aguirre".. I'm not going to be ignorant and say that the Baz film will be too choppy, but I do think it would stand as the lesser film next to Stone's.. regardless of how he makes it. You'll be able to feel the passion in the Stone film no doubt about it.
The Boston Globe had an article by Hugh Hart about the upcoming "chariot pics". It says Oliver's "Alexander the Great" take was influenced by Robin Lane Fox's 1973 book "Alexander the Great". Perhaps, since the article also talks to Moritz Borman, head of Intermedia that is financing it. He credits the success of "Gladiator" and the new CG abilities with making it possible. "Six years ago, if you wanted to make a film like "Alexander", it would probably be undoable financially. Building whole cities and duplicating 10 horses into 2000 and creating a landscape behind it that you shot half a year before somewhere in the Himalayas - you couldn't have done that before and make it look real".
And the News Corp. website in Australia (http://entertainment.news.com.au) has a April 21 article about the dueling Alexanders. Says Stone is expected to start shooting in Sept. (those background shots don't count) and Baz Luhrrman in Nov. BUT the general consensus is that only one of those productions will survive, because both are aiming for June '04 summer release. So it's still possible that if the Baz production continues, Oliver's backers might blink and scuttle it, or vice versa. We're not out of the woods yet.
Quote from: cbrad4d...both are aiming for June '94 summer release.
Damn. 91 years.
I'll be, like, starting to get old.
in my opinion, stone's version will be a mature, literary-type of work, while luhrmann's will be something teenagers will enjoy. whatever that means. i just hope stone doesn't use the crazy richardsonesque photography like he did with any given sunday, which didn't even have richardson in it.
I don't know - you can't always rely on Stone to be mature: not to mention Any Given Sunday, let's not forget the ridiculous spectacle that is Natural Born Killers... I quite like it, but it is the most over-the-top, unsubtle piece of satire...
Probably being a bit unfair: the MTV style did have a point there (to be MTV style) - I doubt he'd use it for a period film.
Or would he...?
Quote from: children with angelsI don't know - you can't always rely on Stone to be mature: not to mention Any Given Sunday, let's not forget the ridiculous spectacle that is Natural Born Killers... I quite like it, but it is the most over-the-top, unsubtle piece of satire...
Probably being a bit unfair: the MTV style did have a point there (to be MTV style) - I doubt he'd use it for a period film.
Or would he...?
well...i don't want to say shit because i didn't watch all of
any given sunday, nor do i want to. some subjects just aren't appealing to me...
and why does everyone hate
natural norn killers because it threw subtelty out the window? having two anti-heroes like mickey and mallory presented as comic book icons was really fun. also...how can you say you like it when you have so many bad things to say about it? a ridiculous spectacle...well...it is a ridiculous spectacle...which is exactly what it was making fun of. i also find it funny how lots of "groups" and what not claimed the film glorified violence, yet other people say the satire was too obvious. i guess it wasn't obvious enough to some...
i don't know. having the media and it's effects on society being made fun of so blatantly was actually quite refreshing, in my opinion.
Quote from: children with angelsProbably being a bit unfair: the MTV style did have a point there (to be MTV style) - I doubt he'd use it for a period film.
Or would he...?
are you talking about his "mtv style" in
any given sunday?
i never said he was mtv in that one. i said richardsonesque, which i think is quite different. if
any given sunday was mtv-ish, i might actually bring alot more humour into the film. but from what i've seen, i think the richardson shit was played out alot more than the mtv stuff.
blah.
i thought visually AGS was one of Stone's best, but that's just me. can't deny that some of the football sequences are pretty damn spectacular.
my prediction is that both these movies will come out and everyone will start comparing them and it will be just as boring as this thread has been so far and then in five years people will say "Hey remember that year that two Alexander the Great films came out? " "Yeah, neither was really that good"
Quote from: RegularKaratemy prediction is that both these movies will come out and everyone will start comparing them and it will be just as boring as this thread has been so far and then in five years people will say "Hey remember that year that two Alexander the Great films came out? " "Yeah, neither was really that good"
Yeah, and five years from now, people will say:
"Remember Xixax.com?"
"Yeah. Newbies suck."
I enjoy Natural Born Killer's - it's fun and funny (partly because of how over-the-top it is, a lot because of Downey Jr's performance), I'm just using it as an example of how Stone can't necessarily be relied on to be "mature"... And I know that's the point - that kind of style doesn't come about by accident.
And - I have to come clean - I haven't actually seen Any Given Sunday either, and was kind of crossing my fingers that my reference to it would be appropriate... Apparently not! Sorry...
Stone :yabbse-thumbup: ....I'm actually wathin' U-Turn rite now :shock:
I'd like to see Stone's version better. I like Lhurmann and all, but I think Stone's better suited for the material.
Colin Farrell Talks Alexander the Great
Colin Farrell talked to BBC Radio 1 about his starring role in Oliver Stone's Alexander the Great, the 20 year-old King of Macedonia some 2,300 years ago. He's due to start filming in June and Colin says Stone has written such a phenomenal script he can't wait to start shooting.
"Everything is in it. There's greed, there's jealousy, there's love, there's pain, there's hope, there's desperation, there's pride, there's friendship, there's betrayal. It's an amazing, amazing story."
"There's so much in it - it's so dense that it nearly reads like bad fiction. Obviously bisexual - which wasn't even an issue back then."
"There was no term for bisexuality - it was just the way society was. People made love to men and women. It was only later on you had to pick one side of the fence. It's amazing."
should make for some interesting sex scenes.
Anthony Hopkins Joining Stone's Alexander
Anthony Hopkins is negotiating to star alongside Colin Farrell in Intermedia's Alexander, says Variety. The epic will be distributed by Warner Bros.
Hopkins, reteaming with his Nixon director Oliver Stone, will play the role of Ptolemy, the last surviving general in the army of Macedonian conqueror Alexander the Great who went on to become the Pharoah of Egypt. A younger actor will be cast to play Ptolemy in battle scenes.
Intermedia is in a race with the rival Baz Luhrmann-Leonardo DiCaprio project at Universal and DreamWorks, produced by Dino De Laurentiis. In a surprise move, Intermedia has established Morocco as its primary shooting location, the locale Luhrmann said he had abandoned for his home turf Australia because he couldn't get insurance for his actors. The Stone film will now take advantage of all the amenities that had been offered to its rival.
Part of Alexander will also be shot in London. Stone has already done some shooting near the Himalayas, and principal photography is on course to begin in July. Filming will stop for a month in August and resume in September.
Alexander the Great Race Takes a New Turn
While director Oliver Stone is trying to get his version of Alexander into theaters for Thanksgiving 2004, Baz Luhrmann and producer Dino De Laurentiis now say their Alexander the Great will not be released until at least late 2005.
Variety reports that De Laurentiis said Luhrmann plans to start filming his Leonardo DiCaprio and Nicole Kidman starrer in Morocco early next year. He international sales will be shopped at the Cannes Festival. Universal and DreamWorks co-finance the film.
The ambitious project -- which carries a budget of around $150 million -- requires the casting of some 70 speaking roles as well as hordes of extras (supplied from the Moroccan army by King Mohammed VI).
"This huge preparation can't be done in less than eight or nine months," said De Laurentiis, casting some skepticism on whether the Stone project, to be distributed by Warner Brothers and financed by Intermedia, could keep to its 2004 date.
Stone's project will star Colin Farrell in the title role, and Anthony Hopkins recently joined as well. Intermedia chief Moritz Borman reiterated confidence in his production schedule, adding that the pic had 30 staffers already on the payroll. "Set designs are done, the costumes are done. They're working on a full pre-production schedule," he said.
Luhrmann now plans to begin his principal photography in April 2004 and shoot for six months. Borman said Stone plans to shoot for 12 weeks.
"What most attracts me is the complex character of Alexander himself," said DiCaprio. "His legend is one of the most compelling stories in human history." Kidman, who will play Olympia, said, "She is unlike any other woman I've played before, and it's a role I'm really looking forward to."
Hmm...
well great news on Tony Hopkins joining the Stone project. to be honest both projects sound intriguing. i think it may be a good idea to space them out instead of going 'head to head.' not sure how that would work with audiences, especially considering both of these films will inevitably be long ones. will the general public go and see two 2&1/2-3 hour alexander the great films? i dunno... i would. guess it depeds on how the stone one is received. i'd imagine if people really liked stone's movie they might go and see baz's as well.
Stone's shooting schedule is only 10 weeks to Luhrmann's 6 months? I'm guessing Luhrmann is equally interested in the beauty of the large scale battles as he is to the character Alexander himself. I bet that is what will keep them shooting for so long. I'll likely see both films, but Stone's seems more interesting.
~rougerum
how the fuck will stone pull it off with such a short shooting schedule? any more "s's" in that sentence and ssssssssssssssssss.
I know, looks like Oliver Stone is trying to rush things to get out his Alexander project first. Bazz is taking his sweet time.
If you really want to make a successful burger, take your time.. even if you're competing with Wendys. In the long-run, it will pay off.
Since either film will be the work of a crass, overrated blowhard of a director, I plan to stay home and quietly read a book when these epics ooze their way into my local multiplex. Or watch my DVD of Morvern Callar, if it's out by then.
Dino De Laurentiis outlined the plans for his Alexander project, which is being directed by Baz Luhrmann and set to star Leonardo DiCaprio and Nicole Kidman.
Seemingly unconcerned by the fact that Oliver Stone's rival Alexander project for Intermedia is being readied for a late 2004 delivery date, De Laurentiis is set to begin principal photography of the film in Morocco in April 2004.
Universal has domestic rights to the film and DreamWorks has international, although De Laurentiis is planning to sell Germany, Japan, France, UK, Spain, Italy and possibly Korea and Australia/New Zealand at Cannes.
"It's an expensive film and the prices are high," he explained, "although I have already had one offer from Japan of $20m. We are moving slowly and according to our plan. I believe that on a project of this size, you have to prepare properly, so we have eight months' preparation. The film has 20 leading characters and 70 speaking parts. Without full preparation, you go over schedule and over budget."
De Laurentiis said that digital effects work largely involving Alexander's horse Bucephalus will begin in November, with rehearsals set for Jan 2004. Kidman plays Olympia, Alexander's mother who was 16 years his senior. "The character of Olympia is one of the few iconic women in history," she said in a statement. "She is unlike any other woman I've played before and it's a role I'm really looking forward to."
"It's not just that Alexander conquered the world or was taught by Aristotle," added DiCaprio. "What most attracts me is the complex character of Alexander himself - always restless, impulsive but measured. His legend is one of the most compelling stories in human history."
De Laurentiis is also selling territories [at Cannes] on Carlo Carlei's next film Last Legion, another historical epic set during the fall of the Roman empire which will be shot in English as a European production. The film tells the true story of a group of legionaries who go to Britain to save the young emperor of Rome who has been kidnapped by barbarians.
Baz Luhrmann Talks Alexander The Great
Source: Sydney Morning Herald
The Sydney Morning Herald spoke with director Baz Luhrmann about Alexander The Great:
"But, simply put, we absolutely want to make the film in Australia. And we have wanted to do that for over a year now. So we're going to do everything we can to make that happen."
The hurdles included the rising value of the Australia dollar and the unavailability of "6000 soldiers who don't have a day job" as was offered in Morocco.
Luhrmann, who took Moulin Rouge to a best picture Oscar nomination last year, said the scale of the film was daunting.
"The reason that Alexander the Great really has not been done successfully before is the sheer scale of it - it's the world's biggest road movie.
"He goes from Greece to Turkey to Egypt to Jordan to the Hindu Kush to India, then all the way back again.
"And all the way, you're dealing with drama and spectacle. At one stage there were half a million people in one battle."
Whatever the eventual main location of the film, Luhrmann plans to work on the digital effects in November, then start filming once DiCaprio is finished playing the reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes in The Aviator in the middle of next year.
But he may shoot the young Alexander earlier. An international search for a boy aged seven to 10 to play the part is about to begin.
On the competition with another Alexander film planned by Oliver Stone, Luhrmann said he would not be racing to get to the screen first.
"I simply do not believe that I can make a film that requires such extraordinary challenges to be overcome and be rushing at the same time."
Dark Horizons
With production delayed a year and Oliver Stone's rival version not far off from shooting, speculation began to grow that Universal was going to quietly bury their Baz Luhrmann helmed "Alexander the Great" epic but not so. In fact The Herald Sun reports that Luhrmann and producer Dino De Laurentiis meet with Prime Minister John Howard and Premier Bob Carr this week in order to try and garner military support to shoot the $US100 million epic around both Sydney's Fox Studios and the desert locations in and around the Broken Hill region in western New South Wales. Despite offers from China, Romania and Canada to film there, Luhrmann is keen to shoot in his home country but the trick is he needs around "500 troops capable of carrying out Alexander's military manoeuvres for two months". A big demand, though only around a tenth of the manpower that was offered to him by King Mohammed VI when filming was originally slated for Morocco. Luhrmann is also not settling on plain old extras either - "It's not about a bunch of extras standing there holding a spear. It's precise military manoeuvres. It's about the ability to go out into the desert and bivouac down then get up in the morning and shoot. We really need a crack cavalry. If we could get 300 crack cavalry, we'd be cool. With CG [computer-generated images], you don't need big numbers but you need great talents". The PM told the pair that he "gave his commitment to look into it [and] to do what he could", but without military support the director seems resigned to then moving the shoot to China - "If we knew we had these 200 troops tomorrow, it's a done thing - without it, we're gone, we can't really do it. This isn't just a 'gee, wouldn't it be nice', this is technical reality".
Angelina Jolie Joins Oliver Stone's Alexander
Source: Variety
Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life star Angelina Jolie has been cast by director Oliver Stone in his upcoming epic Alexander. Jolie will play the Macedonian conqueror's mother, Olympias. She joins Colin Farrell as Alexander and Anthony Hopkins, who was previously set to play Ptolemy.
Jolie will play Alexander's mother from his childhood through his reign as the king. Jolie will shoot her scenes in Morocco and London in the fall, says Variety. The role of Phillip, Alexander's father, has yet to be cast in the Warner Bros. distributed film.
Jolie will make Alexander before she plays another period heroine, Catherine the Great, in Love and Honor, the Randall Wallace-directed film for Disney, which begins production in Russia next spring.
Between Stone and Luhrmann.... well, something tells me I'm paying two tickets to see both movies. As for me, I'm not that well informed about Alexander The Great, but love both of the director's and their names are enough for me to be in line to buy a ticket 8)
Rosario Dawson is Roxanne in Stone's Alexander
Source: The Hollywood Reporter Sunday, July 27, 2003
Director Oliver Stone is in talks with Rosario Dawson (Men in Black II) to star in the epic Alexander. She Colin Farrell as Alexander, Anthony Hopkins as Ptolemy and Angelina Jolie who plays Alexander's mother.
As Roxanne, Dawson will portray Alexander's (Farrell) first wife. Intermedia is financing the film, which Warner Bros. Pictures is distributing domestically.
The Macedonian conqueror, Alexander the Great (356-323 B.C.), conquered almost the entire known world of his era. Though Alexander made use of the well-oiled army created by his father, he pushed the limits of Macedonian & Greek power to levels King Philip could not have dreamed of.
Jared Leto Joining Oliver Stone's Alexander
Source: Variety
Jared Leto (Panic Room) will co-star in the Oliver Stone-directed Alexander, for Intermedia and Warner Bros.
Leto will play Hephaistion, Alexander's top general and his lifelong companion.
Leto's role touches on one of the more sensitive plot points of both Intermedia's film and the rival saga being mounted by Baz Luhrmann and Dino De Laurentiis for Universal and DreamWorks: the conqueror's wide-ranging sexual interests.
Colin Farrell stars as Alexander, with Angelina Jolie as his mother and Anthony Hopkins as the general and future pharaoh Ptolemy.
Baz Luhrmann on Alexander the Great
The new issue of Entertainment Weekly has a good interview with director Baz Luhrmann talking about Alexander the Great. Here's several bits from the article.
Are you getting the cast you wanted? I've got Leonardo. In my mind, there was only one appropriate casting for Alexander and that was Leonardo. I worked with him when he was 19. He's a good friend and I've watched him grow into an actor who's truly in control of his own abilities. I've been thinking about doing Alexander for 10 years, but I never mentioned it to Leonardo. Then, when Marty [Scorsese] went to do his, he thought of Leonardo first and you totally understand why. When you see Alexander's face on screen, you've got to believe 50,000 men would follow this boy-man across the world. It's very hard to manifest humanity in a character that's an icon, but Leonardo is the guy for that kind of gig.
Who else is part of your cast? Nicole Kidman is playing Alexander's mother, Olympia, who is sort of a match for Cleopatra. I'll be seeing her in a few weeks and Leonardo in Montreal and I'm bringing them a draft, so both of them will know exactly what I'm doing. I still can't technically offer anyone contracts. I've gotten into the story by investing hugely in Alexander's childhood at the age of 9. So, I've got to find the perfect 9-year-old that looks like Leonardo as a child, who's really good with a horse and can act, and then I've got to schedule him before he grows up. As soon as I can cast the child, I can offer the contracts to the other actors.
What is the film's look? The assumed look of the ancient world was cooked up in '50s Hollywood -- everyone in white bedsheets and white miniskirts. It's definitely not that. There's a visual richness that you don't associate with the kind of camp '50s Hollywood language of it. It's a world you look at and wish you'd been part of. [Once again, Luhrmann is working with wife Catherine Martin, his production designer on ''Romeo + Juliet'' and ''Moulin Rouge.'' She won Oscars for ''Rouge'''s sets and costumes.]
Quote from: Baz LurhmanIt's very hard to manifest humanity in a character that's an icon
I hope that means he's going to be tough on Alexander. I just don't want a Braveheart-esque glorification.
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanQuote from: Baz LurhmanIt's very hard to manifest humanity in a character that's an icon
I hope that means he's going to be tough on Alexander. I just don't want a Braveheart-esque glorification.
me too.
good news on stone's casting. the beautiful rosario dawson joining up. and jared leto now, makes for quite the intriguing cast.
bad news for Baz's Alexander Project...
Alexander: The quiet burial of Baz Luhrmann's project has begun - AICN-D indicating the film has been delayed again for at least six months to "undergo script revisions".
Baz Luhrmann Gives Alexander the Great Update
Source: BBCi Films Wednesday, November 12, 2003
Director Baz Luhrmann has given an update on his Alexander the Great project which will star Leonardo DiCaprio and Nicole Kidman. He says he will start filming next September, despite the fact that Oliver Stone's Untitled Alexander the Great Project is already filming.
"I think you might want to see that [Stone's film] but it's not much of a stretch of the imagination to imagine mine's going to be different," he told BBCi Films, adding, "I never do anything on anyone else's schedule and I make things when I'm ready, basically."
In the meantime he's directing what he calls "a one minute movie" and everyone else calls "a pretentious commercial" for a perfumer. It'll star Nicole Kidman.
..baz=blah....
he's whack....
and his films are whack...
stone's Alexander will make Baz's look like Ishtar....
i'm probably in the minority but i'm much more excited about the Baz version.
I think they're both (Luhrmann and Stone) crackpots with ADD and not much inspiration. For me, the question is which film do I want to see LEAST... if I HAD to choose between Stone and Luhrmann, I'd choose Stone, but I don't think either of them are any great shakes.
Quote from: themodernage02i'm probably in the minority but i'm much more excited about the Baz version.
I must be in the minority as well.
me too... but I actually want to see both movies and then Im sure we'll get some great things from both... two great directors with very different style should make two totally different movies even though the topic is the same
I just wish there was more space in between them.
I'm looking forward to Stone's more, though.
Stone's is my choice...
Quote from: Pedro the WombatStone's is my choice...
:yabbse-thumbup:
Quote from: godardianI think they're both (Luhrmann and Stone) crackpots with ADD and not much inspiration. For me, the question is which film do I want to see LEAST... if I HAD to choose between Stone and Luhrmann, I'd choose Stone, but I don't think either of them are any great shakes.
:shock:
have u seen a lot of stone's work?
Godardian, have you seen Romeo + Juliet?
I'm kind of looking forward to Baz's version more...
Quote from: godardianI think they're both (Luhrmann and Stone) crackpots with ADD and not much inspiration. For me, the question is which film do I want to see LEAST... if I HAD to choose between Stone and Luhrmann, I'd choose Stone, but I don't think either of them are any great shakes.
Gordardian... for once, you and I are in total agreement.
Except that if I had to choose between the two I would choose Luhrmann just because he's not quite stale yet.
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanGodardian, have you seen Romeo + Juliet?
I'm kind of looking forward to Baz's version more...
I have, and I didn't like it (though I never complain too loudly about a chance to see Paul Rudd on screen...)
I haven't seen
Strictly Ballroom, but I'm not really inclined to, now. I hate to say it, but I liked
Chicago much better than
Moulin Rouge, which I found both much too full of its own pounding postmodernism, and awfully empty and harried for something that obviously wanted very badly to be beautiful. Hint to Luhrmann: No need to spend millions on gorgeous sets when you're just going to rollercoaster your camera recklessly through them and barely let us see them. I prefer him to the detested Guy Ritchie, but they both suffer from the same thing: They have a surplus of energy, but no real eye.
Cbrad- I have seen quite a bit of Stone's work. I appreciate the earlier stuff a lot more, and there's a lot of technical proficiency in the later, razzle-dazzley stuff (esp.
Natural Born Killers, but again, there's this hamster-wheel frenzy to much of it, which makes it seem pointless if it wasn't already. At his best, he does pretty well at a sort of melodramatic, Samuel Fuller-esque, overripe hyper-movieness, but when it comes to that, I can always just go to Stone mentor Brian de Palma, who does it even better and is more fun. I certainly don't think Stone is capable of the profound political statements he seems to think he is, though I'm sure I agree with him on much to do with the political.
Apart from their work, both Stone and Luhrmann have personalities I could do without.
Anyway, give me
Full Metal Jacket before
Platoon, and give me
Chicago (or better yet, the wonderful
Cabaret) before you give me
Moulin Rouge. [/i]
JFK? Nixon? have u seen those?
Quote from: Jeremy Blackmanhave you seen Romeo + Juliet?
.that film is up their w/ kids as one of the most worthless , trite , overrated, piece of celluloid garbage....
just that on efilm solidified my disgust of baz......
COMPARE BOTH DIRECTORS WORK...(i know stone has been directing longer)...and why wouldn't one been more interested and hopefull that stones' would/ will be better......
Quote from: ©bradJFK? Nixon? have u seen those?
I'd be willing to give
Nixon a whirl, if only for Joan Allen, but yes, I saw
JFK, and I was sort of nonplussed. I'd be willing to give it another try, too, but I was definitely not impressed the first time. That was long enough ago that I wouldn't mind reassessing it with my current eyes.
Quote from: godardianQuote from: ©bradJFK? Nixon? have u seen those?
I'd be willing to give Nixon a whirl, if only for Joan Allen, but yes, I saw JFK, and I was sort of nonplussed. I'd be willing to give it another try, too, but I was definitely not impressed the first time. That was long enough ago that I wouldn't mind reassessing it with my current eyes.
please due so. do it on a sunday, when u have time and can take a break or two. (stone himself said jkf should be watched w/ an intermission)
Quote from: ©bassQuote from: godardianQuote from: ©bradJFK? Nixon? have u seen those?
I'd be willing to give Nixon a whirl, if only for Joan Allen, but yes, I saw JFK, and I was sort of nonplussed. I'd be willing to give it another try, too, but I was definitely not impressed the first time. That was long enough ago that I wouldn't mind reassessing it with my current eyes.
please due so. do it on a sunday, when u have time and can take a break or two. (stone himself said jkf should be watched w/ an intermission)
heh....i watched it in one sitting. the director's cut too. i was so involved though, it really didn't bother me. i've watched it a lot since, and i've taken intermissions too. i say it works better that way.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.empireonline.co.uk%2Fimg%2Fnews%2Ffuturefilms%2Flarge%2Flarge378.jpg&hash=f2457de5e865cca55618649e28cc49ac9174c2b1)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.empireonline.co.uk%2Fimg%2Fnews%2Ffuturefilms%2Flarge%2Flarge379.jpg&hash=1bf9145dc3c40c20aa75e035c20cb42e947e8a52)
uh,,. hm.
i can't wait.
blond's gay, huh? :)
Quote from: ©bradi can't wait.
I can't either. I've been on a major Stone haul as of late and he is turning into one of my favorite modern directors.
Quote from: kotteblond's gay, huh? :)
I'd say the micro-miniskirt is more of a giveaway... Farrell has nice legs, though.
Quote from: godardianQuote from: kotteblond's gay, huh? :)
I'd say the micro-miniskirt is more of a giveaway...
Hehe...didn't Russell wear a mini-skirt as well?
u got to remember though, alexander played for both teams, so it makes sense that he would look a little gay.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.calendarlive.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2004-01%2F11013944.jpg&hash=ffc9a1955f4a5c4b1a1e86908bfad073000d3400)
A world to conquer
There's a spring in Oliver Stone's step as he strides around a re-creation of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the setting for a scene in his epic new movie, "Alexander." Source: Los Angeles Times
"Let's go, guys!" he yells cheerfully to no one in particular, clapping his hands as some 200 extras, dressed variously as Macedonian soldiers, Indians, Persians and skimpily dressed Babylonian women, scurry into position. Eccentrically, Stone has chosen to wear a wide-brimmed hat (indoors!) to complement his sports shirt and chinos. He's flashing his gap-toothed smile a lot. Clearly he's in an ebullient mood.
It's understandable. Stone has long wanted to make a film about the military conqueror Alexander the Great (356-323 BC), who in his 32 years created the most stupendous empire the world had seen, stretching from the Balkans to the Himalayas, and including what is now Macedonia, Greece, Turkey, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan. "I started talking about this in 1989, when the German producer Thomas Schuehly approached me," Stone recalls. But when making a film of Alexander's life finally became feasible, he was not alone in wanting to do it.
After the success of "Gladiator" a couple of years ago, sword-and-sandals epics suddenly seemed viable for the first time in 40 years. And the story of Alexander the Great was clearly the one to bring to the screen. At one point, it seemed there might be three competing biopics — confusingly, all earmarked to be made in Morocco. Martin Scorsese was briefly reputed to be interested, while Italian producer Dino de Laurentiis had plans for an Alexander epic, directed by Baz Luhrmann, with Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role. A little more than a year ago, Stone looked like an underdog.
He threw in his lot with the giant European-American production and distribution company Intermedia, wrote a strong script, and generally behaved as if his rivals didn't exist.
Stone's tenacity paid off. Two days before he found himself marshaling extras on the Hanging Gardens set, the "Alexander" production learned that the De Laurentiis-Luhrmann-DiCaprio version had fallen through for now. He finally has a clear run at the story — and he believes that in the person of Irish actor Colin Farrell he has the definitive Alexander.
"The competition got nasty at times," says Intermedia Chairman Moritz Borman, speaking by phone from his office in Munich, Germany. "Quite frankly, when we started, they had Baz Luhrmann, who had just done 'Moulin Rouge.' Leonardo was at that time a bigger star than Colin. I had the smaller package, so to speak. But Oliver's script is extraordinary. So I had a screenplay. They never did. They just had different versions."
Still, this "smaller package" comprises a budget described by Borman as "hovering around $150 million." The film also stars Anthony Hopkins as Ptolemy, who founded the Macedonian dynasty in Egypt; Val Kilmer as Alexander's father, Philip; and Angelina Jolie (in real life only a year older than Farrell) as his mother, Olympias. Jared Leto plays Hephaistion, a Macedonian warrior who is Alexander's closest friend.
A mammoth operation
The production itself is conceived on a truly monumental scale, spanning three continents. Shooting began in Morocco's deserts and Atlas mountains in late September. Interiors were shot here for three weeks over the Christmas-New Year period. "Alexander" has now moved to Thailand for jungle battle scenes; the 85-day shoot concludes early next month.
Borman likens it to "a very big road movie." A staggering 20,000 costumes have been designed. The film's armorers created 9,000 arrows, 3,000 shields, 3,000 swords, 4,000 bows, 200 cavalry lances and 350 axes and clubs.
"In Morocco, we had close to 1,000 soldiers provided as extras by the army," producer John Kilik recalls. "We have a crew of about 120 here in London, but in Morocco it was up to about 500. We had 2,000 people, and 120 horses. We'd have two units going, one with five cameras, the other with three, and Oliver going back and forth. It's like a military operation."
Alexander intrigued Stone from their first introduction.
"When I read the Random House classic book of the 1950s, he took my imagination. The beauty of the man, combined with his dashing exploits and his strong parents — he's fascinating material. He had an idealism I find very rare," Stone says. "He truly believed in the myths and executed them. He outshone Achilles and practically matched the myths of Hercules, in his way. It's an astounding story: a boy who followed his dreams.
"People don't do that often in life, and when you find them, you want to know about them."
Another reason Stone relished the prospect of an Alexander film was the sheer challenge: "No one's done it. No one's written something about Alexander's life that's remembered. There was a bad opera. Robert Rossen, bless his soul, took it on and completely missed it," says Stone, referring to the director's 1956 film "Alexander the Great." "Why didn't Shakespeare try it? Or Marlowe, or the Roman playwrights? It's bizarre."
Stone and his team have seen for themselves why Alexander's life proves such a daunting project. "The big films I made before were contemporary," Stone says. "With this we had to start from scratch, make every single piece of clothing and armor, because nothing is available. We go back 23 centuries, so whatever you need — pottery, glasses — there's nothing you can get."
Even the climate has caused headaches for the production. "In Morocco, we had sandstorms," Stone says. "To some extent, I kept shooting through them, but we still lost 2 1/2 days out of 37 there. The key is to make it a guerrilla operation — get in and out fast."
Then there was the small matter of finance. Borman admitted that shooting started on "Alexander" before all the money was in place. Intermedia sold distribution rights territory by territory. But not until Warner Bros., its U.S. distributor, also agreed to finance the film's distribution in Britain and Italy was the project on safe financial footing.
Enthusiastic star
While getting an epic made is one thing, persuading audiences to see it is another. Much of its success will depend on Colin Farrell, who plays Alexander. And today he is decidedly under the weather, with a bout of flu. Between takes he huddles in a corner of the set, next to a heater.
Farrell has grown his dark hair to chin length and dyed it blond. His limbs are bronzed with tanning oil. He looks the part, in a tunic and sandals, yet there are occupational hazards with such a costume — as he drags deeply on a cigarette, ash falls on his bare thigh and Farrell mutters an obscenity.
"Painful," he says finally. "Especially when your legs have been shaved." But even through his illness, his enthusiasm for "Alexander" is evident. "In the last four years I've been lucky enough to do some big jobs," he says. "But I've never done anything like this. It's a very noble endeavor, this film. Alexander was a man who gained absolute power. He was ruler of what people knew the Earth to be at that stage. He's the original Greek tragedy, you know? He was running away from a lot, running toward a lot and trying to find himself in the middle."
Farrell insists that Stone's script (which he based on a biography of Alexander by British historian Robin Lane Fox) is itself a coherent historical account.
"You can never know enough, so you read 'The Iliad' and Sophocles, you get a feeling for the gods," he says. "But Page 1 to Page 158 [of the script], that's the bible. You can just run with what Oliver wrote and make it your own."
As for Stone, he's thrilled with his leading man. "See that?" he said, after the day's filming. "Colin has the flu, but you wouldn't know it. I ask him for choices with a line, and he just adjusts it four different ways. He's so upbeat…. Oh, yeah, and he's nasty in an Irish way. All his best lines are under his breath. It's hard to get all that. This is a young man's story, and what young American actor has all that?"
Farrell casts his gaze upward, around the enormous set. "Our production designer and costume designer [Jan Roelfs and eight-time Oscar nominee Jenny Beavan] are geniuses. They create this world, and all you have to do is exist in it. I've seen some amazing sets, but look at this!"
He has a point. It's an extraordinary spectacle — a huge space with pillars, columns, fountains and real hanging plants, imported from Holland. The costumes of the extras, representing half a dozen nationalities, are so vivid that at first glance it can give one a sense of visual overload. The scene marks the entry into Babylon of Alexander and his Macedonian comrades, who are greeted warmly. But a member of the city's ruling family is concerned about how they will be treated by these invaders, and Alexander speaks to her reassuringly.
Intriguingly, Farrell speaks in a softer version of his own strong Irish accent — and many of the actors cast as his allies are Irish or English. This was deliberate policy on Stone's part: "These men were Macedonians, not cultivated Greeks, and it seemed to me they occupied a similar position that the Irish and Scots did to the English in the British Empire," he said.
It isn't hard to figure out why Stone was drawn to Alexander the Great; he is fascinated by power and its exercise. He has made two movies about U.S. presidents ("JFK" in 1991 and "Nixon" in 1995) and his last two films, "Commandante" and "Persona Non Grata," focused on Fidel Castro and Yasser Arafat, respectively.
"One thing that comes out in this film is that the Olympic gods start to lose their hold on man," Stone says. "Mankind goes toward Christianity, that comes 300, 400 years later, but men start to look for personal salvation as opposed to the Olympic gods, who weren't enough. Alexander shows you that man can do it, become the highest reflection of gods."
So the trick is to make a movie that reflects that ambition? Stone smiled: "Exactly."
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.techcomforces.com%2Falexander_teaser.jpg&hash=ea2e12089ee07518e0fb479f65fb9bfefb2cc6b7)
alright i'm really excited now.
What the hell are these, bleached hair ?!
Oh son. I'm allll ready like.
What is that? "Fortune favors the bold?" How about "fortune favors the brutal?"
Seriously, tell me one good thing that man did for the world.
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanWhat is that? "Fortune favors the bold?" How about "fortune favors the brutal?"
Seriously, tell me one good thing that man did for the world.
dude, he was pretty cool. and
fortunate, which is what the tagline implies.. and i think is pretty obvious when u look at his deal. i think that's all the tagline was saying.
and yeah fortune does favor the (most) brutal, most of the time.
this epic revival is just another weird time warp to rise out of temporal confusion, which we're all in right now. remember when ppl said the musical was coming back? what happened to that? i wouldn't be surprised if the next phase was a series of films about the renaissance.. that would be interesting.
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanWhat is that? "Fortune favors the bold?" How about "fortune favors the brutal?"
Seriously, tell me one good thing that man did for the world.
bold doesn't have to imply he was good. Brutal is true, but bold is truer.
'Alexander' Final Scenes Lost
New movie Alexander has been thrown into disarray after director Oliver Stone discovered he shot the final scenes on damaged film. The Natural Born Killers film-maker - who has been shooting the movie in the Far East with Colin Farrell and Angelina Jolie - will now have to go back and re-shoot the scenes after he discovered they were unusable when he viewed the rushes in Uban, Thailand. Stone had originally shot the final scenes of his movie in Bangkok, but thinks the film was damaged when it went through airport checks before being delivered.
ON SET PHOTOS:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themoviebox.net%2Fmovies%2F2004%2F0-9ABC%2FAlexander%2Fphotos%2Falexander_pic5.jpg&hash=c174bca603c370aa584a16ac390b6f351e883e03)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themoviebox.net%2Fmovies%2F2004%2F0-9ABC%2FAlexander%2Fphotos%2Falexander_pic4.jpg&hash=295cbe60769800834377598e182e2cb33d1c1c87)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themoviebox.net%2Fmovies%2F2004%2F0-9ABC%2FAlexander%2Fphotos%2Falexander_pic10.jpg&hash=9ecffe8c08c4580877dc98730bf4bd1bd85fa40a)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themoviebox.net%2Fmovies%2F2004%2F0-9ABC%2FAlexander%2Fphotos%2Falexander_pic3.jpg&hash=ab15a5b98921f13af957ca1fd264b2a5414ef977)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themoviebox.net%2Fmovies%2F2004%2F0-9ABC%2FAlexander%2Fphotos%2Falexander_pic7.jpg&hash=3892ba54fbd76e4f2b442a96b21c0d61f4019080)
Lurhmann's Alexander the Great Not Dead
Source: E! Online Tuesday, July 13, 2004
E! Online says that, despite published reports to the contrary, Baz Luhrmann's epic Alexander the Great is not dead yet. The Universal Pictures and DreamWorks co-production would star Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role and Nicole Kidman as Alexander's mother, Olympia.
The 'Telegraph' reported that Luhrmann decided to scrap the flick because he wanted to take a year off and spend more time with his production designer wife, Catherine Martin, and their new daughter, Lillian, born last October. The story was subsequently picked up by the New York Post.
However, disputing those accounts, Luhrmann's Australia-based rep, Maria Farmer, said the filmmaker has not scuttled his big-budget historical biopic on the Macedonian conquerer, and is still firming up plans for his next cinematic outing.
"Baz is currently in Europe working on the final draft of his script for 'Alexander the Great'. When he completes that draft he will decide whether Alexander is the next film on his slate," Farmer said. "We do not know where these reports have originated from. They certainly did not come from Baz."
Oliver Stone's own version at Warner Bros., Alexander, will hit theaters on November 5. It stars Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Anthony Hopkins, and Val Kilmer.
I'm hearing two different stories here... ^ that one and...
Baz's Alexander Dead...At Last
Dark Horizons
Unofficially its been dead for nearly a year, but at last the big members involved are finally admitting to defeat.
Kidman: "Luhrmann Not Doing Alexander Film"
Australian director Baz Luhrmann has officially dumped his delayed Alexander The Great biopic, according the film's would-be star Nicole Kidman. The Oscar-winner was set to play Olympias - the mother of Leonardo DiCaprio's Macedonian warrior Alexander - in the eagerly anticipated movie. Luhrmann announced in 2003 he was delaying the film until a 2006 release to concentrate on other projects and devote a lot more time to the film. Rival Alexander film, directed by Oliver Stone and starring Colin Farrell and Angelina Jolie, is released this month. When asked by Canadian newspaper Toronto Sun if the Moulin Rouge director was still going ahead with Alexander, Kidman replied, "No." When told many film fans were looking forward to comparing the two films and were intrigued by Luhrmann's vastly different creative approach to the story, Kidman says, "I was too (intrigued)."
QuoteKidman: "Luhrmann Not Doing Alexander Film"
8)
great news. could you imagine how awful this would have been. romeo and juliet and moulon rouge both suck ass [except visually]... the moment i heard that baz was doing this i had this image of alexander in purple hair wearing black leather while twirling a wand dancing arund in an open battlefield crying out haiku war hymns while having fake blood pour down on him like rain.
and them john leguizamo shows up
Sounds more interesting than whatever boring ass hack-job Stone will shit out.
yeah i really wanted to see this one more.
RIP
sucks!!
Quote from: NEON MERCURY
8)
great news. could you imagine how awful this would have been. romeo and juliet and moulon rouge both suck ass [except visually]... the moment i heard that baz was doing this i had this image of alexander in purple hair wearing black leather while twirling a wand dancing arund in an open battlefield crying out haiku war hymns while having fake blood pour down on him like rain.
and them john leguizamo shows up
:lol: Neon your always able to crack me up.
RUMOR CONTROL: What Ever Happened To Bazs Luhrman's Alexander?
Source: Premiere Magazine
Oliver Stone's Alexander was less than great by box office standards, but that isn't stopping director Baz Luhrmann from making his own biopic of the Macedonian military man- despite what his leading lady says.
The gridlocked project recently drew attention when Nicole Kidman, who was set to play Alexanders mother, Olympias, told the press that the production was off. Not so, according to the directors spokesperson, Maria Farmer. "Baz is still finalizing the script for Alexander the Great." she says.
But the truth is that recent sword and sandal fare has had trouble conscripting audiences (Alexander banked only $34 million domestically, King Arthur took in $51.9 million; Troy led with $133.3 million), which may make it a struggle for Luhrmann to keep the big-budget epic alive. Though he has shot some footage- reportedly including promotional material of Leonardo DiCaprio, who may play Alexander, in full battle regalia- no start date is set, and neither Kidman nor DiCaprio has signed a contract. If Luhrmann does get the green light, we have only one request: Shelve the leather and metal minis for men. The last time a guy looked tough in a skirt was, well, never.
De Laurentiis Says Alexander Still a Go
Source: Mary February 22, 2005
According to Italy's Il Corriere della Sera (via Screen Daily), producer Dino De Laurentiis has re-assured that he is moving forward with plans to film his Alexander the Great project, to be directed by Baz Luhrmann (Moulin Rouge) and to star Leonardo DiCaprio and Nicole Kidman.
"We will shoot the film in one year's time, and it will be the Alexander that everyone has been waiting for," De Laurentiis said, confirming the talent that was attached to the project when it was announced in 2003.
De Laurentiis's film was put on hold when Oliver Stone's rival Alexander project started in 2004. "I don't want to hit out against Oliver Stone, who merits respect. But his picture was certainly flawed, and was missing the spine of a screenplay," the Italian producer told the Milan newspaper.
He added that "epic films are difficult to do well. King Arthur was also flawed. It badly copied ideas from the third film in my schedule, which is based on Valerio Massimo Manfredi's novel, 'The Last Legion'."
The Last Legion is set during the fall of the Roman empire and tells the true story of a group of legionaries who go to Britain to save the young emperor of Rome who has been kidnapped by barbarians. De Laurentiis said that Carlo Carlei is no longer attached to direct that project and a new director has not been announced.
Meanwhile, De Laurentiis is currently preparing Decameron, an adaptation of the 14th century Italian classic by Giovanni Boccaccio. The $38 million drama, written and directed by David Leland, will start shooting in April in Rome and Tuscany.
Hayden Christensen (Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith) plays the lead role of Lorenzo, starring opposite Mischa Barton (The O.C.), who plays Pampinea.
Italian fashion designer Roberto Cavalli heads the production's art department. "You won't be seeing any leotards," De Laurentiis warned. "The costumes and sketches I've seen are wonderful, and are adapted to young people on the road today."
Boccaccio's "Il Decameron" (c.1351) is a series of one hundred stories written in the wake of the Black Death. The stories are told in a country villa outside the city of Florence by ten young noble men and women who are seeking to escape the ravages of the plague.
De Laurentiis's upcoming projects also include The Lecter Variation, which follows Hannibal Lecter from his childhood in Lithuania through a period in Paris to his arrival in the US. The film will feature Lecter at the ages of 8, 14 and 20. De Laurentiis confirmed that the movie will be directed by Peter Webber, and the cast will include Gong Li (Memoirs of a Geisha).
will someone please just kill De Laurentiis already? or, atleast, heavily sedate him to the point where he is uncapable of speaking or doing anything that would allow him to greenlight a movie.