Hellenic Nationalist Review Of The Alexander Movie
A Hellenic Nationalist comrade recently viewed The Alexander Movie now playing in movie theatres across North America, his review of the film and its audience is reproduced below...
************************
I believe that Oliver Stone genuinely believed he WAS promoting ancient Greek civilization in a positive light. Maybe because he's read too much into the "homosexuality" of ancient Greece, and admiring this aspect of dubious nature forone reason or another, thought he was portraying Hellenism in a progressive light. Someone told me he was a homosexual, so this might be the case. I mean, even as far back as "Midnight Express", Oliver Stone included a homosexual scene in the movie (the part where the Swedish guy makes the move on Billy Hayes even though Hayes finally rejects his advances). Now, with the general tolerant attitudes towards homosexuality in the Western world, he probably felt more at liberty to focus on this subject.
Truly, the amount of overt homosexual references in this movie is absolutely appalling. From the very BEGINNING, we are made to watch blonde-haired, skinny, prepubescent boys wrestle each other in make-shift underwear for a few minutes. I'm sure the pedophiles watching the movie got hard from just that.
Then we have little children discussing the "positive"and negative varients of homoeroticism with Aristotle, who is against lustful homosexuality (from what I understood) but seems to support intimate (possibly platonic) male-bonds that develop in war and "which allow men to accomplish great things."
The rest of the movie is a series of unadulterated acts of homosexuality between men and between men and boys. In one sequence, a young boy (teenager or youngman) is raped in open view by three older guys during a feast and then dragged off by some guy to presumably continue being anally raped. Alexander sees this going on, and acts as if nothing remotely strange is going on, and so resumes drinking his goblet of wine.
During the same feast, Alexander's father Philip (who is drunk, of course) is seen with one woman and one young man (the latter drunk) each one clutching each of his shoulders, and obviously preparing to take part in an orgy with Philip somewhere else.
Drunken guys are kissing each other all over the placeand, for the most part, the few women present are ignored as they silently look on to the debauchery around them, not really caring.
And as Alexander conquers kingdom after kingdom he introduces homosexuality to their civilizations, too. In Persia, for example, his men enter the king's harem (which is filled with about 50 women in colorful clothes that look like belly-dancing outfits) and, although just about all of his men are impressed by their beauty, almost as many seem just as intrigued at the 5 or so swarthy and hairless Persian boys hudled in the corner. These Persian boys stare at the Greeks wide-eyed and are all too willing to do their bidding. But as far as I know, Persians never had males intheir harems so this might be Stone's attempt to portray the ancient world as universally homosexual. Or maybe they were just eunuchs in charge of the harem? But then that doesn't explain why they were lying around with the Greeks and allowing them to kiss them.
When Alexander finally gets to India he has long-haired Indian boys dance seductively in front of him as his wife sits next to him. After the dance, Alexander gets up and walks to the nervous boy. His men all start cheering, "Kiss him! Kiss him!" in Irish accents, so he assents and kisses the boy in front of the entire Greek-Indian assembly. His wife doesn't seem to be too pleased. The old Indian women in the audience look at the display in shock and disgust, probably thinking to themselves what kind of a sick bastard just conquered them and is now degrading their youth.
And then there's Hephaistion who's constantly trying to take his relationship with Alexander to the "next step" to the displeasure of his wife.
Of course Alexander will look "great" to the Westerners because their accomplishments have been traditionally measured by physical conquests rather than ideological conquests. If the film had focused on Alexander spreading Hellenic ideals most of the audience would have probably been confused. So they concentrated on Alexander's conquests, which the audience could relateto, instead. And, since this is the age of liberalism and multiculturalism, his conquests were largely interpreted by the film makers as wars to free mankind from tyrants, establish an egalitarian and multi-racial world, and unite all peoples under a single leader for the benefit of all.
They used a number of Negroes in the Persian army. And, even worse, they had Alexander the Great's first wife, Roxane, played by a Negroe, which personally insulted me even though I'm not Persian. Having great respect and admiration for both ancient Persia and modern Iran, I found the occassiona lstereotypes of Arab-looking Persians ignorant, though the Israeli actor Raz Degan -- in my opinion -- did physically look like a Persian in the film: light-skinned, long-faced, and hazel-eyed.
Even though he hardly said more than a few of words I felt a sort of sympathy for his stoic and emotionally distant character, whose eyes were very penetrating and seemed to conceal a sort of hidden and great melancholy underneath.
Unlike Alexander, who was portrayed as highly passionate, daring, and emotional, Darius is portrayed more as a somber king who sees war as a natural extension of Empire rather than one concerning acclaimed notions of freedom and valor. His emotions are conveyed entirely through his silent actions and eyes, which I thought was a very interesting approach (as this is hard to do in a film). You never sense any animosity in those eyes; just a sort of bafflement at Alexander the Great's idealism and arrogance.
But his character sadly wasn't explored much, which might have been good as it leaves him as enigmatic which is understanble also because he isn't a main character but rather a foil to subtly compare and contrast the two kings and their worldviews.
So he dies early on. In the first battle scene of the movie, after Alexander the Great charges toward Darius, who's sitting still and completely unemotional on his chariot as his foe rapidly approaches,Alexander launches a spear at him which he duckswithout blinking or changing his facial expressions. As Alexander continues to advance he retreats with hisguards -- but in a kingly manner rather than one of cowardice -- and turns around in his chariot to stare back at the strange Alexander.
After that, Alexander takes the city of Babylon (which is gorgeously depicted) and makes a plan to hunt down Darius to seal his sovereignty over Persia. Finally, his men track Darius down, only to discover his corpse. Apparently, betrayed and murdered by his own generals, Darius' bloodied body is sprawled on the soil as a nameless soldier might be. Alexander then places a tunic over Darius' bloodied face, showing respect for his enemy, and granting him full burial rights.
I wonder how much of any of this is really true.
Anyway, aside from Darius, most of the remaining Persians depicted look like Arabs at best and of mixed race at worst. And, as I said before, Roxane was played by an American Negroe -- who I did not find at all attractive and would be surprised if anynon-Negroe would (aside, of course, from the Americans who are indoctrinated into finding black women"beautiful" and "exotic" as long as they have large breasts).
But considering the indecent role she had to play -- Irefer to the sex scene where Alexander the Great literally tries to rape her, strips her completely naked (at which point we are forced to watch close-ups of her unnaturally large breasts several times), and then finally gives in and has sex with Alexander -- I doubt any self-respecting Iranian woman would have degraded themselves like that in the name of Hollywood "art" so maybe it's not such a great surprise why no Persian actors were chosen to play major roles.
The same may apply to Greeks who, I assume, would have had nothing to do with the movie after reading the script. That also makes me wonder how this film will do in Greece. I hear that it's already been released in Athens. Or maybe that release was just a sneak preview for the lawyers who wanted to sue the film. I don't know if you heard, but after seeing the film, they dropped the lawsuit. I don't know why considering the level of homosexuality in it.
Oliver Stone, for whatever reason, created a film almost entirely geared towards male homosexual viewers. And I say *male* homosexualviewers because there is a misogynist attitude that pervades the movie which I doubt feminist-dykes would appreciate much. And, strangely enough (especially for a Hollywood movie), at the end of this fim this misogynism proves to be entirely justified since all the major women in the movie (Olympias and Roxane) are portrayed as devious, snake-charming witches willing to kill those who stand in their way and those they are jealous of.
Personally, I think the movie was geared tohomosexuals more than anything else. The homosexuality was all-pervading to such a degree that it seemed to actually constitute a central point in the film to the point where one might reasonablyconclude that Alexander the Great was merely a backstory to creating a homosexual-geared film.
I forget to mention this before but ironically when I went to see the movie on a Wednesday night, there were two couples in the theater. One was comprised of a black guy with a white girl as his date. The other was comprised of a Puerto Rican guy with a white girl dressed like a nigger-bitch or Puerto Rican (but who, I think, was speaking a non-Spanish language to someone). There might also have been a second girl the Puerto Rican was with butI didn't get a good look.
I bring this up to re-inforce the appeal to a multicultural/multi-racial audience this movie might have had. Not that they necessarily enjoyed the movie. The Puerto Rican/Puerto Rican-wannabe girl kept laughing and saying "he's gay" when Alexander and Hephaistion were "getting close." She also kept commenting on how she wished Alexander would "just die" so the movie could finish. She even spoke on hercellphone in the middle of the movie, in typical Puerto Rican uncultured style. And when a scene showed Alexander kissing his Russian-accented mother Olympias on the mouth she yelled out "eww... he kissed his mom!"
************************
I believe that Oliver Stone genuinely believed he WAS promoting ancient Greek civilization in a positive light. Maybe because he's read too much into the "homosexuality" of ancient Greece, and admiring this aspect of dubious nature forone reason or another, thought he was portraying Hellenism in a progressive light. Someone told me he was a homosexual, so this might be the case. I mean, even as far back as "Midnight Express", Oliver Stone included a homosexual scene in the movie (the part where the Swedish guy makes the move on Billy Hayes even though Hayes finally rejects his advances). Now, with the general tolerant attitudes towards homosexuality in the Western world, he probably felt more at liberty to focus on this subject.
Truly, the amount of overt homosexual references in this movie is absolutely appalling. From the very BEGINNING, we are made to watch blonde-haired, skinny, prepubescent boys wrestle each other in make-shift underwear for a few minutes. I'm sure the pedophiles watching the movie got hard from just that.
Then we have little children discussing the "positive"and negative varients of homoeroticism with Aristotle, who is against lustful homosexuality (from what I understood) but seems to support intimate (possibly platonic) male-bonds that develop in war and "which allow men to accomplish great things."
The rest of the movie is a series of unadulterated acts of homosexuality between men and between men and boys. In one sequence, a young boy (teenager or youngman) is raped in open view by three older guys during a feast and then dragged off by some guy to presumably continue being anally raped. Alexander sees this going on, and acts as if nothing remotely strange is going on, and so resumes drinking his goblet of wine.
During the same feast, Alexander's father Philip (who is drunk, of course) is seen with one woman and one young man (the latter drunk) each one clutching each of his shoulders, and obviously preparing to take part in an orgy with Philip somewhere else.
Drunken guys are kissing each other all over the placeand, for the most part, the few women present are ignored as they silently look on to the debauchery around them, not really caring.
And as Alexander conquers kingdom after kingdom he introduces homosexuality to their civilizations, too. In Persia, for example, his men enter the king's harem (which is filled with about 50 women in colorful clothes that look like belly-dancing outfits) and, although just about all of his men are impressed by their beauty, almost as many seem just as intrigued at the 5 or so swarthy and hairless Persian boys hudled in the corner. These Persian boys stare at the Greeks wide-eyed and are all too willing to do their bidding. But as far as I know, Persians never had males intheir harems so this might be Stone's attempt to portray the ancient world as universally homosexual. Or maybe they were just eunuchs in charge of the harem? But then that doesn't explain why they were lying around with the Greeks and allowing them to kiss them.
When Alexander finally gets to India he has long-haired Indian boys dance seductively in front of him as his wife sits next to him. After the dance, Alexander gets up and walks to the nervous boy. His men all start cheering, "Kiss him! Kiss him!" in Irish accents, so he assents and kisses the boy in front of the entire Greek-Indian assembly. His wife doesn't seem to be too pleased. The old Indian women in the audience look at the display in shock and disgust, probably thinking to themselves what kind of a sick bastard just conquered them and is now degrading their youth.
And then there's Hephaistion who's constantly trying to take his relationship with Alexander to the "next step" to the displeasure of his wife.
Of course Alexander will look "great" to the Westerners because their accomplishments have been traditionally measured by physical conquests rather than ideological conquests. If the film had focused on Alexander spreading Hellenic ideals most of the audience would have probably been confused. So they concentrated on Alexander's conquests, which the audience could relateto, instead. And, since this is the age of liberalism and multiculturalism, his conquests were largely interpreted by the film makers as wars to free mankind from tyrants, establish an egalitarian and multi-racial world, and unite all peoples under a single leader for the benefit of all.
They used a number of Negroes in the Persian army. And, even worse, they had Alexander the Great's first wife, Roxane, played by a Negroe, which personally insulted me even though I'm not Persian. Having great respect and admiration for both ancient Persia and modern Iran, I found the occassiona lstereotypes of Arab-looking Persians ignorant, though the Israeli actor Raz Degan -- in my opinion -- did physically look like a Persian in the film: light-skinned, long-faced, and hazel-eyed.
Even though he hardly said more than a few of words I felt a sort of sympathy for his stoic and emotionally distant character, whose eyes were very penetrating and seemed to conceal a sort of hidden and great melancholy underneath.
Unlike Alexander, who was portrayed as highly passionate, daring, and emotional, Darius is portrayed more as a somber king who sees war as a natural extension of Empire rather than one concerning acclaimed notions of freedom and valor. His emotions are conveyed entirely through his silent actions and eyes, which I thought was a very interesting approach (as this is hard to do in a film). You never sense any animosity in those eyes; just a sort of bafflement at Alexander the Great's idealism and arrogance.
But his character sadly wasn't explored much, which might have been good as it leaves him as enigmatic which is understanble also because he isn't a main character but rather a foil to subtly compare and contrast the two kings and their worldviews.
So he dies early on. In the first battle scene of the movie, after Alexander the Great charges toward Darius, who's sitting still and completely unemotional on his chariot as his foe rapidly approaches,Alexander launches a spear at him which he duckswithout blinking or changing his facial expressions. As Alexander continues to advance he retreats with hisguards -- but in a kingly manner rather than one of cowardice -- and turns around in his chariot to stare back at the strange Alexander.
After that, Alexander takes the city of Babylon (which is gorgeously depicted) and makes a plan to hunt down Darius to seal his sovereignty over Persia. Finally, his men track Darius down, only to discover his corpse. Apparently, betrayed and murdered by his own generals, Darius' bloodied body is sprawled on the soil as a nameless soldier might be. Alexander then places a tunic over Darius' bloodied face, showing respect for his enemy, and granting him full burial rights.
I wonder how much of any of this is really true.
Anyway, aside from Darius, most of the remaining Persians depicted look like Arabs at best and of mixed race at worst. And, as I said before, Roxane was played by an American Negroe -- who I did not find at all attractive and would be surprised if anynon-Negroe would (aside, of course, from the Americans who are indoctrinated into finding black women"beautiful" and "exotic" as long as they have large breasts).
But considering the indecent role she had to play -- Irefer to the sex scene where Alexander the Great literally tries to rape her, strips her completely naked (at which point we are forced to watch close-ups of her unnaturally large breasts several times), and then finally gives in and has sex with Alexander -- I doubt any self-respecting Iranian woman would have degraded themselves like that in the name of Hollywood "art" so maybe it's not such a great surprise why no Persian actors were chosen to play major roles.
The same may apply to Greeks who, I assume, would have had nothing to do with the movie after reading the script. That also makes me wonder how this film will do in Greece. I hear that it's already been released in Athens. Or maybe that release was just a sneak preview for the lawyers who wanted to sue the film. I don't know if you heard, but after seeing the film, they dropped the lawsuit. I don't know why considering the level of homosexuality in it.
Oliver Stone, for whatever reason, created a film almost entirely geared towards male homosexual viewers. And I say *male* homosexualviewers because there is a misogynist attitude that pervades the movie which I doubt feminist-dykes would appreciate much. And, strangely enough (especially for a Hollywood movie), at the end of this fim this misogynism proves to be entirely justified since all the major women in the movie (Olympias and Roxane) are portrayed as devious, snake-charming witches willing to kill those who stand in their way and those they are jealous of.
Personally, I think the movie was geared tohomosexuals more than anything else. The homosexuality was all-pervading to such a degree that it seemed to actually constitute a central point in the film to the point where one might reasonablyconclude that Alexander the Great was merely a backstory to creating a homosexual-geared film.
I forget to mention this before but ironically when I went to see the movie on a Wednesday night, there were two couples in the theater. One was comprised of a black guy with a white girl as his date. The other was comprised of a Puerto Rican guy with a white girl dressed like a nigger-bitch or Puerto Rican (but who, I think, was speaking a non-Spanish language to someone). There might also have been a second girl the Puerto Rican was with butI didn't get a good look.
I bring this up to re-inforce the appeal to a multicultural/multi-racial audience this movie might have had. Not that they necessarily enjoyed the movie. The Puerto Rican/Puerto Rican-wannabe girl kept laughing and saying "he's gay" when Alexander and Hephaistion were "getting close." She also kept commenting on how she wished Alexander would "just die" so the movie could finish. She even spoke on hercellphone in the middle of the movie, in typical Puerto Rican uncultured style. And when a scene showed Alexander kissing his Russian-accented mother Olympias on the mouth she yelled out "eww... he kissed his mom!"
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home