A lot of people had been anticipating Troy for a while when it came out, for a variety of reasons. I was one of those sad, sad people who, being a fan of the Iliad, thought this could (if handled correctly) prove to be a masterful epic film detailing the sufferings endured by two opposing armies during a pointless war with roots in both the pettiness of the gods and the follies of man. An insightful piece exploring the psyches of great men weighed down by the calls of destiny.

Bit of a disappointment for me, then, although I’m sure my mobile phone company appreciates the gesture.

Rumours regarding the film had, you see, been running rampant around the internet long before the general public interest was attracted by the approach of the release date. Rumours in a vague sense even before the casting was complete (with those of us who were interested in such things analysing each suggested name for Achilles and deciding exactly why they’d be awful in the role). And then about 300 of those sad individuals came together at the JACT Greek Summer School at Bryanston in July 2003, and these discussions could finally be held in person. The fact that the name Brad Pitt by now was very closely associated with Achilles added more fuel to the fire: some of us (like yours truly) failed to see how Pitt could be described as “the biggest and most beautiful of the Achaians” (double entendre aside). Others thought he could be magnificent.

Initially, it was suggested amongst a group of us that when Troy was released we all get together and go and see the first performance somewhere. Tentative agreements were made, and at the end of the summer school the matter was laid aside until the beginning of this year, when we realised to our horror that some genius had slated the release date of this film for just before the start of public exams, when although many could afford the time to see the film, they couldn’t really afford the time to travel around the country to watch it with like-minded people, as had been agreed.

Much thinking was done by all, and cinema schedules were examined. It soon became readily apparent that most of us could see the film at approximately the same time, talk to each other by phone as we made our ways back to our respective computers, and hold a huge online debate. Much buoyed up by this prospect, we settled down to wait, watching the internet trailers with interest to see whether we could build up a good picture of what was going to happen, but otherwise ignoring spoilers, so as not to stem the tide of righteous indignation when, as we were by this time fairly sure would happen, Hollywood absolutely destroyed an amazing story.

The day of the film’s release dawned bright and sunny, and I got up in good time to catch the Underground to the station nearest my local cinema. Or it would have been in good time if the Metropolitan line wasn’t the most annoying entity on the face of the planet, and resulted in me nearly missing my chosen showing. Not a good start, but I did manage to get there, and got a fairly good seat. I made sure my mobile was off, and settled down to watch the film.

Nearly three hours later I emerged and switched my phone on. It immediately rang, and was (not surprisingly) a friend from Bryanston, who had emerged about 20 minutes before me and was desperate to talk to someone. We decided to analyse the good parts of the film first, and leave the ripping-to-shreds part until we both got home and could talk online. For we suspected (and were not long after proven right) that the ripping-to-shreds would take longer.

I shall do the same here.

GOOD THINGS:

Gratuitous male nudity (doubt this will appeal to all); particularly Orlando Bloom

Brad Pitt was, as far as the script would allow him to be, dead right as Achilles. He got the feel of it right, even though the script wouldn’t let him be Achilles as the Classics student sees him

Agamemnon was a bit OTT for how he’s depicted in the Iliad, but he’s exactly right for the character as portrayed in Aeschylus’ Oresteia (as I said, we’re very sad people)

Eric Bana had Hector almost dead to rights

Peter O’Toole in Priam’s supplication to Achilles was perfect. You can see how it’s destroying him to have to beg the enemy who invaded his home and killed his son to return Hector’s body, to kiss the hands that killed his child. That scene is regarded by many as the most important in the whole Iliad (and is the event which finishes the Iliad, which doesn’t go on to deal with the Death of Achilles or the Trojan Horse) and it’s the only reason I’m sure someone on the production team has read even a bit of the Iliad.

The Horse looked cool

Actions scenes were fun, even if most were a little lacking in purpose

Paris did (though only in some scenes, which was a pity) act like the cowardly little brat that he is

Sean Bean made a good Odysseus (kept to the portrayal of him in the Iliad, rather than the one in the Odyssey which I can’t stand)

Aeneas’ cameo (no-one else in the cinema understood why I laughed hysterically at that, and most of my friends say it was the same for them)

BAD THINGS:

Oh, where to start?

One thing which none of the people I’ve spoken to can really understand the reason for. They’ve taken a ten-year siege and made it fifteen days. That’s pointless. Okay, it makes the film move a little faster, but it’s completely unnecessary. It would only take a few seconds for a panning shot to show the Greek camp gradually falling into decay and a voiceover to say something like “Ten years have past. Both sides have long been weary of this siege, but Agamemnon’s pride and Paris’ lust keep the stalemate unbroken. Strife is growing in the Greek camp…”. And then you’ve got an extra ten years of angst. Of weariness. Of the sense of futility. With only three days of fighting in the film, the amount to which the major players have already become disillusioned is frankly unrealistic.

Helen’s not even approaching the “most beautiful woman in the world”. And what’s going on with that accent, anyway?

Most of the characters are pretty wooden and two-dimensional. Just look at what they did to Aiax. And if Diomedes was even there, I didn’t notice him.

The lack of the gods. It makes certain things make absolutely no sense. Achilles’ mother is a Sea Nymph, for crying out loud, but he acts as though he doesn’t entirely believe that the gods exist. And it means you don’t get Hephaistos making Achilles some cool new armour after the death of Patroclus. You don’t have Aphrodite whisking Paris to safety when he falls in his duel. And on top of that, you don’t have the entire basis for the Trojan War, which goes back to the Apple of Discord and the Judgement of Paris (Paris judged Aphrodite to be more beautiful than Hera or Athena, for which as his reward she gave him the most beautiful woman in the world, ie Helen of Sparta).

Agamemnon is portrayed as the ruler of the Greeks by right of conquest. This isn’t so, and if it were it would account to some extent for his exceptional arrogance. He is in fact commander of a Pan-Hellenic alliance against Troy by dint of ruling Mykenae, the most powerful of the Greek city-states. The other Greek rulers are his slightly-inferior allies, not his subordinates.

The whole Patroclus thing. Again, the film-makers have cast aside a perfectly good opportunity for pathos. In the traditional story, Achilles gave Patroclus permission to lead the Myrmidons in his armour, but warned him not to get swept away in the heat of battle and to turn back once he had reached a certain stage. And when Achilles speaks those very words, you know that Patroclus will not heed them in the heat of battle, and he will be killed. And so part of Achilles anger is directed at himself, not just at Hector, which makes his fury all the more vengeful. The way the events are shown in the film is a complete waste of a chance to tug on the heartstrings.

Killing off Agamemnon and Menelaus. Agamemnon has a very, very famous death on his return home (killed by unfaithful wife, who happens to be Helen’s sister) and Menelaus should live in old age and regret with Helen. There’s no point in killing them off other than to tie up loose ends, but enough loose ends are left hanging (like the Sword of Troy (which doesn’t usually exist) and Aeneas), that only those who have read the Odyssey or the Aeneid will understand, to make tying up any lose ends completely pointless.

I’m going to get bogged down in even pettier detail if I keep going on this for much longer, so there’s just one more thing I’m going to analyse. The film’s resolution. I’ll start from the death of Hector.

In the Iliad, Hector’s dying words are “Paris and Phoebus Apollo destroy you at the Skaian Gates”. And this comes true, according to myth though not in the Iliad itself, which ends with Hector’s funeral games starting. Paris shoots an arrow which, guided by Apollo (god of archers) hits Achilles at his only vulnerable spot, his heel. This, note, is BEFORE the Trojan Horse, which Achilles played no part in.

In the film, Hector says no such thing, which annoys me (it’s my favourite line in the whole poem). And the Skaian Gates don’t come into anything at all. Achilles is in the Horse, and then heads through the palace looking for Briseis (Trojan priestess who was his concubine whom Agamemnon nicked which annoyed Achilles who didn’t fight who got her back who then let her go back to Troy with Priam, another, ahem, interesting interpretation of what happens in the poem). And Paris sees him, and has a Legolas moment and shoots him in the heel. He dies. No explanation for the whole Achilles’ Heel thing. Whatsoever. It’s traditionally the entire basis for Achilles’ status, and the reason we use the term as a way of describing someone’s great weakness, and it not explained. If the entire film apart from this had worked, this would have destroyed it for me. As it is, it annoys me no end. Even leaving the myth aside, it’s an unsatisfactory way to kill someone, particularly a great hero. Early in the film some random kid asks Achilles if it’s true that he’s invulnerable, and he laughs it off. After he’s shot in the heel two arrown land in his breastplate and seem to go all the way through to his chest, which shouldn’t be possible. The whole this is just STUPID. You can’t keep part of a myth like Achilles’ Heel and ignore the entire BASIS for it (his mother dipping him in the Styx for invulnerability, but having to hold his heel so that he doesn’t float away, hence his heel is not invulnerable).

Essentially, the film-makers have tried to leave in enough traditional stuff to appease Classics buffs, but have left enough out that what’s there makes no sense and detracts from the film as a whole. I accept that it would have been well-nigh impossible from a production point of view to present the Trojan War exactly as it is mythologically, but the balance is so wrong that it doesn’t work either as a piece of pseudo-history or as a piece of pseudo-myth.

It’s a good thing it says “Inspired by Homer’s “The Iliad”” at the end. It’s definitely not actually based on anything. My overall view is that it’s a completely wasted opportunity for greatness.

By the way, I say I’ll “Absolutely” watch it again because when it’s out to rent a huge gang of us are *so* going to get together and play drinking games centred around it.