Alexander Revisited: The Unrated Final Cut -- Due 2/27/07 (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

Oops, I should've noticed your location.

 

[PatrickDA]

Two clips containing the first half-hour of the new 'Director's Cut' are on
Yahoo...

Links
1 - http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?p=...p=oliver+stone

2 - http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?p=...p=oliver+stone

Overall, I like the changes, but I did notice a minor mistake. In his big speech
to his troops before the battle of Gaugamela, Alexander puts his helmet on
TWICE and the guy handing it to him is on his left side, then on his right side
after the cut. Hopefully, these clips aren't final, because I can't imagine Stone
allowing something that sloppy to take place.

Now, the new version clears up Hopkins character a great deal. By cutting
directly to the battle of Gaugamela from Hopkins it makes his line of "I know,
I was there" much clearer to any one who had forgotten who Hopkins
character was. In the first two cuts, you've got a ton of Alexander
childhood scenes between the first time Hopkins appears and the next time
we hear his VO about being there (at the battle of Gaugamela.) Next, Stone
added several bloody minutes to the Battle of Gaugamela which added a
great deal of much needed action and extended the running time of the
battle, which many thought was too short. Stone also included more titles of
where you (the viewer) is on the battle field, so to clear up any outstanding
issues people had with being confused, although I never was during the first
two cuts. Stone added a nice panning shot out of the dissolve to black
after the battle and introduction to the killed/wounded tent scene. He cut
out the worst moments of the first two cuts by getting rid of Jolie picking
up a snake and then playing with a young Alexander for FAR TOO LONG. In
this cut, we go right to young Alexander on the bed with Jolie already holding
the snake instead of all that wasted time beforehand. I do miss the panning
shot through the lobby-type room from the first two cuts, which featured
wonderful production design, but you can't have everything I guess. I also
enjoyed how Stone kept the camera OFF of Alexander during the opening
death bed scene and allowed nearly all of the supporting characters a chance
for the audience to see and identify them. Stone has put the Henry V-like,
the-night-before-the-battle walk through his troops tents BACK into the film
as well as make a bigger deal of the eclipse of the moon and put Alexander's
chat with Heph. back into the film that was cut from the second version of
the film. In the end, it's the best version yet of the first 1/3 of the story.
I can't wait until I see the whole messy affair in two weeks.

 

[Nathan V]

Sounds fantastic, Patrick. Starting off with Guagemela (sic)...what a ballsy move. That's the Stone I know. Glad to see that he went all out on the battle and took out the Jolie snake stuff. As an editor, I can say that the continuity break you mention is no biggie...check out Walter Murch's book. In so many words, he says strict continuity is for pansies, especially with really creative editors like Stone and Scorsese. I was on the fence before, but you just convinced me to purchase this.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[JulianK]

Patrick, you're obviously something of an expert on this film... I wonder if you know if Stone's commented on which version of the film he'd want someone who hadn't seen it to see?

 

[PatrickDA]

Stone hasn't been asked that question yet, but you can ask him questions
through the Alexander Revisited myspace page. I'd guess he'd want first time
viewers to watch this third cut.

 

[Nathan V]

PatrickDA,

I'm hesitant to watch the footage linked above (waiting for the full experience ext tuesday), but I'd love to hear a little more about the changes. Aside from the repositioning of Guagamela, do you recall any other structural changes? Are the young Colin Farrell scenes intercut throughout the movie (as in the DC) or all at the front of the film (as in TC)? Do you recall any alternate takes or angles, extensions or reductions of existing scenes we know of? As for Ptolemy, I always thought he wasn't much developed as a character, but existed more as a general "roman chorus" type narrator; is that dynamic retained or altered in this cut? You said Guagamela is expanded- awesome. I remember watching Any Given Sunday in '03 and thinking, "the battles in Alexander are going to be insane." I didn't feel the TC or DC lived up to my expectations in delivering the primeval ferocity one expects from Stone...it sounds like that's this new cut shows the battles as Stone always intended. Is the battle noticeably more intense? I remember watching the DC and wondering if Stone had spliced in more battle footage than the TC, but I couldn't be sure. In any case, I'd love to hear about any changes or new footage, no matter how minute. Film editors around the world should be drooling at the existence of the Alexander cuts - the very idea of being able to see Oliver Stone (one of our best) work through his creative process across 3 cuts of the same film, and to know that the third one was made with no outside pressure or constraints, is amazing. This is a milestone.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[PatrickDA]

Ok,

Gaugamela - As far as I can tell, it has been expanded by about five
minutes worth of more blood and individual fighting between soldiers
from both armies. Outside of the added footage, it doesn't appear to
be edited differently than the first cut. I don't recall Gaugamela being
edited different between the first and second cuts, but the battle in
India seemed different. Of course, you can't see the third cut of that
battle as just the first half hour appears in the two clips.

Ptolemy - Stone introduces him by cutting from Alexander's death bed
to a wide shot of a balony on which Ptolemy is standing. Then, Stone
has Ptolemy start talking about Alexander, but with new dialogue not
heard in either of the first two cuts. Ptolemy proceeds to walk back to
his scribe which leads into the dialogue we heard in the first cut. Stone
does use different takes from the first cut with some of Hopkins' scenes,
but all the dailogue remains the same. Stone cuts directly from Hopkins
to the planning meeting between Alexander and his generals for the battle
of Gaugamela, thus making Ptolemy's line of 'I know, I was there' much more
effective than in either of the first two versions since a lot of time passes by
between Ptolemy's introduction and that scene of the generals planning
for the battle the day before in a tent. So, I'd agree that Stone makes
Ptolemy feel much more like a character in this third cut and less like a
narrator/chorus.

 

[Nathan V]

Awesome, Patrick. You're on top of things. Those types of details are exactly the type of stuff I like to discuss with people, but I only know a few people who watch films with that much detail. Thank goodness for HTF.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[JonZ]

Isnt the HD version also due tuesday? Its not on amazon for preorder.

edit: just saw its been delayed

 

[TheBat]

here is a review of the new cut from dvdreview.

Jacob
http://www.dvdreview.com/reviews/pages/2567.shtml

 

[Darko]

I liked the original cut, so I guess I'll really like the new version.

 

[TravisR]

I think even the people who hate this movie can agree with this part of the review (from the link that Jacob posted).Hopefully, we'll see more things like this in the future.

 

[MorganP]

What sort of fawning nonsense is this?

 

[TravisR]

A positive review.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

I received a review copy while on vacation last week, and will try to get one up in the next couple of days.

Regards,

 

[Nathan V]

Thanks, Ken. I'm very curious to hear your thoughts.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[Matthew Marino]

I bought the third cut yesterday and watched it as well. While its likely the best version I still don't feel this is how the movie should be. I think my problem is that I envision this movie completely in chronological order, bookended by the Anthony Hopkins scenes and it somehow works better that way. Cutting back to Alexanders childhood and rise to power often seem out of place and they don't seem to enhance the ongoing main story. In the new cut it works well in the beginning. Like Patrick said it flows well into the main story and gives us a better idea of who is who (particularly the younger Anthony Hopkins). Cutting back to his childhood seems to work there as well but there are problems even still. There's this big build up of him mounting his horse for the first time. Will he do it or will it throw him off? I think this scene has been extended as well. The problem is that we've already witnessed him using the horse in a big and bloody battle so we know he'll mount it just fine.

As the movie goes on the 'flashbacks' seem to work less and less. After Alexander falls in the Indian battle (which has some really gory stuff added that I won't ruin) it cuts to the scene of him confronting his mother after his father is murdered. They argue and the voice over tells us that he never saw his mother again. Then it cuts back to him recovering from the battle. Something just doesn't sit right with me there. As I said, it's not really enhancing the main story of him conquering the lands to the east. It just seems like they had these scenes and Stone wanted to sprinkle them throughout the movie. It's a 3 1/2 hour movie so I don't feel that having all of these scenes in succession at the beginning would make it boring. It's a grand movie and my attention won't be lost if the first battle doesn't take place right away.

With that said, theres a lot of added things in the new cut I really like. Roxanna's scenes have been ordered differently and it seems to work better this way. The eunuch character is much more fleshed out and his new scenes are intercut brilliantly with one key moment in the movie and it really works great. As we know, there is more blood and guts in the battles which add a good visceral punch to them. Stone keeps tampering with the order of the scenes but I just feel the natural arc of the story would work better as it happened and would provide a much clearer look at Alexander the Great's rise and fall. I am very interested in hearing other people's reactions and this is certainly something that needs to be discussed.

 

[FranklinC]

Cripes.

Okay, I know there's got to be others wondering this but since they won't speak up I guess I'll have to ask this for THEIR sake:

Is there any more to the nude scenes with Rosario Dawson?

What can I say, I look out for others.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

I did not see the earlier versions, but Stone mentions in his introduction that their wedding consummation scene has been extended.

BTW, I posted my review an hour or two ago in the thread located here

Regards,

 

[Matthew Marino]

Franklin, unfortunately there isn't. I was hoping for some more myself but I guess we should just be happy what what we have.