Which Alexander Poll
 

Which Alexander version are you getting?

The theatrical, which I actually liked quite a bit. I may Netflix the "director's cut" at some point for the curiosity factor, but I think it's unfortunate that that Stone felt the need to cater to the red staters (especially since his belief that the film bombed because of its gay content is probably misguided).

Maybe you need a 'both' and 'neither' option in the poll.

I'll probably rent one (or both) before I decide, and will probably use this poll as a gauge as to which to rent first.

I think it's funny that so many people believed one out of context quote instead of waiting for the actual release.

From Entertainment Weekly this week:
"[W]hile eight minutes have been snipped from the wayward epic, rumors that the Macedonian conqueror would emerge miraculously hetero prove unfounded. ... No, as Stone himself explains in his painstakingly informative/discursive/batty commentary, the intent was to restructure Alexander so that the hero's fraught Greek childhood with battling parents runs more clearly in parallel with his later conquests of Babylon and on and on."

That said, if you watched the theatrical cut and were told that the homosexuality had been severely cut back, you'd believe it, because it's barely there. That's what made it so funny when Stone blamed that for the movie's failure.

My answer to the poll: I'm mildly curious about the director's cut, enough that if somebody offered to pay me to take a copy and put it on my shelf, I might consider it. Otherwise, nothing, thanks.

i may rent it to see what its about, but wont be buying it as there are far to many other movies i want first

i'll probably get the theatrical version from CH some day just in order to be able to see it........

I'm going to go with the theatrical cut.

I will probably give the director's cut a chance.

It's unfortunate that <b>flaming Blue Staters</b> like you continue bring up this issue, ESPECIALLY after the DVDTalk review of the director's cut actually says that the director's cut has MORE "gay" stuff in it than the theatrical cut.

The irony, and thus the problem here, is Stone's politics. Oliver Stone hasn't made a good film since, I'd argue, Platoon. JFK was about as realistic as Jet Li's ability to pull off his moves without wires. Alexander started to get bad press right off the bat from all the critics, NOT because of the gay material, but because the movie was a mess (according to the critics). I'll hold judgment until I see in a couple weeks whenever I get the DVD. Oliver blamed the failure of his movie in the American demographic because of his politics.

BTW, I live in a Blue State, but in a RED region. If it weren't for Chicago and Cook County, Illinois would have probably went Red. We in the rural sticks don't need government assistance to wipe our ass, like the city slickers apparently do.

<i>Mod edit: Come on Mike you've been here long enough to know generalizations like that are discouraged. You're free to state your opinion on the topic but please leave the needless rhetoric out of it.<i>

Both.

http://www.cocktailguiden.com/cockta...derssister.jpg

1 oz gin
1 oz creme de cacao
1 oz sweet cream


...though at times I get the harder gin/vodka version....

Pro-B

no neither option...its rigged

I suggest you read that review again and pay attention to what is actually said in it.

My understanding is that the Director's Cut is faster paced but even more of a convoluted mess, which I find very hard to accomplish given what I saw in theaters.

FWIW, I am a liberal and can say that Alexander bombed because quite frankly, it was a bad movie. I remember being embarrassed by Stone's comments when I read them, as I knew that meant he couldn't accept either criticism or the fact that his pet project was a piece of shit, a very well shot piece of shit, but nonetheless.

That said, I will probably get the Director's Cut because I love to watch trainwreck movies under the influence of alcohol and I found the theatrical cut way too long, so I have no reason to even entertain the notion of watching that version again. As long as it's not missing a lot of Angelina, I'm fine.

I'm thinking wait until they are both available for a 2 for $20 deal.

Can you read? I said that I thought Stone's opinion - which he has stated more than once - that the film's failure was largely due to middle America's resistance to gay themes was misguided. In other words, I don't think he's right. I was basically defending you - but you blew it.

Also, what the hell is a flaming Blue Stater? It sounds delicious.

From the DVD Talk review:

"The problem is that removing many bits of important character development that were deemed "too gay" by audiences has deprived other remaining scenes of their proper context. The quasi love story between Alexander and Hephaistion is still a big part of the movie, but now the scenes they have together actually seem more melodramatic than before. Rather than the intended effect of toning down that aspect of the movie, Stone has unintentionally made it more histrionic and "gay" than it previously was."

This muddies the issue. Did Stone try to make the film less "gay" and fail? Or is the "director's cut" an intentional act of defiance against the presumed demands of mainstream audiences released under the guise of a more heterosexual cut?

I voted for the Director's Cut in hopes that it's a better movie than the Theatrical Cut.

I'm on the fence here. I can't imagine buying it solely because the trailers looked so absolutely freakin' horrible they kept me from actually seeing the movie! I'll netflix it and decide then.

buy the theatrical, netlix the directors cut... Im in the minority, because I really enjoyed this movie.

As of now, I shall get the Theatrical Version.

In the future, I shall probably by the DC and find someone to make a custome DVD case to make Alexander a 3-discer.

You try to help him out and he makes an attack;typical of a Republican nimrod. You shouldn't be surprised.

I might Netflix one version, but this is definitely a movie that is worth owning just because it's such a trainwreck, similar to Verhoeven's Showgirls.

Don't even bother with him...with ML's past history of blatant statements, misquoting, making false claims, and above all being utterly offensive to other members of the forum...including his derogatory "signatures"...I would not bother considering his claims.


BTW...Lowry...I do happen to live in Cook County...and your post is utterly offensive to me.

Regards,
Pro-B

Oh, and name calling is so very adult. Mike may be over the top and even misguided on occasion, but the opposite side starts slinging trash just the same after he posts.

Back to the topic at hand. I am tempted to buy neither. The reviews are just so bad for this film. I will probably rent the theatrical. If I don't rent it, I may buy it when it hits the <$10 mark.

ML supporter here! :rock2:

Oh and.... theatrical for me.