Alexander the Great (1956)
Review by Dindrane
Film:
DVD:

Written & Directed by Robert Rossen
Starring Richard Burton, Danielle Darrieux, Fredric March, Claire Bloom, Marisa de Leza

Features:

• Trailer
  

Released by: MGM
Region: 1
Rating: NR
Anamorphic: Yes.

My Advice: Get it, learn it, let it inspire you to learn more.

The film essentially begins with the birth of Alexander (Burton when fully grown), who his mother Olympias (Darrieux) promptly declares a god, while his father Philip (March) is at war. At Alexander's birth, there are many signs of his greatness, such as the two eagles that perched on the queen's chamber as she was giving birth, read by the court astrologer as meaning that Alexander would rule two worlds: Greece/Macedonia and Persia. Other signs are explained to Philip, but all is not well at home. Philip believes that his queen might have been unfaithful with the soothsayer and that Alexander's paternity might therefore be in question. His advisors council, however, that Macedonia must continue, and that an heir, proclaimed as a god by the Oracle of Delphi, is necessary for that.

Soon, the film progresses to Alexander's teen years, with his teaching by Aristotle (Barry Jones) and his fascination with the battles waged by his father and older friends. "A Greek army on Persian soil" is a frequent dream and need of Greece, and Alexander knows that he was, in essence, born to live out this dream. It is Aristotle's dream to unify Greece under Philip and put an end to "Greeks killing Greeks," but he knows that the Greeks may not really follow someone like Philip, whom they see as a barbarian, but they might follow his son Alexander, educated and essentially raised by Aristotle, one of the greatest of Greeks who reveres the Greek gods. Yet questions about Alexander's loyalty to his father follow him, and Olympias' hatred of Philip taints him. Whose glory will Alexander proclaim and whose dream will he live out: Philip's, Olympias', Aristotle's, or his own?

It is inevitable for a film of this era of history to be complex. The Greek names might confuse some viewers as much as the endless "who is marrying whom" and "who is related to whom." Like history does, keep your eyes upon Alexander and let the other schemers fall by the wayside. No one else really matters.

It's kind of hard to go wrong when your technical advisor is HRH the Prince of Greece. The battle scenes are done in the style typical of the 1950s and 60s, meaning that you see swaths of warriors, not the frantic, quick-cut, close-ups of current films. Of course there are some historically questionable film decisions: while it is true that Olympias seems to have told Alexander that Philip was not his father, Philip seems to have believed Alexander was his and raised him as his heir and son, even though he had sons by his other wives and need not have done so. Also, the film, perhaps kindly, leaves out Alexander's main flaw in the eyes of the warrior culture: his high voice, something Philip derided. We do get a nice bit of behind-the-scenes maneuverings between and among Aristotle and the other courtiers, all with their own opinions about truth and ideas about who should rule and how, as well as how the battles should be waged.

As per usual with Hollywood films, there's a solid mixture of history and fantasy, with this one weighted towards history, especially the political and interpersonal complexities of the age. What must it have been like to be he son to a womanizing father who killed his own brothers for power and a foreign, jealous mother who may or may not have been embroiled in plots against your father, but who certainly wants to rule through you--your father never thanking you for saving his life on the battlefield, and even questioning whether or not you were attempting assassinations of him--what must it have been like to fight your entire life not to be everyone's pawn, even history's? Father and son even fought over a woman, Eurydice (de Leza)--the former for love, or at least lust, and the latter for politics and family pride. The film also side-steps the question of Alexander's sexuality. Homosexuality (or rather bisexuality) was of course not only accepted, but assumed in their culture, and it is widely believed by historians that Alexander's close friend Hephaestion (Ricardo Valle) was probably his lover, but none of this matters to the film, nor, ultimately, to history.

Given the age of the original film stock, the audio and video quality are quite good. The battle scenes are a bit annoyingly loud, and there is no subtitling available to help viewers with the accents of some of the actors, but all in all, it looks and sounds as epic as it should. The fantastic cinematography helps with this of course. There are a few scenes where the colors are a bit washed out, but must of it looks great--the palace is lush and the blood flows dark red. At a time when the "look" of things makes or breaks your political future and the safety of your people, what the film looks like is of utmost importance.

The film has no features except the original trailer, which is too bad. It would be outstanding if the producers had paid just a little to get a commentary done by classicists or any living cast and crew, or even included a few texts about the era and what history knows about this relatively well-documented general. To not have done so loses a great opportunity for viewers to learn about something important.

For all that's holy, if this movie interests you, or if you have any intention of seeing the new Hollywood Alexanderfest, please read a book about Alexander before or after you view the film. That should answer any questions you have and reduce the effects on your brain of all the half-truths and hearsay that films indulge as truth. If nothing else, this film gives us an appreciation for just how important this one little boy was to the history of the world and how very great he, his father, and his grandfather really were. Western culture is different because of the relationship between Greece and Macedonia, as well as their conquest of Persia.

So much of Alexander's world was gossip and courtly irritation, so that he might have been so successful on the battlefield just to insure that his victories were his own and to stop being drug into everyone else's mess. If you're interested in the classics, Hollywood's Golden Age, or just like historical epics, then definitely check this out, taking as per usual your Hollywood history with a grain of sand. It can, after all, be boiled down to a line Philip gets when speaking to Alexander, "Who says choice is yours?"