Troy (2004)

Can someone show me where this is titled The Iliad and not Troy?

This is mainly a reply to all the 1 star reviews which don't take anything into account other than the inaccuracy in how this relates to The Iliad. I'm sorry that they might have raped your image from The Iliad, but this isn't a movie called The Iliad, it's called Troy. In the Iliad the siege took 9 years, does anyone actually expect something like that ever to be put to film? There is so much that would not translate well to film, I don't have a problem with other character changes they made.

Get real, this is a 'fun' movie. It wasn't made to piss you off, giving something a 1 star review based soley on how it was not completely accurate to something is ridiculous. Pull up $300 million of your own money and make it how it how it was in The Iliad and see you recoup 1% of your production cost. September 30, 2008

Epic and Awesome

A bunch of glorious battle scenes and a good story. The diector's cut is amazing. September 16, 2008

Peterson Cannot Grasp Homer

Wolfgang Peterson's film based on Homer's Iliad is both tremendous and horribly skewed. Everyone knows the story of the Trojan Horse so it does not bear repeating, but I will outline what I think Peterson did right and what was revolting.

The screenplay, action, and sets are largely fantastic. Troy is an epic ancient metropolis and looking at it gives the viewer a sense of awe. Watching Achilles attack the Trojan beach is the greatest battle scene in the movie.

Likewise the casting and characters are largely wonderful. Whenever I reread the Iliad, Achilles will always be Brad Pitt, the cocky, proud, and deadly American. Eric Bana will always play Hector, Peter O'Toole Priam, and best of all, Sean Bean for Odysseus. These actors did wonderful jobs of portraying these epic characters and it felt like Homer when I saw them onscreen.

Peterson does a large bit of rewriting in this film, some of it understandable and some of it foul. I can see eliminating the physical presence of the gods, for any portrayal of Zeus or Athena would seem cliche and trite. But I cannot forgive the recasting of Agamemnon and Menelaus as despicable, megalomaniac brutes. Both these kings were noble and proud, and Peterson spits on both of them.

One of the foremost pleasures in reading the Iliad is recognizing that there is no stereotypical villain. Making Troy seem the pinnacle of ancient civilization and the Greeks shabby, grungy and greedy brutes does not fly well with me. Hector was indeed honorable (and I think the only virtuous character in the Iliad), but so were Menelaus and Agamemnon. Making the Greeks the enemy is simplistic and vapid, though perhaps the modern American will enjoy it - rooting for a tragic, virtuous hero (Hector and his city) always feels good, especially when you really hate the enemy (Menalaus and Agamemnon). Homer may have been a Trojan sympathizer (I don't think he was), but he was fair to Troy and to the Achaians. Peterson gets Hector's honor and courage right, and everything about Greek leadership wrong.

The largest problem Troy has is trying to retell a 40,000 line poem in two hours. Peterson is forced to cut book after book of Homer in his attempt to adapt it to the screen, but goes awry because of the drastic retelling. Everything seems rushed - ten years of war is condensed to two weeks of battle. Episodes such as Agamemnon's feud are terribly rushed and sparing Paris will make no one happy.

I wish that in Troy we saw less Peterson and more Homer. Let the bard speak for himself, let the real battle of Troy tell itself. What could have been a truly electrifying film because of the tremendous abilities of Bana, Bean, Pitt, and O'Toole is disappointing and unsatisfying. Its only boon is that it may encourage people to read Homer and read the tragedy of Achilles and Hector. September 13, 2008

Homer disappears for this spectacle

"Troy" is an example of not taking your subject seriously. Homer's twin epics, "The Iliad" and "The Odyssey" are sprawling, have lots of scenes, meander, and are not necessarily great movies in the making. But Homer's epics could be mined for the right material to make a good movie. But this isn't it.

First, the acting is not always so hot. Paris comes across as such a wimp that it is rather hard to take. Eric Bana creates a character who seems to recognize the tragedy that is occurring, but--compared with a wonderfully sculpted Brad Pitt--he doesn't look like he could hold his own with him in combat, which diminishes the impact of their inevitable one on one battle. Brad Pitt, as Achilles, seems pretty shallow, although he looks great. Peter O'Toole, playing Trojan King Priam, is not a terribly compelling figure.

Second, Homer (not Homer Simpson! Homer, the poet who created "The Iliad" and "The Odyssey") disappears as the script goes bizarre. Menelaus and Ajax die as portrayed in this version? The same with Agamemnon? There's enough pizzazz in Homer's work not to have to resort to the butchery of his works for alterations that are unnecessary.

Third, for some pluses. This is gorgeously shot; the battles scenes are well played; the computer graphics work well and are not over obtrusive. The depiction is near spectacular. Even though it bears only a modest resemblance to Homer (for which, ultimately, I'm old-fashioned enough that I cannot forgive the perpetrators), it is all to the good that people ignorant of his work will at least have some faint knowledge of it by watching this. Maybe a few more people might actually read his work after having viewed this flick. If so, this movie has made its own contribution.

I tend to rate products pretty positively, since I normally review things that I like. This movie I don't like so much. But, on the other hand, if you want to see a buff Brad Pitt, lots of spectacle, fine special effects, even if the movie greatly ignores Homer, then you'll probably enjoy this. So, on a split vote, I'll go with a 3.
August 20, 2008

TROY

I love Brad Pitt as an actor. This movie on blu ray is one of the best I've seen. Clear & crisp picture and great sound. I didn't like the movie that much. It's over three hours long and the concept of going to war for one woman, it's a movie I cannot watch more than once. If you're a big Pitt fan, get it, if not, just skip it, you're not missing much. August 12, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...