Rating: 
Summary: "Troy" marks Brad Pitt's best performance in years!!
Review: A couple of months ago, I saw the highly anticipated epic, "Troy", at the theater. I, for one, must say that the film was, without a doubt, one of the most impressive and action-packed epics ever made since Russell Crowe's "Gladiator" and Charlton Heston's "Ben-Hur"! The direction of Wolfgang Petersen ("Air Force One") was top-notch and flawless! The performance of superstar Brad Pitt ("Snatch", "Ocean's Eleven"), headlining the film's cast as the Greek warrior Achilles, was powerful and commanding! Once again, this is Pitt's best performance in years! The performance of Eric Bana ("The Hulk", "Black Hawk Down"), as Achilles' Trojan counterpart, Prince Hector, was not only a tour de force performance, but an unforgettable one at that! Rounding out the cast are Orlando Bloom ("The Lord of the Rings" trilogy), Diane Kruger ("Wicker Park", "National Treasure"), Brian Cox ("The Ring"), Brendan Gleeson ("Cold Mountain"), Sean Bean ("Don't Say A Word"), Saffron Burrows ("Wing Commander"), Rose Byrne ("Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones"), Julie Christie ("Afterglow"), and Peter O'Toole ("Lawrence of Arabia") in which they gave excellent performances as well!For those not familiar with Homer's "The Iliad", the oldest and most enduring story ever told, "Troy" goes like this: Trojan princes Hector (Bana) and Paris (Bloom) are on a peace-keeping errand for their father, King Priam (O'Toole), in Sparta. Paris falls for King Menelaus' (Gleeson) lovely young bride Helen (Kruger), and Paris whisks Helen back to Troy for his own. Big mistake for Paris! Because with Helen missing, not to mention Menelaus presenting the problem to his brother, the land-grabbing Super-monarch Agamemnon (Cox), who uses the problem as an excuse to start a war between Troy and most of Greece, and only a great, big wooden horse and the might of warrior-for-hire Achilles (Pitt) can infiltrate the impenetrable walls of Troy and avenge the "theft" of Helen. To take on the role of Achilles, Brad Pitt worked out ferociously for months, with four hours a day of intensive body-building and four hours of fight training. But Pitt's training took a turn for the worse as an injury sidelined him for three months while filming a crucial fight scene: the mano-a-mano showdown between Achilles and Hector (In other words, Pitt had damaged his Achilles heel, paying homage to his character). Yet physically, Pitt is everything that Achilles should be: beautiful, god-like, and a fighting machine. Yet, Achilles is not a brooding, James Dean, introspective Hamlet-type, which is how he is played by Pitt. Achilles is a hero with a tragic flaw (almost always hubris). "The Iliad", like the writings of the ancient Greeks, is not about language or character development. It's about larger-than-life themes: gods, goddesses, vengeance and might, and fury and fate. With fate behind all decisions, there is almost no need for character because there is no inner struggle. The Greek myths are painted in the broadest of strokes to create the largest of pictures. The story of this is saddled with a mortality and humanity that saps it of what makes it great in the first place: infinity. Nonetheless, "Troy" proved a whole lot. Pitt, a superstar and a member of Hollywood's $20-million club, has only carried a blockbuster once: "Se7en", and that was nine years ago. Likewise, the success of "Troy", to me, had a lot to say about the leading-man future of Eric Bana, whose supporting performance was the best thing about Ridley Scott's "Black Hawk Down" in 2001, but who languished as last year's "Hulk" in the Ang Lee film. Pitt did an excellent job in the film because he's buff and fights well, and we all know he can act from "Se7en" and "Twelve Monkeys", and he should have hits well into the near future. It will be long, however, before a romantic comedy or courtroom drama will test Orlando Bloom's mettle. But so long as he's shooting arrows ("The Lord of the Rings" films) and buckling swashes ("Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl") in the company of $200 million-grossing Hobbits and pirates, he's safe. It's Bana who is the revelation as Hector. His warrior physique and huge, vulnerable eyes mix perfectly for a romantic hero. Fortunately, "Troy" follows the model of all great and not-so-great Hollywood epics by having a multi-national cast with British accents for characters who wouldn't have spoken English, anchored by the last surviving British theatrical aristocracy. That's why we get screen legend Peter O'Toole as King Priam, who, dusted off, is still the best actor in any scene he's in. In conclusion, "Troy" has it all: a great cast, spectacular action, a powerful storyline, and extraordinary, larger-than-life characters! My advice about the film is: Come for the Brad Pitt, savor the Orlando Bloom, and stay for the Eric Bana. And never, NEVER, under any circumstances, underestimate Peter O'Toole. "Troy", without a doubt, is a DVD must-have when it's released!
Rating: 
Summary: Another one bites the dust.
Review: Another one gone, and another one gone....
I don't understand Hollywood. They want their movies to sell, right? I love the idea of taking old stories and making movies out of them. All those lovely stories that have been around thousands (or hundreds) of years....
But there's a reason they've been around so long - people LIKE them. So why does Hollywood feel it has to add so many twists to the story? Why does it have to change it so much? Take King Arthur, for instance, or Robin Hood. And Troy. It's true they are just myths, but there IS actually a limitation to the different possibilities for the original version.
They ruined this story! Ok, ok, so maybe you don't care about the story, or all willing to enjoy a changed version. Well, I was prepared to enjoy it, even if it was changed.
But, even NOT looking at the legend... it was no good. I mean, I think that the actors did a good job, but it was BORING. The fight between Achilles and Hector was pretty good, but that's about it. There were basically two types of characters: Whiney and annoying, and cruel. Not wonderfully cruel - but cruel like a child's character (like Char's uncle in the movie 'Ella Enchanted'). And then there was Achilles, who seemed to fall in love with a girl but really showed no emotion throughout, and Hector, who was the hero of the movie (in my opinion), and was the only good character.
They should have taken out a few bad scenes, and made this movie PG.
Now, looking at how they changed it from the legend... well... they portrayed the Trojans as the 'good guys', and made the Greeks the 'bad guys'. Menalus, instead of loving his wife (Helen) and wanting to get her back, just wants to kill her. Paris, instead of being a cruel whiney coward, is just a pathetic sort of person you either feel sorry for or want to strangle.
And the gods. WHERE are the Gods?! It is my solemn duty to inform you that there aren't any in this movie. According to the legends, it was all the gods fault that Paris stole Helen (and half of Sparta's treasure) in the first place. The gods intervened - like Apollo, who guided Paris's arrow to Achilles ankle.
Oh, by the way, in this movie, Achilles is a totally normal guy. Apart from showing no emotion, being some sort of great fighter, and having a water nymph for a mother, that is. What about the Achilles Tendon? That's who it was named for. Achilles supposedly was dipped, held by his ankle, into this stuff that made him immortal. His ankle was the only vulnerable spot. In the movie, they erased that fact, and Achilles simply died with arrows in his chest. Yahoo.
Ok, I'm drawing out this review, but I'm trying to be helpful (and express my disappointment, too). If you are a Brad Pitt fan, or Orlando Bloom fan, etc., then you might like this movie. After all, Pitt seems to be the central character, and Bloom wins in the end.
If you like fighting movies, this isn't a good choice, because there doesn't seem to be a lot of fighting. Hmm - I don't see how they manage 2 1/2 hours, considering there isn't any story either.
Sorry - what I mean, is, it goes like this (If you don't want to know what happens, don't read this): Paris and Helen are in love. Paris takes Helen away. They get to Troy. Then the Greeks get to Troy. Then they fight for 3 days. The Trojan horse makes its appearance, the Greeks win, though Agamemnon and Achilles die, some Trojans flee, the end. That's all.
There's the great story! Yay!
They were trying to make something great, but they didn't realize that the story of Troy IS great - and trying to make a great story better isn't going to work (85% of the time, at least).
Sure, borrow this movie from the library, spend a few dollars to rent it, you might like it - after all, lots of people apparently did. Just don't expect much of it, that's all.
Rating: 
Summary: A Very Respectable Rendering of the Trojan War
Review: Based loosely on Homer's Iliad, this film recreates the Trojan war in telescoped form, compressing a decade and more of momentous events into a few weeks of political maneuvering and a few days of outright fighting. It succeeds in a variety of ways.
It creates an authentic seeming eastern Mediterranean bronze age world, not infected by the latter day Greece of classical times (which is more familiar to us), and thereby establishes a convincing cultural backdrop for the decisions which may actually have driven the events recorded by Homer. The war, itself, is shown for what it most probably was, a power-driven effort by one group to dominate another, and not a massive effort to reclaim a wayward woman.
The characters, though drastically shrunk in number from those who people the Iliad, come convincingly to life through the efforts of screenwriter and actors. Though Helen herself is rather stiffly portrayed, Brad Pitt, despite complaints by some, gives us a very convincing and human Achilles. He does seem a little wooden at times though, particularly when confronting Peter O'Toole's Priam. That scene was the powerful denouement of the Iliad and called for more vitality from Achilles, as the man is at last awakened from his self-absorbed bronze age heroic persona, than Pitt managed to provide. But Pitt is excellent as the warrior par excellence and makes real the myth of an invincible Achilles as he practices and teaches and kills those around him.
License was taken with the story as characters are knocked off who supposedly lived through the Trojan war and much has necessarily been left out. Still, that is to be expected in a film treatment of such a huge tale and, all in all, most of it was well done. True, Orlando Bloom's Paris is a little hard to take but then so was the original character who is basically a sneak and a bit of a coward in the original. The priestess, Briseis, who is captured by Achilles and becomes the cause of his rift with his fellow Achaeans when Agamemnon claims her for his own, is nicely portrayed in this film. Her part has been enhanced here from the original in which she was little more than a prop whose possession triggers the anger of Achilles against his leader and thereby sets the entire Achaean enterprise at risk.
Eric Bana's Hector seemed wooden and a bit too much of a goody-two-shoes to have been the great champion of Troy he is supposed to have been and it was a little hard to imagine him standing up for long against Achilles as, of course, he ultimately must do. Of course, even in the original Iliad he doesn't really stand his ground before that fierce warrior but, rather, breaks and flees before Achilles who chases him around the walls of Troy before finally killing him with a spear thrust. Still, that is not quite how the great duel between the champions is portrayed here though it is handled well enough.
The actors, director and choreographers seem to have captured the manner in which the ancient Acheaeans might really have moved in battle, as seen in the pictures on pottery shards that have come down to us from that era. In a stylish blending of ancient acrobatics, modern martial arts and, perhaps, not a little dance, Pitt's Achilles demonstrates why he is the unchallenged master of war and individual combat for which the legends seem to remember him.
Alas, the episode of the Trojan Horse is a bit of a letdown and seems almost an afterthought in the narrative. It's particularly disappointing when the Trojans foolishly disregard the obvious (to us) threat the wooden statue poses and heedlessly drag it into their city, giving the Greeks the opening they've long sought. But then I don't suppose there was any better way to present this. How do you create suspense when something like this is so much a part of our historical background?
This tale is dramatically tighter than its literary antecedent but, in the end, it does not quite rise to the power of its predecessor. Still, it's finely done despite that and worth seeing.
SWM
Rating:
Summary: Petersen's Big Fat Greek Epic
Review: Because of its being based on one of the most famous and widely-known epic tales of all time, "The Iliad", Hollywood certainly had a difficult task with "Troy". Under a hot spotlight for historical accuracy, director Wolgang Petersen does steer away from the original story, but does a fine job to bring such an extensive series of events to the screen. For those who do not know the story, King Menelaus of Sparta is outraged when he discovers that his beautiful wife Helen (Diane Kruger) has run off with the young Trojan prince Paris (Orlando Bloom). He seeks help from his greedy and mischevious brother Agammemnon, who convinces Menelaus to start a war to conquer Troy and bring Helen back to Sparta. In an act of desperation, Agammemnon recruits loose-cannon Achilles (Brad Pitt), one of the greatest warriors of all time to lead the fight. Fighting for the Trojans is the legendary soldier Hector (Eric Bana), eldest son of King Priam (Peter O'Toole) and brother to Paris. What begins is one of the greatest and most widely-recognized tales of all time, which eventually leads to the Trojan horse, and the fall of Troy. Performance wise, "Troy" tries to rely heavily on its A-list ensemble cast for the movie's backbone, and luckily, most of the performances are spot on. As the reluctant hero and family man Hector, Eric Bana gives a suprisingly deep and emotionally solid performance. He molds himself to the character, and gives one of the best performances in the film. Orlando Bloom puts his doe-eyes and innocent face to good use in the role of Paris, and envelopes the torn and somewhat pathetic character well. Newcomers Diane Kruger and Rose Byrne are solid in their roles as the prominent female characters Helen and Briseis, respectively. A bulked up and perfectly tanned Brad Pitt gives a good, but not great performance as Achilles, and Peter O'Toole gives a wonderful cameo as King Priam. The scene between Priam and Achilles is one of the best in the film. Although the performances are a main focus of the picture, the action and battle sequences are what really make this movie. Huge numbers of extras and large choreographed fight scenes pay off in a realistic, bloody and poignant picture of ancient warfare. "Troy" does alter history quite a bit to give it a more Hollywood feel, which to some effect, diminishes parts of the epic tale. However, the adaptations made to the script work well, and are credible considering the ominious task of bring a ten-year-long war to life. One of the most anticipated (and not to mention most expensive) epic films of the spring, Wolfgang Petersen's "Troy" is a fine and enjoyable movie. Sure, it has its flaws, like any other film, but the fantastic battle sequences, solid performances, beautiful scenery and music, and not to mention the constant presence of half-naked Greeks makes for a good day at the cinema.
Rating:
Summary: Because it is possible to love both the movie AND the Iliad
Review: Comparing Troy to Homer's Iliad will make a great difference in the outcome of a review. I noticed that most negative reviews here are a result of dissatisfaction with the changes made, and while I love the Iliad and respect canon sources just as much as any scholar, I also think it possible to enjoy a film for what it's worth.
Yes, I know that many important elements of the original story aren't included in Troy, such as the gods and goddesses, and that a lot of characters who should've died lived and vice versa. I can understand the frustration fans of the Iliad have with Paris and Helen's escape at the end, or even the fact that Patroclus was recreated as Achilles cousin, instead of his best friend as he originally was in Homer's epic. All these changes are sins in the eyes of many expecting an accurate adaptation of this beloved classic, but for the record I also know quite a number of people (knowledgeable in all things Homer or otherwise), who were able to enjoy the film in spite of these. I happen to be one of those who enjoyed the movie, and I think that it had much to do with my expectations- or lack thereof.
First off, Greek mythology has always been a rich source for the movie industry over the years. From Disney's animated movie Hercules to last year's Helen of Troy miniseries; from the 1956 Helen of Troy movie to the 1960's sandal and sword epics...Greek myths have also never been portrayed 100 percent faithfully to the sources and whether this is a good thing or not is a matter of debate, which I will not delve into. One thing I am certain of is that while I still love the idea of an accurate portrayal of the Trojan War onscreen, I also appreciated Troy- though it was not what everyone hoped for.
Troy's casting choices were excellent. Brad Pitt's Achilles failed to convince during my initial viewing, but after a second and third viewing I could not see anyone else in the part. Overconfident in his abilities, invincible as a warrior and demi-godlike in appearance (yes, Achilles was a blonde), Mr. Pitt had the role pinned down. His fight scenes were the best I've seen in a long time and they were made more impressive by the fact that no stuntmen were involved in the shooting. Achilles signature fighting style was also interesting to watch and made you believe that he was indeed, `a man born to end lives.' Nowadays, when Achilles' character comes to my mind, it is Brad's face that accompanies it. Eric Bana played a very sympathetic Hector, the man you alternately root for and grieve for every time his wisdom is ignored and he is forced to obey orders against his will and better judgment. Critics were right when they said that Hector was the emotional core of the story, for the only time I cried during the movie was when Hector bade his father farewell before confronting Achilles. Orlando Bloom was perfect as the selfish and impulsive prince Paris, his fight scene with Brendan Gleeson's Menelaus one of the best after the Achilles-Hector duel. Many hated Paris' weakness and Bloom's silly facial expressions- ironically, these were what made him Paris, as Paris WAS a coward and Bloom's fear during his fight with Menelaus was altogether real and perfect. The Paris-Hector scenes were well written, and I found the chemistry between the brothers even more believable and endearing than the relationship between Paris and Helen itself.
Brian Cox's Agamemnon was a little over the top at times, but he amused me to no end. Cox really looked like he was enjoying his part, and he took me on the ride with him. To his credit, he is the only actor who can act and look greedy while being funny and believable at the same time. Brendan Gleeson also made a satisfying Menelaus. While I disagree with the scriptwriters rendition of the jilted husband (as Menelaus was both young and a good husband who loved Helen), this has more to do with the scriptwriter's version of the character, rather than Gleeson's acting. His rage at his insulted honor was convincing and I truly felt scared for Paris during their fight.
The supporting characters also came up to par with the main cast.
Sean Bean portrayed a wise Odysseus whose lines are witty enough to be quoted every now and then, and the way Bean spoke also had me convinced that he was always right about everything. His intermediary role between Achilles and Agamamnon was entertaining to watch, as was his tone when exercising his powers of persuasion.
Peter O'Toole was both mesmerizing and frustrating as Priam. Mesmerizing in the scene were he begged for Hector's body in Achilles' tent, frustrating in his disregard for Hector's opinion and dependence on the gods.
Julie Christie had only one scene as Thetis, but she was regal enough for me to doubt that there were no goddesses in the film. She was either a goddess, or *very* close to it.
But IMHO, Rose Byrne was the best among the female leads, considering what she had to work with. Her expanded role as Briseis is another thing many complain about, but in the interest of being objective I will say that she did very well with what she was given and held her own against Pitt himself. She also displayed more range (fear, anger, hurt, happiness, etc.) than Diana Krueger's Helen and it is no wonder that the warrior was so taken with her version of the spirited temple maid.
Vincent Reagan was another face I could not forget while watching Troy. His portrayal of Eudorus truly defined the epitome of a supporting character, and I have no doubt that there has never been a right hand man as likeable as he. Like Briseis, he too was able to express a range of emotions- pain, fear and loyalty- and I find this impressive, given his relatively small number of scenes.
As a whole, my only complaints with regards to the movie are the compression of events, the musical score, and a weak performance or two.
The timing of the events, for it seemed as if the Trojan war was compressed from a span of 10 years to a period of 5 days in the movie. While 10 years may be too much of an exaggeration for translation into film, I feel that the creators of Troy could've made the war last for up to a few months, at least.
I was also disappointed in their choice of Helen. Diane Krueger is lovely to look at (perhaps not beautiful enough to play Helen, but pretty enough to keep both Paris and myself happy), but her performance seemed flat in comparison to Byrne's. Her role may have been toned down, but I felt that Helen still had a lot of scenes where she could've displayed emotion more convincingly. Her romance with Paris was also less interesting than what Hector had with Andromache, or even what Achilles had with Briseis. On a more positive note, Krueger was very regal in her bearing, and I had no trouble believing her to be every inch a queen.
Saffron Burrows was a likeable Andromache, another character one could look up to and sympathize with; my only complaint was that she was not given more to do. Aside from happiness with her family, the only other emotions she displayed were that of sorrow and worry, suppressed or otherwise. Still, she displayed these very convincingly- and the part where she banged her head against the wall when she knew her husband was being killed moved me.
Garrett Hedlund's Patroclus was the worst of all performances- and this had nothing to do with his demotion from best friend to cousin. As I mentioned above, the script changes from canon are not an issue with me since I am judging the movie *in itself**. Initially, I could see what the scriptwriter was doing. Since Troy focused on Achilles and Hector largely, Benioff tried to create parallelisms between the two men at different points: Hector had a love interest in Andromache, as Achilles had in Briseis. Hector had a filial, protectiveness over Paris, as Achilles had with Patroclus. But the difference is that while Hector's brotherly love for Paris and Paris' childish dependence on Hector were very touching, the interaction between Achilles and Patroclus did not strike the same cord. Perhaps it was because Hedlund's Patroclus seemed too modern; while Pitt MADE Achilles, Hedlund did not look as if he belonged in the same era at all...in fact, he looked as if he belonged to a surfing movie...which is strange, considering that his appearance was similar to that of Pitt's. I feel that he could've also acted better in spite of how his role was written. I wanted to sympathize with young Patroclus' in Troy. I wanted to empathize with his need to fight- I wanted to feel his frustration in not being able to prove himself. Sadly, what could've been pent up fury (or an impressive display of teen angst), only came across as mere childish tantrum, which was annoying at worst and laughable at best.
Lastly, the musical score was painful to the ear. The woman's moaning in the background was not mysterious and exotic as the composer intended...it was only strange a tad grating, which aroused my curiosity on how the original rejected score, must have sounded.
And yet, these faults have not dimmed my enjoyment of the movie. I did not view Troy as a deep, historical epic but as a brilliant fantasy-action adventure which had a little bit of everything to keep most movie goers happy. When I made this distinction, it was possible for me to watch it without comparing it to the Iliad every five minutes. It is possible to love both the movie and the book as two *separate* things after all, and I can only hope that those who loved Troy as much as I did will now be curious enough to pick up the Iliad, learn how it differs from the movie, and even enjoy the differences in BOTH mediums.
Rating:
Summary: Very Good - But Not Gladiator.
Review: From the start, I think most of us knew that this was never going to be as great as 2000's epic, Gladiator, for two reasons - one, an epic like this had already been done (taking away its Hollywood originality) and two, its leading star, Brad Pitt, was never going to be good enough to give an Oscar winning performance. Although saying that, he portrayed the posing Achilles well, along with other good cast members such as Brendan Gleeson as Menelaus, Brian Cox playing the powerful Agamemnon and Eric Bana playing the well respected warrior and Prince, Hector. With some tremendous battle scenes, entertaining sword fights and magnificent scenery (filmed in Malta), Troy does not fail to please the viewer. Based on Homer's historic poem 'The Iliad', this film follows many in their pursuits of victory, revenge, love and peace in a time of war. Perhaps not the most gripping or moving of films, you do at least have some care for the characters, yet I strongly believe with perhaps a stronger cast for certain roles, and a better script, Troy could have been one of the all time greats. Yet despite this - Troy is a must see.
Rating:
Summary: A good attempt.
Review: I am a mythology fan, and I was really looking forward to this movie. I became immediately alarmed at the slow beginning, and while I was entertained for the majority of the movie, something wasn't quite right and I didn't know what it was until the end. WHERE was the MEAT of the STORY? Sure, it was "explained" nicely, but I felt incredibly ripped off from the minimal portrayal of Helen of Troy and the CRITICAL role she played. Also, as another reviewer mentioned, there are no gods in this film... they are mentioned and briefly shown in statues, but there are no live characters-- dissapointing.
That aside, there was some *excellent* battle scenes that I've been hungry for in a non-LOTR setting for a change. Also, there was some really good acting from the supporting roles which really carried this film through.
I normally would avoid comparing this to similiar films of this vein, however, the background music is so similar to that of Gladiator (which can take the Pepsi Challenge with this movie any ol' day of the week) I found myself reflecting back on Gladiator and feeling that Troy was a lesser film. Much to my delight, some of the actors from Braveheart play important lead roles in Troy, so again, I felt myself yearning for strength in story that Braveheart had.
Rating:
Summary: A really good piece of entertainment..
Review: I have read many other reviews which complain about how different this movie is from Homer's Illiad. I have read the Illiad and agree with them, it is different. However, the title of this movie is not "THE ILLIAD"; the title is Troy. Yes, a few things have been changed, and a few deaths unplanned, but overall the story is great and sticks to the main plot. The movie itself is a masterpiece with extraordinary special effects and a cast of talented actors. If talent is not your thing, then the eye candy will hopefully do. Troy is a gripping and poetic film which I reccomend watching.
Rating: 
Summary: Wooden
Review: I rented this DVD before the last blizzard hit, thinking it would be a great way to ride out the storm. Well, what could have been a great epic turned out to be epically boring! I just didn't care about any of the characters and the battle scenes weren't anywhere near as exciting as they could have been, and it was hard to care who won! As far as the story line, where was the explanation for WHY Achilles is such a great warrior and can't be beat? A little detail about his HEEL (hello!) was left out of the story until the very end when he blatently sticks his heel out to take the arrow. It might as well have had a bullseye painted on it! It all seemed so silly! As far as the acting, the only actor worth anything in this movie was Eric Bana. The rest acted like a bunch of wooden horses. Luckily, I also rented "The Village" at the same time, but that's another review....
Rating: 
Summary: Immortality! Take it, its yours!
Review: I was highly anticipating the release of this film and unfortunately I was slightly let down. First and foremost, there are changes to Homer's story that should not have been included. (Revealing these changes would spoil too much of the plot) The movie ends quite abruptly and leaves the moviegoer hanging for a more fulfilling finish. The acting in this film is divided - some performances are great where others are lacking. Brad Pitt's Achilles is the perfect embodiment of the powerful, sometimes overconfident warrior who's thirst for blood does not hinder his ability to show respect. Eric Bana also gives a wonderful performance as the righteous Trojan prince, Hector. The battle between Hector and Achilles is a treat for the eye on screen. A notable mention is Peter O'Toole's King Priam. O'Toole brings a patriarchal feel to the character of Priam and he is a sharp contrast to the "King of Kings,"Agamemnon who is out to capture Troy for no more than personal gain. Also, my favorite performance in the entire film is that of Sean Bean who plays Odysseus. Quick witted and sharp-tongued, Odysseus is friend to Achilles and a great warrior in his own right. I would have like to see more of Sean Bean in the film. As for Diane Kruger who plays Helen, I give her credit as this is her first major role and she basically had to look beautiful and kiss Orlando Bloom. As for Orlando, my love of his visage has clearly deterred my ability to fairly criticize his performance. Plot modifications and acting aside, Troy's battle sequences are on a grand scale as is the set design and costuming. In that sense, the film is visually stunning. Troy keeps your attention and doesn't drag, but do not go into this film looking for a masterpiece. Finally, a note to female fans - you will have no problem staring at the men of Troy for two and a half hours!
|
