NOT TOTALLY IMPRESSED!


I just saw the trailer on the Ilya Salkind Company website (www.ilyasalkindcompany.com). Needless to say, I'm not totally impressed with it. Of course, there really isn't that much footage from the film to work with. But it felt more like watching a preview for next week's episode of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" than a new film about Alexander the Great. But I'm sure that a longer trailer will be released before the film comes out next year, if it comes out at all.

And what's with the warrior woman? Now, don't get me wrong, I like seeing beautiful women kicking butt and looking hot, but it's not right for an historical film. The Greeks, including the Macedonians, did not allow women to fight. What I'm saying is not sexist, but is based on historical fact. I don't mind seeing some dramatic license taken for a film, but even "Troy" and "Alexander" showed that part was true. The women in those films were strong, but not warriors. But, if she turns out being a member of the Amazon warriors, then I'll change my tune.

I'll very likely see the film still, but with reservations. I'll probably enjoy it as well. But that's to be determined in 2006.

Take care, and God bless!

"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid."
-Ronald Reagan

reply

it's only a teaser and like you said there isn't much footage of the film. but i like it. i don't know what part of it made you "not totally impressed." esp. compared to ANY part of Oliver Stone's Alexander which cost like a gazillion dollars to make. regarding the warrior girl, i read in some article that they weren't going for historical accuracy, but were going to be freely inspired by the life of Alexander the Great. so i wouldn't take it so seriously cause i think it's just supposed to be fun!


reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

When you say you're not "totally impressed" I guess that means you were just impressed. After finally seeing Stone's Alexander, I would be impressed with anything that is comprehensible and not overbarring and rot with over acting and unexciting battle sequences.

reply

Hmm dont know what to make of that. The synopsis looks like it really is only based in Macedon and not focusing on anything else. Would need to be a really impressive script to work as a decent film.

reply

It looks like *beep* That's really all I can say. Oliver Stone's film at least LOOKED good, and contrary to what other's say the battles were great, but yeah the acting was as low as a limbo pole goes, and the story was so cut up and uninteresting (unless you are really into the history). This however looks like someone's trying to resurrect the Xena franchise by butchering history once again with wire-fu and bad special effects, bad acting, bad action, and just..looks bad. Costumes are out of place as well.

edit: I'd also like to add that at the end of the teaser, there's a shot of Alexander...whereing Ptolemy's helmet from the Oliver Stone film. I ain't seen low budget like this since the body vests from Starship Troopers got sold to just about every tiny show on television, including Power Rangers.

BEND OVA WILLY AND PICK UP YOUR LUNCH MONEY!

reply

$150 million dollars for Stone's and all you can say is "it looked good." Do you have any idea what $150 million buys next to the $5 OR LESS that this one cost?

reply

[deleted]

woo 2 year wait for a reply.

To answer your question. $150 million dollars bought the costums and huge set pieces and special effects, along with the ton of extras...that made the film LOOK good.

BEND OVA WILLY AND PICK UP YOUR LUNCH MONEY!

reply

Even Alexander was a total bomb, at the box office and amongst critics.
Why keep the pain going?

_____________________________
THIS is not an exit

Last film: Finder's Fee (2001) - 6.5 / 10

reply