Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Troy (Director's Cut) [HD DVD]
Amazon Vehicles Buy 2 kids' books and save Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Dolly Parton Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Totes Summer-Event-Garden Amazon Cash Back Offer ElvisandNixon ElvisandNixon ElvisandNixon  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis Water Sports

Format: HD DVD|Change
Price:$6.95+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Features 2 new extras: "Troy In Focus" a 23 minute interview and a new 5 minute introduction by Wolfgang Peterson. Most of the other special features have been ported over from the previous edition.

First the most important question is whether or not this double dip is worth it? Absolutely because the additional footage only enhances the film giving it additional depth. The transfer is striking (regardless of which format)as well. In many respects this isn't a double dip because we get a film that is superior to the original version.

Unlike "The Illiad" Wolfgang Petersen's film "Troy" seemed too short and for good reason; Petersen had to trim the film down to a shorter length for its theatrical release. Luckily Warner gave Petersen the opportunity to revisit this epic film and add more meat to the bones of a film that had the look of an epic but was missing much of the emotional depth.

Petersen restores roughly 32 minutes to the film giving additional depth to the various relationships in the film. While "Troy" isn't a perfect epic, it's much improved. James Horner's score is still occasionally obtrusive but the overall impact of Petersen's film with its marvelous performances from Brian Cox (who steals almost every scene he's in), the quiet power of Eric Bana and even the gravity of Pitt as Achilles is far more effective than the previous version.

Image quality is superb for both the DVD and Blu Ray verisons of the film (the Blu Ray, of course, gets the nod because the images are much sharper, crisper with better definition but the DVD isn't too shabby either). Audio for the Blu Ray is presented lossless while the DVD's audio sounds terrific given the limitations of the format. Colors are a bit bolder here than on the previous version to my eyes.

It appears that a lot of the special features from the previous edition have been ported over and the only new things are the introduction by Petersen as well as a retrospective 23 minute interview where Petersen discusses the genesis of the original film and this project.

This film version much more closely resembles what he had in mind when he took on the project. Greek mythology purists will find some of the changes disturbing but some of the changes enhance the film pulling the strands of the story together a little tighter.
99 comments| 134 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
HALL OF FAMEon September 27, 2004
As a teacher of Classical Greek and Roman Mythology I was looking forward to "Troy." In the past I have put together a unit on the Trojan War that included not only Homer's epic poem the "Iliad," but also the plays of Euripides and Aeschylus and other ancient works on the stories of these characters. In other words I am familiar with this story to the extent that when Briseis showed up wearing a garment with long sleeves I was upset that we did not get to see the lovely arms that were part of her usual epithet. So, suffice it to say, that when characters who survived the Trojan War started dying in this film, I was not exactly happy. Consequently, the truth is that the less you know about the Trojan War of classical mythology, the more you will enjoy Wolfgang Petersen's "Troy."

I have no problem with the idea that Homer and the other ancients have to be adapted in making a modern motion picture about the Trojan War. The decision to eliminate the gods is appropriate, getting away from the idea that this was a ten year war makes sense, and if the alliance of the Greeks is now political rather than as part of an oath sworn by the princes who were suitors for Helen's hand, I consider that to be legitimate. I do not understand why Iphigenia, Cassandra, and Hecuba are all eliminated but there are not fatal omissions. But when you start rewriting who gets killed that is going a bit too far, especially when one premature death starts a chain effect that means Athens will never develop the jury system, which means we probably lose out on it too. David Benioff's screenplay was "inspired" by Homer's "Iliad," which at least is an honest way to characterize what he did in this script, but I still do not have to like it or endorse it.

The big selling point for this film was not Homer but rather Brad Pitt as Achilles. Stories abound about how Pitt worked six months to get in shape for this film, gave up smoking, and ended up hurting his Achilles tendon in one of those profound ironies that indicates that maybe the gods were not pleased with what was happening in this film. Pitt certainly looks good, not just in terms of taking several opportunities to display the line of his nude body, but in how he carries himself as Achilles. The whole idea is that this guy is the greatest warrior on the face of the planet and Pitt exudes that with the way he strides across the sands of Troy. Even more impressive is the choreography for the fights, because Pitt's movements are so smooth and powerful, especially compared with that of Eric Bana's Hector, that you do not doubt that this guy is in a league by himself as a warrior. I also like the way he uses the distinctive form of his shield when fighting. They thought this part out quite a bit.

The fight choreography was worked out by Simon Crane, the film's stunt coordinator and second unit director, who describes Achilles as fighting with a boxing style but with the velocity of a speed skater and the agility of a panther. They also come up with a nice touch in that Achilles looks slightly to the side at his opponent until he is ready to come in for the kill. The best fight sequences of "Troy" are when Achilles is fighting. The giant battle sequences of computerized soldiers are not as impressive, mainly because the camera is always in motion and the cutting is so fast that we are left with an impression of the battle rather than always being able to tell what is going on (which has become my constant complaint with most movies with large battle sequences).

Bana does a good job of capturing Hector's nobility without turning him into a marble statue, while Peter O'Toole fills the role of Priam naturally. On the Trojan side the problematic character is Paris (Orlando Bloom), again because of the writing more than the performance. Priam has negotiated peace between Troy and the Sparta of King Menelaus (Brendan Gleeson), but that is destroyed when Paris persuades Helen (Diane Kruger) to run away with him. Both Hector and Priam know that Paris is wrong and their reasons for supporting him and thereby dooming Troy ring hollow (the less than stellar "Helen of Troy" television miniseries did a nice job of providing a solid motivation for the Trojans to protect Helen).

It you want to draw a clear distinction between Homer's story of Achilles and that of Benioff it is that the former is about the rage of Achilles (see the first line of the "Iliad") and the latter adds an equally strong love element. The one character whose role is most inflated in this version is that of Briseis (Rose Byrne), the Trojan slave girl who comes between Achilles and Agamemnon (Brian Cox), the king of kings for the Greeks. This change becomes the reasoning behind how the film rewrites the end game of the Trojan War, although I still do not understand why some of the key characters get to live happily ever after. But since Pitt's performance dominates the film and he is clearly the horse that director Wolfgang Petersen is riding to make the whole thing work, it makes sense that he has to be around until the very end.

The good news is that when I teach mythology after this DVD comes out my students will probably enjoy attacking Benioff's changes in the original stories of Greek mythology in their papers. I think this will definitely help them understand why the writings of Homer and the other ancients are considered classics.
1414 comments| 446 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 24, 2007
When I saw TROY in the theaters, I wasn't expecting much. After that first viewing, I knew there was something missing; the screenplay just didn't grab me, it failed to immerse me on the scenes. I am quite familiar with GREEK myths, also both Norse and Roman mythology. Well, I managed to purchase the director's cut of Troy, and although it is not as great as KINGDOM of HEAVEN Director's cut, it is a better cut of the film.

I presume that most of the folks who'll be interested in the director's cut are fans or at least the ones who saw it in theaters as I did. ONE OBVIOUS improvement this version has over the previous dvd is the PICTURE transfer. The Video this time out is more vibrant, sharper and cleaner. Another difference is the SOUNDTRACK on certain scenes; the training scene of Achilles and his cousin, the duel between Hector and Achilles. Also, the music is improved with added bass during the siege at the beach and on the gates of Troy. The music sounded more powerful.

The Director's cut has the same plotlines, characters and scenes. It does have added "meat" and do they make Troy a better cut of the film? Yes.

1: Opening scene with a dog going around the spoils of war. (Dead bodies)
2: Nudity in the scene between Paris and Helen. Their relationship is also a bit more fleshed out. Love scenes are extended, suffice it to say, the film is a bit more uninhibited when it comes to nudity.
3: Helen's husband is shown as unfaithful. It gives more motivation to Helen's actions.
4: Odysseus is developed as the humble King of Ithaca. He likes to be among the common folk. His character is also more fleshed out; the film also emphasizes how it is Achilles trusts his judgment.
5: Hector knew about Paris' affair with Helen even before they boarded the ship back to Troy. He warns him of the potential consequences.
6: Achilles' ego is more fleshed out. He has a confrontation with Agamemnon regarding the Priestess of Apollo. (Extended)
7: Extended battle sequences. More blood is shown. Heads get lopped off more often.
8: Funeral sequences are extended. It shows more emotion and emphasizes the combatants' sorrow with the lost of their comrades.
9: A dog licks off the "fake" disease after the Trojans took the wooden horse inside their city.
10: Agamemnon's obsession and arrogance is more fleshed out.
11: Extended final act sequence; last assault on the city of Troy. More blood and gore is shown. A tad more brutally graphic.

There may be more that I missed, it did contain an added 30+ minutes of footage. The film is contained in 2 discs (2 Dual layer DVDs) similar to the terrific extended cuts of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and Kingdom of Heaven Director's cut.

VIDEO/AUDIO: 2.35 Anamorphic widescreen. Exceptional transfer, an improvement over the previous dvd release; Near-flawless picture quality, nice colors, improved sharpness and contrast. Black levels are solid. 5.1 Dolby Digital English is very powerful. I'd had hoped that this cut would include DTS sound mix, it would have been better with DTS.

In closing: Is the director's cut worth a "double dip"? For me, for $ 14.99 2-disc edition director's cut, definitely yes! As for the other more "stylish" Ultimate Edition (includes photo book etc.)with the $ 25.99-$ 34.99 price tag, I'm not so sure. For fans of the film, or if you don't have the original release, this is a no-brainer. The lack of DTS track is a minus, but this new edition definitely has a bit more "grandeur" than the theatrical release.
However, if you hated the original cut, this new director's cut will NOT change your mind!
Recommended! (timidly) ( 3 ½ stars)
99 comments| 85 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
As a teacher of Classical Greek and Roman Mythology I was looking forward to the opening of "Troy," which came on the final day of exam week, too late to use in class this semester. In the past I have put together a unit on the Trojan War that included not only Homer's epic poem the "Iliad," but also the plays of Euripides and Aeschylus and other ancient works on the stories of these characters. In other words I am familiar with this story to the extent that when Briseis showed up wearing a garment with long sleeves I was upset that we did not get to see her lovely arms. So, suffice it to say, that when characters who survived the Trojan War started dying in this film, I was not exactly happy. Consequently, the truth is that the less you know about the Trojan War, the more you will enjoy Wolfgang Petersen's "Troy."
I have no problem with the idea that Homer and the other ancients have to be adapted in making a modern motion picture about the Trojan War. The decision to eliminate the gods is appropriate, getting away from the idea that this was a ten year war makes sense, and if the alliance of the Greeks is now political rather than as part of an oath sworn by the princes who were suitors for Helen's hand, I consider that to be legitimate. I do not understand why Iphigenia, Cassandra, and Hecuba are all eliminated but there are not fatal omissions. But when you start rewriting who gets killed that is going a bit too far, especially when one premature death starts a chain effect that means Athens will never develop the jury system. David Benioff's screenplay was "inspired" by Homer's "Iliad," which at least is an honest way to characterize what he did in this script, but I still do not have to like it.
The big selling point for this film was not Homer but rather Brad Pitt as Achilles. Stories abound about how Pitt worked six months to get in shape for this film, gave up smoking, and ended up hurting his Achilles tendon in one of those profound ironies that indicates that maybe the gods were not pleased with what was happening in this film. Pitt certainly looks good, not just in terms of taking several opportunities to display the line of his nude body, but in how he carries himself as Achilles. The whole idea is that this guy is the greatest warrior on the face of the planet and Pitt exudes that with the way he strides across the sands of Troy. Even more impressive is the choreography for the fights, because Pitt's movements are so smooth and powerful, especially compared with that of Eric Bana's Hector, that you do not doubt that this guy is in a league by himself as a warrior. I also like the way he uses the distinctive form of his shield when fighting.
The fight choreography was worked out by Simon Crane, the film's stunt coordinator and second unit director, who describes Achilles as fighting with a boxing style but with the velocity of a speed skater and the agility of a panther. They also come up with a nice touch in that Achilles looks slightly to the side at his opponent until he is ready to come in for the kill. The best fight sequences of "Troy" are when Achilles is fighting. The giant battle sequences of computerized soldiers are not as impressive, mainly because the camera is always in motion and the cutting is so fast that we are left with an impression of the battle rather than always being able to tell what is going on (which has become my constant complaint with most movies with large battle sequences).
Bana does a good job of capturing Hector's nobility without turning him into a marble statue, while Peter O'Toole fills the role of Priam naturally. On the Trojan side the problematic character is Paris (Orlando Bloom), again because of the writing more than the performance. Priam has negotiated peace between Troy and the Sparta of King Menelaus (Brendan Gleeson), but that is destroyed when Paris persuades Helen (Diane Kruger) to run away with him. Both Hector and Priam know that Paris is wrong and their reasons for supporting him and thereby dooming Troy ring hollow (the less than stellar "Helen of Troy" television miniseries did a nice job of providing a solid motivation for the Trojans to protect Helen).
It you want to draw a clear distinction between Homer's story of Achilles and that of Benioff it is that the former is about the rage of Achilles (see the first line of the "Iliad") and the latter adds an equally strong love element. The one character whose role is most inflated in this version is that of Briseis (Rose Byrne), the Trojan slave girl who comes between Achilles and Agamemnon (Brian Cox), the king of kings for the Greeks. This change becomes the reasoning behind how the film rewrites the end game of the Trojan War, although I still do not understand why some of the key characters get to live happily ever after. But since Pitt's performance dominates the film and he is clearly the horse that director Wolfgang Petersen is riding to make the whole thing work, it makes sense that he has to be around until the very end.
The good news is that when I teach mythology this summer and when "Troy" comes out on DVD, my students will probably enjoy attacking Benioff's changes in the original stories in their papers. I think this will definitely help them understand why the writings of Homer and the other ancients are considered classics.
0Comment| 55 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 17, 2004
An ancient poem and a motion picture are two entirely different mediums, and should be judged accordingly. We as viewers (well, most of us) cut Peter Jackson some slack with his deviations from Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings," and we ought to give the same consideration to Wolfgang Petersen, who brings Homer's classic to vivid, sweaty life. And not only does Petersen pull off a cinematic coup, he makes watching TROY an outright fun and thrilling experience.
The film centers around two characters--and they are not Helen and Paris. A beefed-up Brad Pitt plays Achilles, a fierce Greek warrior who is literally unbeatable. Yet Achilles is anything but a nice person: he is self-centered and pretentious, and he fights on his terms, often to the detriment of his countrymen. Achilles has but one quest: to be immortalized through history, and the Greek siege of Troy provides him the perfect opportunity. For such a shallow, narcissistic character, Pitt is perfectly suited for the role.
Eric Bana, on the other hand, steals the show as Hector, Prince of Troy. Hector is a good, kind, and decent man who loves his family and his country. Faced with having to clean up the mess after his brother Paris (Orlando Bloom) brings Helen of Sparta (Diane Kruger) to his beloved land, Hector leads the Trojan army against the Greek invaders; his showdown with Achilles is inevitable, and is also the film's defining moment.
Yet TROY is bursting at its wooden horse seams with other memorable performances, including a frail Peter O'Toole as Trojan King Priam, and his scene-chewing counterpart Brian Cox, who plays greedy King Agamemnon. Brendan Gleeson and Sean Bean are superb, too, as Greek kings Menelaus and Odysseus, while Bloom is less than stellar as a peach-fuzzed, pusillanimitic Paris.
Director Petersen delivers a grand epic complete with stunning cinematography, fierce action, imaginative special effects, and a spellbinding story. His film does not detract, but instead enhances, Homer's classic. In the words of King Menelaus of Sparta: "May the gods keep the wolves in the hills and the women in our beds." How can an epic go wrong with a line like that?
--D. Mikels
11 comment| 81 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 30, 2007
I am lucky enough to have seen a screening of the Director's Cut for Troy prior to this DVD's release. I haven't seen the DVD extras, so all I can address here is the movie itself. It is fanstastic - the 40 minutes of additonal material adds meat to the bones of the original. The added footage and new score gives the movie a grander scope and serious gravitas. The colors are richer. There are additional scenes that give you a better insight into the Paris and Helen relationship as well as scenes that give more depth to Odysseus and Priam. I loved it.

I was already a fan of the original, and now cannot recommend this new improved version highly enough.
11 comment| 44 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 1, 2004
This is the first time I've felt compelled to write a review.

I am a fan of Homer and the original texts, but the interventionist Gods had to be cut to allow for a film that wouldn't be viewed as farcical to a contemporary audience.

I had never been a fan of Brad Pitt, and frankly expected to be disappointed in his portrayal of Achilles. I was WRONG, his portrayal was EXCELLENT, and it prompted me to take a look at the work he's been doing since his days on the covers of the teenage magazines. He has done some excellent work and I think it has been dismissed because he is so photogenic.

Playing Achilles is wrought with all the pitfallls of playing Hamlet. We all know the story, the scenes, and the lines. There have been great paintings depicting scenes such as Priam begging Achilles for Hector's body. This is every bit as tough as trying to deliver Hamlet's "To be or not to be...". The actor's great challenge is to make those words his own, in order to be believable as the character. Brad Pitt accomplishes this and it is no small feat. I for one applaud his courage in taking on this role, and would be the first to rise for a standing ovation for the performance he delivers.

The score for Troy by James Horner is magnificent, evocative, and compelling. "Remember Me" should be a serious contender for the Oscar, and shouldn't be missed. I'll tune in on Oscar night just to cheer for James Horner, and Troy.

The lessons of the tale of Troy are lessons for the ages; the archetypal personalities ring as true today as they ever did, and the screenplay captures them with messages such as:

"War is young men dying and old men talking."

"Men are wretched things."

"There will always be another war, I can promise you that."

"I want what all men want, I just want it more."

What is it that man wants? Immortality. A name that will live forever. How many men over the centuries have been willing to trade everything for personal glory? Mankind is ever the same.

When I first read the Iliad, I wept for Hector and the mighty Achilles, and I wept again with this film. Wept for them and all of mankind, because we seem to have so little control of our destinies, as we try to exert complete control over our world.

Set aside your preconceived notions of Mr. Pitt, open yourself to the experience of this film, stop looking for disappointment, and you'll experience a wonderful, yet emotionally devastating, heartbreaking film. Theatre requires a "suspension of disbelief" on the part of the audience to work its magic.

Judge this film for yourself, with an open mind, and an open heart.

Kaller S. Gilbert

Portland, Oregon
22 comments| 40 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 19, 2004
I'm tired of hearing people say this movie was terrible. True, many elements of the full story are missing, but what were you expecting? The full story of the Trojan War could not be told in a trilogy, let alone one film. I think the film maker made a wise choice in dispensing with the gods; that would have only complicated what is basically a three-hour film. And to all those that say Brad Pitt was miscast: you're full of it. I'm not a huge fan of his, but his performance was exactly the way I would want to see Achilles portrayed--arrogant, extremely skilled, handsome, often brutal, yet with a heart under all that armor. So to sum up, while Troy might disappoint people wanting the Iliad, I believe this film has the heart of Homer's tale through and through, even if it's from a different perspective. In all, it's impossible to satisfy people who think no detail should be left out, but if you want that, read the Iliad. It's better than the movie, but the film itself is very well done for those with an open mind and an understanding of the mindset of such men.
0Comment| 29 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 17, 2004
...in this movie doesn't belong to Helen of Troy, but to Brad Pitt's Achilles!
This is because the most striking-looking person, very much on purpose as a superblond, is Brad-illes. I had heard that he gave up smoking and worked out in order to be buff enough to be Achilles. Well, the only other movie I ever saw Brad in was "Legends of the Fall", of which I have an imperfect memory, so I'm almost coming to Brad sight-unseen. Therefore, I can say with perfect candor that he's great!
I had my doubts about this movie, I had to admit. But I was pleasantly surprised at how much I did like it. Is it a movie for purists, though? Oh, no, not in the least. It's been twenty years since I read the Iliad, but even I can tell what's not true to the text here here.
1. No gods anywhere in sight. A good chunk of the original poem concerns all the machinations of the gods behind (or is it above?) the scenes. Not a breath of that here. Brad-illes makes some comments about the gods, quite reminiscent of how Kevin Sorbo's Hercules character says disparaging things about Hera. Of course, any time a movie has tried to show the gods, it just looks SO dopey; think "Clash of the Titans" and feel yourself blush. So, to dispense with that whole set of characters not only saved paychecks but also face. But the subliminal message I think is that the gods are hooey--no amount of worship, sacrifice, whatever, is of any avail. It's rather nihilistic in feel. Good people die and bad people triumph, if only for a while.
2. Characters die here who don't die at Troy. I guess it would be wrong to say just who, but let me put it this way: At a "trial by combat" kind of scene in the very beginning, a character got slain whom I know for a fact is still alive enough to get a visit from Odysseus in "The Odyssey". Once this happened, I said to myself, TutorGal anything's possible in this here movie! Then there's a big climax scene, when a woman character is being sexually threatened by another Major Character, and she kills him--even though he gets his own play and a different kind of hosing in his legendary bath later on.
3. Other characters don't even appear at all. Like the famous Cassandra, who says in effect "Hey, I wouldn't bring that big wooden horse in here if I were you!" And her mother, Hecuba, who Hamlet takes on about in one of his soliloquys. I guess the story held together without them, but I did miss them.
There's probably a lot of other stuff too, like the Great Balls of Fire (gotta go see it to find out what that means), that aren't in the source material, but still and all, I think it worked well enough.
Some other reviewers take umbrage at the casting, but I don't think there are any problems on that score. Brad looks rather surfer-ish in some respects, but he's not as All-American as others would paint him. He's shown to be a not-very-pleasant person, chuck full-o anger. I found him believable enough.
Yeah, Helen is something of a nonentity, but my rationale on that is that it was necessary to have a very young woman play Helen if your Paris were going to be Orlando Bloom, who seems like a high schooler in many respects. They match well agewise. I also think that to play a different kind of Helen, a more seductive kind, you'd need a much older actress, say about 35, who knew her own sexuality very well. But if there were a Helen like that, King Priam would have given her the heave-ho because she'd have known the repercussions of her actions too well to be forgiven.
Speaking of King Priam, Peter O'Toole is one of my favorites this time around. Once famous as a Golden Boy himself 40 years ago, now Sir PO'T sports his white hair very elegantly. When he sees the 1,000 ships sailing right for his beach, he did what I call "face acting"--he decided to show fear and alarm by making his face long. A trick worthy of the late great Olivier himself--had to lean over to tell my companion, "Looks like he's opening up his can of ham!" There's a very strange encounter between him and Brad-illes towards the end of the movie, where Brad almost seems frightened of him, continually moving away from him. But since PO'T is a rather looming sort of person, I rather got the feeling that Brad was afraid that PO'T was going to plant a big wet kiss on him if he wasn't careful.
Lots of fighting and dying by an incredibly large cast, but rather quick and well edited so you're not too shocked by the proceedings.
In sum, I had a good old time at "Troy" -- it's a summer action film that delivers enough thrills and, with the right audience, laughs to make you smirk as you leave the theater. High art? No. Fun? Certainly is!
0Comment| 13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 22, 2005
Well, I am a Professor in Classics in the University and I really can't believe that so many people despise this excellent movie because "it is not faithful to the Iliad", or because it "is not historically reliable".

First of all, decide what you want: if you want history, you need to throw the Iliad out of the window, because Homer was definitely NOT historically accurate. If you want Homer, you have to get rid of history.

Now, some short reflections. Speaking of "historical mistakes" with reference to Troy is nonsense: the movie is inspired to a myth, and the myth is the result of fantastic amplification and transfiguration of historical events. The Trojan war was very different from its poetical (not only Homeric) representations: as historians such as Moses Finley showed, it did not last ten years, but probably was a series of short raids aiming at plunder. As a matter of fact, the post-homeric epics describe Achilles as a thug and the Myrmidons as a band of robbers, spoiling temples and abducting daughters of priests. Besides, at the time of the Trojan war the Myceneans were considerably impoverished in comparison with the wealth of the previous centuries, and so they needed new lands to conquer and sack (as Pierre Levecque has clearly pointed out).

Homer describes the Greek army as powerful and glamorous; he aims to glorify the heroes and their achievements, but after all the poet is a Ionic rationalist, and every now and then he lets us understand how brutal and ruthless these ancient warriors really were. And just as he is a Ionic rationalist, he seems not to take very seriously the Gods and their astonishing deeds, fascinating relics of an ancestral tradition which Homer remembered well but maybe could not completely understand himself.

And now, some words about the so-called `unfaithfulness' towards the Iliad. First, the movie tells the whole story of the Trojan war and not only the subject treated by Homer (Achilles' wrath, Patroclus' death, Achilles'revenge); therefore, the screenwriter needed other sources, and he found them not only in Greek ancient poetry (post-Homeric epics, tragedy), but also in Medieval and modern literatures (Benoit de Sainte Maure's "Roman de Troie", Christa Wolf's "Cassandra"). Besides, Homer was NOT faithful to the previous epic tradition (for instance, he denies Iphigeneia's sacrifice, or Achilles'stay in Skyros, two episodes which probably date back to a very ancient stage of Greek mythology) and later poets and writers were NOT faithful to Homer. They told the myth of the Trojan war in different ways and from different points of view. For instance, the authors of the Roman era (such as Virgilius, Seneca, Dracontius) show a deep sympathy for the Trojans (who were considered the ancestors of the Romans): they exalt Hector's courage and try to excuse Paris for his faults. During the Roman empire, the applauded rhetor Dione of Prusa (something similar to a modern TV anchorman) criticized Homer for his employ of the Gods in the action; besides, he said that Achilles was killed by Hector and the war won by the Trojans, and that the whole tradition on the matter was conditioned by the greek point of view. Later writers told about Achilles'love for the Trojan princess Polyxena, how they met in Apollo's temple where Paris treacherously killed the hero, and how she killed herself on Achilles'grave (Philoxenos). And so on: the Greek myth is a perpetual work-in-progress. Any scholar in Literature should know this well.

So, Benioff's screenplay is really a fine work, which elaborates quite a lot of sources with some personal touch, in order to adapt the myth to an antimilitarist and anti-imperialistic point of view.

As regards the mise en scène, I loved the breathtaking battle sequences (especially the duel between Patroclus and Hector and the one between Hector and Achilles: the latter is nearly a homoerotic scene, with the palpable physical contact between the two heroes), the magnificent scenery (especially the palaces of Agamenon and Priamus, and the Greek camp), the accuracy in reproducing weapons and armour (notice that, just like in Homer, only Ajax fights in the Mycenean way, while Achilles and Hector use more recent tactics). With regard to the acting: Brad Pitt/Achilles is awesome (he IS Achilles!), but also Eric Bana and Orlando Bloom are very convincing in their roles (however, Bana, who acts the "good guy", has got an easier job). Rose Byrne/Briseis plays her part very well, and Julie Christie gives as a present her delightful cameo.
11 comment| 31 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse