Has anyone seen Troy yet?

Rob Babcock · « **on:** 17 May 2004, 01:32 am »

I read Eberts review- it wasn't kind. But you pretty much know going in what you're gonna get, and like the Alamo, there ain't gonna be much suspense!

I was sorta thinking I might go see the latest showing tonite; can anyone tell me whether its worthwhile or should I catch Van Helsing instead?

bob82274 · « **Reply #1 on:** 17 May 2004, 02:05 am »

I would see Troy. It wasn't bad really. Just wasn't great. Helen lives up to her reputation and is gorgeous. The person though that I found most interesting (as I am more familiar with the Odyssey than the Iliad) was Hector. He was portrayed as a man of honor with a love for his country over himself (which was opposite of his brother Paris). Another thing that I really liked was that for once Sean Bean actually LIVES through the movie (sure he has a 20 year trip home but he does make it). Go back through this movies. You'll find he never seems to make it to the end. My biggest problem when I saw it was that the theatre I went to was absolutely horrible. I'm not nearly as picky as Bubba about this sort of thing but it was just uncalled for.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #2 on:** 17 May 2004, 06:27 am »

I just got back; funny, I commented to my brother that I've never seen a movie Helen yet that could "lauch a thousand ships", and while she looked okay, this one was no exception. I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I thought she was pretty pedestrian.

It's been a long time since I've "chewed on" the Illiad or Oddessy, but I thought they really marginalized some of the characters that should've had a bit bigger role. And I wish they'd have laid off the CG a little- is there some new union law that a blockbuster must have $75,000,000 worth of computer animation?

The toughest aspect of the movie must have been trying to reconcile the mythical aspects of the story with the decision to make it a stock action movie. I imagine in a standard action flick you can't really have the star killed by an arrow to the heel...

Still, it's hard to imagine anyone dragging that Trojan horse into the city & leaving it unwatched. Sure, 3500 years ago it wasn't the oldest trick in the book, but that horse couldn't have hid anyone. It did look like something you coulda made outta ship parts, but I don't think it was well built enough to hide that many men in.

The cast & acting was mostly impressive. It was amazing how much Pitt bulked up for this one, also he brought more humanity & angst to Achilles than I remember his having. Wasn't the literary Achilles driven more by vanity, ego, hubris & anger? I realize you want an enjoyable film more than a history lesson, but I thought that was odd. I agree, though, that Hector was very well done.

Despite my quibbles (anyone who knows me knows that I pick at all movies like this, even my favorites), I really loved it. I'd give it a 3.5 out of 4, and a must-have when it hits DVD.

Next time, Van Helsing.

bob82274 · « **Reply #3 on:** 17 May 2004, 06:34 am »

Me and one of my flat mates did have one other complaint about it. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Trojan War last for 10 years or so? After watching the movie you would think that it lasted all of about 10 days. Did anyone else feel like it lasted such a short time?

viggen · « **Reply #4 on:** 17 May 2004, 06:39 am »

Yah, some of the amazing characters were marginalized a bit such as Ajax and Odysseus. And, some of the roles that Greek Gods took part in the movie were omitted, as Rob mentioned. Other than that, it's a great movie. Some historical buffs might be interested in knowing that Agamenenon was... oops can't tell you that yet. And, Spartans didn't exist until 800bc, 400 yrs after the trojan war. It was the Dorians whom are allegedly the Spartan predecessors that took part in the war as well as Mycenae and Ionia. Just a thought, Ionia is directly north of Troy, and it would have been easier to do a land battle against Troy as the Troy beach head was on the south side of the Turkish continent. But, what do I know.

Lost81 · « **Reply #5 on:** 18 May 2004, 11:20 am »

For the philistines out there...

Troy in 15 minutes

wshuff · « **Reply #6 on:** 18 May 2004, 12:55 pm »

So when can you tell us about Agamemnon? Inquiring minds want to know.

I thought the movie was very good. An impossible task, really, to put The Illiad on film, but a worthy effort in my book. I especially liked the performances by Bana as Hector, who was my favorite character from the book, and Pitt as Achilles, who I do remember as moody and vain. I disagree with Ebert's comment that Pitt brought complexity to a role where none was needed. I think Achilles was complex.

I have now gone back to the bookshelf and dug up my old copy of Homer's work. Time to read it again after about 20 years.

nickspicks · « **Reply #7 on:** 18 May 2004, 01:59 pm »

I saw it over the weekend.
While a good movie, and I wasn't bored during its 3 hour durration, it made me re-appreciate just how GREAT return of the king was (for an epic movie w/monster battles and outlandish cinamatography..etc.).

I was dissapionted in the straying off the illiad. As i recall, Achillies and his cousin were lovers, and it was the death of his cousin that unleashed Achillies wrath. They didn't include that part.

Brad Pitt was "eh", but did a good job I suppose
Eric Bana was the best character, and the best acting, IMO.
Helen was a dissapiontment. i figured they would have used a more natural beauty, the kind of face that would look good w/mud on it. She was pretty, no doubt. But wore eye makeup like Brittney Spears and was just not the breathtaking beauty I expected.

TheeeChosenOne · « **Reply #8 on:** 18 May 2004, 03:48 pm »

Eric Bana is an amazing actor!

Everyone should check out the ultra-violent flick "Chopper" (currently playing on Showtime Extreme--replaying this Friday night). He imitates the famous Australian convict to a T. Bana is a hugely talented character actor like DeNiro.

This guy is logically destined to be a major movie star.

He gots da skillz, plus he's a big-time favorite (like Colin Farrell

) of famous Directors.......just look at his Hollywood resume thus far: Black Hawk Down (Ridley Scott), Hulk (Ang Lee), Troy (Wolfgang Petersen), ????,.....

Apparently, Bana has turned down many famous Marvel characters. Not many actors have that privilege to choose like that.

Tyson · « **Reply #9 on:** 18 May 2004, 03:54 pm »

I thought the acting was strong from just about everyone, including Pitt (and wow, what physical grace and athleticism he had in his fight scenes). But the movie itself had a central conflict that caused it not to "work" quite as well as it could have. I think Pitt's (and Peterson's) decision to "humanize" the charater(s) was excellent, in many ways the movie demonstrated how human actions and deeds can become mythologized. But, the conflict was that at the same time they were trying to "humanize" and show complexity in the characters, cinematically Peterson was also trying to make a lot of moments "larger than life". I'm thinking of, for example, when Achilles' mother tells him that going off to war will bring him both glory and death, and the subsequent push in on his face with him gazing off in to the distance. Clearly a "mythologizing" moment. But that conflcits with other parts of the movie that work (very well) at humanizing Achilles (and other characters). I think the movie would have been clearly better if they had entirely kept the "battles" epic, and the "characters" human.

Also, I thought Brian Cox as Agamemnon was pretty damn amazing.

One other thing that was subtle but could explain the whole "launched a thousand ships" thing is that Helen was the only light haired, lighted eyed woman in the entire movie. The other women were all dark haired and dark eyed, so Helen would have been very striking indeed in that context. Same for Achilles.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #10 on:** 18 May 2004, 09:23 pm »

You know the a movie designed for summer blockbuster status and carefully crafted to put females in the seats (eg casting Bloom & Pitt) isn't going to allow pretty-boy Achilles to have a homosexual relationship. Our societies homophobia would not be at all understood by the ancient Hellenistic societies. For example, although the Spartans were among the fiercest warriors of any day, they didn't regard sex with their comrades as unusual at all- to the contrary, it helped "bond" the units together.

It's a fine line between making the story a mythical or human one. Achilles takes actions that do strike a mythical tone (eg going to Troy for glory when he knows he'll die there), but also is made at times to appear complex & human. That's fine, but I regret they dropped the mythical subtexts of the gods involvement. There wouldn't have been a Trojan War without Aphrodite; the gods are involved from the moment the story begins. But this is carefully ignored by the movie.

As a telling of the Illiad & parts of the Oddessey, the story is a bit out of whack. Agamemnon didn't die in Troy, he made the trip home. Achilles died long before Troy fell. Ajax didn't die at all, not til much later, and he & Hektor fought to a draw.

Still, as a movie, I think it was very good.

KeithR · « **Reply #11 on:** 19 May 2004, 04:46 pm »

I thought i would hate it, but actually really enjoyed it. Tough story to put on the big screen.

The fighting scenes were awesome...and the script was better than Gladiator--which had too many cheesy Joaquin Phoenix lines and was entirely overrated.

Smeggy · « **Reply #12 on:** 29 May 2004, 06:08 am »

Just saw Troy tonight and I'm afraid I thought it was abysmal. The screenplay was aweful, the direction was terrible and the actors, because of the previous points came across as fairly one-dimensional. It was a poor example of an epic and in my mind much worse than Ridley's efforts, including gladiator. The score seemed to be out of a sixties epic and I felt the cinematography was sub par too. I guess I was expecting more and better.

It didn't give me any great sense of scale or grandiose proportions which the LOTR had in spades. The location was uninspired as well. Some of the action sequences were ok, and Brad's fight technique was nice. The story was 'loosely based' on the Illiad, meaning a lot of the stuff in the film was changed or made up to homogenise the film into a standard action flic. Poor decision. And am I the only one who thinks Orlando Bloom is a laughable romance figure? Paris should have been given to someone who can act and has at least some screen presence and charisma. I mean, really.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #13 on:** 29 May 2004, 07:51 am »

I just wonder why everyone from Hobbits to ancient Greeks all speak with bad British accents.

Smeggy · « **Reply #14 on:** 29 May 2004, 09:21 am »

Pfft, that's nothing. Why does every film from the past have a Lisa Gerrard-alike Celtic wailer in it. Talk about painful on the ears.