New 'Alexander' DVD coming... (1 Viewer)

[PatrickDA]

"I had a chance to sit down with Oliver Stone to talk about World Trade Center this afternoon (more on that interview in a few days) and he casually mentioned a THIRD version of Alexander. Whaa?? I couldn't let a topic like that go by and when pressed for details the great director had this to say:
"I'm doing a third version on DVD, not theatrical. I'm going to do a Cecile B Demille/Oliver Stone three hour forty five minute thing, I'm going to go all out, put everything I like in the movie. He was a complicated man, it was a complicated story and it doesn't hurt to make it longer and let people who loved the film and see it more and understand it more," he said.
I was a little surprised because I had assumed (as I'm sure some of you had) that the director's cut was the final say on Alexander. We got back into World Trade Center after that but near the end of the interview I just had to ask him why he'd go back to the well on this one and when we could expect to see it. Again, he didn't disappoint.
"I love working on it because I love the movie. I hope to have it done in two months, a month and a half and then it's up to Warner. It will be a catalogue item, I don't think they'll go out and make a big thing of it."

So there you have it, a third cut of Alexander coming to a DVD machine near you. I know I'll be interested to see it because it's one of the rare instances to see where a film became broken and how a master storyteller would go about putting it all back together. Stay tuned for the rest of the illuminating interview..."

Does anybody have any official word from Warner Bros. when this might
be released? I'm DYING to know!!!!!!!!

 

[JoePassmore]

Wasn't thrilled with this move, though most I talk to hated it. Passing on this one...

 

[PatrickDA]

That's wonderful, BUT my post was about the new DVD and if anybody
knew of a release date or any sort of info about it. It WASN'T for posting
some lame opinion about the film. I want this to stay on point.

 

[TravisR]

From the sounds of the interview (where ever you got it), I think you're looking at least 2007. I loved the movie but it's not something that WB is probably going to rush to the shelves.

 

[JoePassmore]

First of all, I'm not concerned with what you want.

Secondly, who made you the arbiter of what has value or not? if I want to post my "lame" OPINION I will do so, so get over yourself.

 

[TravisR]

Joe, it's considered thread crapping to just come in and say "Wasn't thrilled with this move, though most I talk to hated it. Passing on this one...". If you don't like it, you don't like it but obviously Patrick did. He was asking a question about an upcoming DVD release, not asking for opinions on the movie.

 

[JoePassmore]

And that's fine. It wasn't my intention to thread crap, but if that's how it came off I apologize. I took his thread as an announcement of the new DVD, rather than a query for more information. Which, IMO, makes opinions on the film acceptable to post.

What I do take issue with was his rude, snotty attitude which was completely uncalled for.

 

[Hayes Preston]

link? source?

 

[Roy Batty]

Quite the opposite, it was your remark what was really uncalled for to begin with: it had nothing to do with the issue, and contributed nothing to the thread. There is really nothing of interest in getting to know your opinion –or anybody else's, for that matter– about this film, when the point of the thread is not to discuss its artistic merits, but to uncover additional information on that upcoming new edit and release.

If you had provided some information AND then added your two cents, that would have made some sense. But your comment, as it is, simply has no point. At all.

By the by, it would have been just as useless if your opinion had been a positive one. Just imagine a legion of board members passing through this thread just to have his/her opinion in writing: hundreds of "I liked this movie"... "I did not"... Not very enlightening, would it?

 

[JoePassmore]

I've already explained that I misinterpreted the original intent of the thread, so your preaching to the choir. Which is funny because your post pointing out the pointlessness of my reply is, in of itself, pointless. How's that for irony?

 

[PatrickDA]

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/news.php?id=4242

 

[john a hunter]

Loved the film and have both versions, but to get a third,an HD transfer would be the deciding factor for me althiough like most people I know, I'm waiting to see what format survives. Any chance of an HD version?

 

[Vincent_P]

As an unapologetic ALEXANDER fan, I had asked Kevin Smith if Rosario Dawson had anything to say about the film while Smith was making CLERKS II with her. Kevin told me that Rosario told him that Stone shot a bunch of scenes that weren't included in either cut of the film, and they'd make it a very different film if they had been included. I'm very interested in seeing this epic, "Cecile B. DeMille/Oliver Stone" version of ALEXANDER.

Vincent

 

[donnie_d]

AWSOMENESS.

 

[Nathan V]

Another quote on the same thing, with no real new info, but from a different interview-


That's from http://www.wildaboutmovies.com/inter...McLoughlin.php

Stone is doing a good thing by making public the existence of this third cut, which will hopefully make Warner consider releasing it on dvd form. I'm glad he believes in the project, as I found it to be a terrifically bold, unrestrained piece of cinema. Definitely not for all tastes though.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[David_B_K]

Well, not to crap on this thread, but I only saw the Director's Cut, and thought it did not quite work. However, the documentary accompanying it made it appear that Stone had a lot of questions about Alexander that went unanswered (and unasked) in the previous version(s). Maybe he will explore them in the new C.B. DeMille version? I daresay I am intrigued by this. It really appears he shot enough to make 3 different films about Alexander, and that he may end up doing so.

I'll probably rent it first, but I am interested. The version I saw did have its moments, but not enough to make it a good film IMO. The fact that he wants to do this new version implies he may have figured out what went wrong on the other 2.

 

[Ryan Wong]

Good News. Hopefully a four disc set like Kingdom of Heaven.

I didn't buy the DVD because I couldn't decide on whether I should get the longer original version or the shorter director cut. Now I'll wait for this one.

 

[RyanAn]

Count me in as someone who is interested in this cut. I've yet to see the film in either version already available. I think it's a good thing when a director wants to make a true version - even if it's tending to be a little tedious in this situation.

ry

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

I haven't seen either cut, but wasn't the "Director's Cut" merely the regular cut just shorn of the movie's gay overtones?

 

[PatrickDA]

NO, all the "gay" (that word didn't exist then) scenes were still in the
Director's Cut except for a minor non-love making moment between Alexander
and Hephaistion before the battle of Gaugemela. Colin still kisses the one
guy on the mouth and hugs Jared Leto in another scene. With the Director's
Cut, Stone re-shaped the first version from start to finish. Taking out about
18 min. and adding 11 min. of new material. He cut Anthony Hopkins screen
time down, but gave Christopher Plummer an additional scene. He included
more flashbacks and flashforwards. It was a superior cut of the first attempt,
however, this new cut will beat them all!!!!