Troy

Allycat said:
I'm a bit too lazy to type out all my thoughts about this movie again, so I'll just re-post my review of it, which I typed out Thursday-night for the affiliated Britpack-board
Click to expand...

It's funny that you mention the Legolas reference. I thought about that too for a second. However if you would look past the part that the bow and arrow has been around for many years 🙂, you'll see that there was actually a difference. The difference was how he fired the arrows. He had a very very distinctly different shot, than Legolas. I thought that was pretty awesome.

I liked the movie. There were some camera issues I had. Some weird zoom-in angles and some 1 second slow motion points that weren't needed. Another issue I had, but was later resolved, was the fact they didn't mention anything about Achilles being invulnerable. They didn't show that he couldn't be killed unless striking his heel. But after discussing the movie with my dad, I came to realize that the director wanted the movie to be about the epic battle of Troy. Not about mythology. I am satisfied now.
 
Alright, I'm not seeing the Bush/Iraq connection at all. Sorry to get off topic, but can someone explain it to me?
 
Ninjalizer said:
Another issue I had, but was later resolved, was the fact they didn't mention anything about Achilles being invulnerable. They didn't show that he couldn't be killed unless striking his heel.
Click to expand...

Homer in the Iliad makes no mention of Achilles' invulnerability. This was an invention of later writers, probably Apollodorus. If he was invulnerable, why wear armour, and why make a big deal about the armour he gets when Hector takes his from Patroclus? (not sure if that' s in the movie...it is in the book...).
 
nopers, no armor stealing...hey kd, you prolly remember, its been to long for me but,...who kills achilles?....in the movie its not who i thought it was...tho i might have remembered wrong...didn't like the romance bit that much either. twas aight, but...eh...
i think the movie would have been better had it had more of the gods in it, at least for me. his mom was in it, about 2 minutes. and you couldn't tell she was a god. 🙁 i was all looking forward to the gods...
it was an ok movie overall..did forget a few things, other than the gods. and they were all portrayed as straight so....not that i mind that, but...its not quite in line with the book...i like greek myths, and i've read a few and the odyssey and parts of the illiad, so i was hoping for something a little closer...but...eh...twas an ok movie...wouldn't see it again tho...don't hate it. just miss the gods.
 
Well, I'm going watching it on Friday. I can't wait. I think it looks really good. One of my friends has already been and seen it and he's already told me what happens....(I like knowing what happens in a film...I know I'm weird) It sounds good, plus I'm a sucker for a bit of romance so that part of the film won't bother me.
 
killerdwarf said:
Homer in the Iliad makes no mention of Achilles' invulnerability. This was an invention of later writers, probably Apollodorus. If he was invulnerable, why wear armour, and why make a big deal about the armour he gets when Hector takes his from Patroclus? (not sure if that' s in the movie...it is in the book...).
Click to expand...

The story of Achilles is that he is invulnerable except for his heel. I think you're right, in that Homer makes no mention about it. But that's what most people know about Achilles. And if they weren't going to touch on it, why make the arrow shot to his heel so dramatic? There was a couple interviews with the director, and one of them asked him about that. His reason was that he didn't want the movie to center on the mythological side of it. He wanted it to be the more realistic battle of Troy. Makes sense to me.
 
so glad some one made a thread for this movie cuz i've got alot to say!! 😉

do NOT read this post if you haven't seen the flik BUt intend too!!! i don't know how to balck the writing so i just do this in stead

s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s



saw this movie with some friends on friday, and two of us liked it, and tre of us.. well we haven't laughed that much EVER from watching a movie... don't want to burts any bobble, and i don't wanna be a jerk or anything when i write my rant about it but her it goes 🙂 😉 :

this is one of the worsed movies i've ever seen... talk about LONG, talk about BAD!! and they didn't even get the story right... about three hours and 70kr...and that was with student discount-they could at least get the story right!! i mean up until hector is offed.. they do okay in the story department, then..(btw.. the preview just was shown on the tv LOL 🙂) well then they start getting a bit bad on it! and what is up with all the cheesy lines?????? orlando bloom, who is an okay actore(sp?) is turned in to such a cheesy... *shivers*, and some of the scenes are just not needed... they should have ditched them and put in som of the story right....

like achillies and that woman... HALLO didn't happen... that woman and the king of greace in the end before achillies dies... Hallo didn't happen. Paris shooting achillis???? what was that???

and i am amased how they wanted to max out of brad pitt!! cuz they made his character live alot longer then he acually did! he dies BEFORE the TROYAN horse!

and the war seems to only last a week or three when it lasted like 9 years.. or something like that...

and where is the etiopians and the amazones?
*breaths-out*

thank you all for listening 🙂 i need to get that out!
- P:: wacko : lexia

BTW... i haven't read Homers book! but i have read the story...... LOL sorry if my book is wrong 😉 LOL
 
polexia said:
like achillies and that woman... HALLO didn't happen... that woman and the king of greace in the end before achillies dies... Hallo didn't happen. Paris shooting achillis???? what was that???
Click to expand...

What's wrong with Paris shooting Achilles? That happens.

and the war seems to only last a week or three when it lasted like 9 years.. or something like that...
Click to expand...

You would have wanted to sit in that theater seat for more than 2.5 hours? They didn't cover the whole war obviously. They couldn't. They gave us the good chunk that was needed.

BTW.. i haven't read Homers book! but i have read the story...... LOL sorry if my book is wrong 😉 LOL
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the problem. I don't know what book you were reading, but apparantly there are some different versions. I'm pretty sure that this one was modeled after Homer's. Read his. It's good.
 
the movie has some bad acting and some wrong scenes... what i meant with paris shooting achillis what that the timing was wrong... not that it didn't happen then. and they have made some unessesary scenes, without that it would have shortend the thing... the book i was reading is a study of greac mythology and history... and there are quite alot of pages on this war.... and it might be after homers book, but i'm pretty sure the people who wrote this book was good at their work(e.g HISTORY) i didn't think of it as a prob not having read homer.. the movie stunk anyways... it doesn't matter if i have a book that tells me the story EXACLY to where the last blooddrop fell or not. this is a very bad to a little past bad film...

i think that if you are going to make amovie about a war this big... this remembered and this important and so on.. you should do it right. they gave us more then we needed.. they also twisted sometings... like the whole thing with achillis and the cusin of paris and hector.... it didn't happen.. she ended up a cuncubine... it was unneeded and untrue... just a hollywood twist on it... more love or what ever.... parst of the movie are okay... moste of it is .. well Cra*

if they didn't have the lovething with that woman and achillis, we wouldn't ahve to see him look for her in the end, and he might have been killed BEFORE the horse....

and i'm not saying that we should sit through a gone with the wind no.2, i'm just saying that they should have informed the audience that the war didn't last a week or so....
i also think that if you are going to make a movie of an historic vent.. well you could do it better then this...

also some of the acting was, well alittle bad. to be this big of a film... the acting wasn't good enough. (and when i say bad acting i mean the voices... like the woman playing helen....)

it also seems that they wanted to have a whole LotR feel to it... mixed with the gladiater or something(hey i might be wrong, but that's the feel i get...)

i might sound a bit harsh writing this , but i wasn't happy at all with what i saw in the theater. i thought i was going to see a great film and i ended up with something that is a one on the dice(and that i can't give it zero, and they had some good fight scenes.) this is not a film i would recomened to anyone, not even BP fans... and sertainly not OB fans.. cause man did he luck-out.
 
faiths5x5 said:
nopers, no armor stealing...hey kd, you prolly remember, its been to long for me but,...who kills achilles?....in the movie its not who i thought it was...tho i might have remembered wrong...didn't like the romance bit that much either. twas aight, but...eh...
Click to expand...

I'm at kind of a disadvantage since I haven't seen the movie yet...so I don't know what they've changed or rewritten.

Paris indeed kills Achilles with a bow...Homer foreshadows this in the Iliad when he alludes to "falling to a God-directed arrow". It is insinuated that Paris took a long shot from cover and Apollo helped it along, (a cowardly act, according to Homer).

A book recap:

In the book, Briseis was Achilles's property as a spoil of war, awarded to him for his valour in the sacking of Parnassus, a city under the rule of Troy. She was stolen by Agamemmnon, and Achilles pouted in his tent. He was fond of her, and there is an allusion to "sharing [his] bed", but the strongest subtext is the connection between Patroclus and Achilles ( I really don't know if this even made it to the movie). Achilles allows Patroclus to use his armour to save the ships, but Hector kills Patroclus when Patroclus disobeys orders and fights for too long. Achilles gets armour from Hephaestus via his mother, and kills Hector in one to one combat. The Iliad itself ends with Hector's funeral. It only covers about six weeks worth of time in a 9 year war.

The Amazons and the Ethiopians come soon after that, and Achilles kills the Amazon leader (Penthisalia, I think) and Memmnon the Ethiopian king and son of Zeus. Achilles is killed soon after. Odysseus develops the horse, and Troy falls with Achilles's son playing a large part in the fighting.

My take on the heel thing is that Achilles could be hurt, but could not be killed unless the special place on his heel was hit...it was like a switch, that once it was hit, he lost any advantage of the magic involved, and his other wounds would have full effect on him without the magical protection.

And Ninjalizer is right...you should read the original...but get a more modern translation...if you don't it'll be like reading the King James version of the bible...all "thee" and "thou". After all you wouldn't read someone's condensed version of Lord of the Rings, would you?
 
killerdwarf: 🙂
i know that was what happens.... i just didn't bother to recount the whole story(sometimes it can be stress full to be stressed and to think and write alot in english because of the spelling) in the book i read they just recap the highs of the story... and other things... so i know what happend that's not really the prob. i know the original book would be more out filling, but the one i read is just as good... and parsi wasn't alive at the end... i do understand small changes like ac not draging hector around the WHOLE city of troy... the way they showed that was effectiv enough and the fight scene and after was a good one... when the king of troy comes to get hector back and so on.... i just don't like the big changes...

an example:
in practical magick the movie you get a sertain ide of the story... and then you think that's how the book is... the you read the book and you see ALOT of differnces... this is fiction...

in troy: which is based on a book about an important event.. they should have been more picky in what they choos to include and exclude.... so that people don't go around thinking that 'oh so that is what happens'

🙂 i'm going to go away now! enjoy your evening or day, whatever state of this beautiful may day you are in!
 
that's true. hope i didn't ruin anything or anything for ya. it was ok but...a bit of let down for me. i knew something was up with achille's death, sides the lady with him...
i was hoping it'd be a lil closer to what happened but..it was aight, but....
it didn't. unless it was so very hidden that i couldn't pick it up when i was purposely looking for it, i may be a bit dense in that area but...it was prolly the first hinting of anything that i ever read and got so...
after i heard of the lack of the gods, i wasn't expecting them to follow with what i had read. 🙁
i shan't go any further in, so you can watch the movie and see and...i dun wanna ruin it for ya. enjoy it 😀
 
polexia said:
killerdwarf: 🙂
i know that was what happens.... i just didn't bother to recount the whole story(sometimes it can be stress full to be stressed and to think and write alot in english because of the spelling) in the book i read they just recap the highs of the story... and other things... so i know what happend that's not really the prob. i know the original book would be more out filling, but the one i read is just as good... and parsi wasn't alive at the end... i do understand small changes like ac not draging hector around the WHOLE city of troy... the way they showed that was effectiv enough and the fight scene and after was a good one... when the king of troy comes to get hector back and so on.... i just don't like the big changes...

an example:
in practical magick the movie you get a sertain ide of the story... and then you think that's how the book is... the you read the book and you see ALOT of differnces... this is fiction...

in troy: which is based on a book about an important event.. they should have been more picky in what they choos to include and exclude.... so that people don't go around thinking that 'oh so that is what happens'

🙂 i'm going to go away now! enjoy your evening or day, whatever state of this beautiful may day you are in!
Click to expand...

Your English is fine...a lot better than my Norwegian for sure, so I salute you 🙂 !

You're making me not want to see the movie if they've taken that many liberties with the story...I agree, they should be more picky with what they change and omit! I wasn't attacking you or anything...I just didn't know how much you actually knew about the story! You know a whole lot! And good evening to you, too!🙂
 
i'd go see it, as cheap as possible, just so i know i'm not being a pain....😀....lol nah, its...not that bad...but...itll never make it into my fave movies....
oh i forgot to say what i meant with the hintings and stuff in the last post, achilles and patro...see they were all cousiny....so...
 
Isn't there a version of the story where Achilles rapes one Priam's sons, or something. As I recall it goes something like Achilles offers to spare Priam's son if he'll give him a little sugar. The son refuses, so Achilles hauls him into a temple, where he rapes, and kills him. I don't see Brad Pitt going for that version though (not good for the image).

I know there's a version where Achilles starts planting big wet ones over the corpse of Patroclus. Actually the story makes more sense when you show Achilles and Patroclus as being lovers. That's why Achilles freaked out, and had to get into the battle, after Partroclus was killed.

Do they show any of that in the movie?
 
no. no and more no. everyone was all straight. it was the first subtexty type thing that i ever noticed and it wasn't there anymore 🙁 he just wigged cuz it was his cousin and...something else....i dunno how much it matters...but...
 
Hang on for a sec there Faith 5X5. I'm going to hit Google. I'll be right back...
 
nerd4hire said:
Isn't there a version of the story where Achilles rapes one Priam's sons, or something. As I recall it goes something like Achilles offers to spare Priam's son if he'll give him a little sugar. The son refuses, so Achilles hauls him into a temple, where he rapes, and kills him. I don't see Brad Pitt going for that version though (not good for the image).
Click to expand...

I've never heard that version of the story. Sounds like a much later addition. In the Iliad, Achilles sacrifices 12 "highborn" youths of Troy on Patroclus's funeral pyre (slits their throats). One does offer lotsa money and other "comfort" to save himself, but Achilles does him in anyway.

nerd4hire said:
I know there's a version where Achilles starts planting big wet ones over the corpse of Patroclus. Actually the story makes more sense when you show Achilles and Patroclus as being lovers. That's why Achilles freaked out, and had to get into the battle, after Partroclus was killed.
Click to expand...

He does this in the Iliad ^^. And the unspoken subtext is that they were more than friends...they grew up in the same household, after all, and the implication is that they were indeed lovers.
 
Ah here we go F 5X5. Took a little longer to find something than I thought. Achilles limp wrist

Here's a blurb:

as soon as the Greeks reached the Trojan shore, they joined battle with the defenders. Among them was Troilus, the nineteen year old son of Priam, the king of Troy. It had been foretold that if he lived to the age of twenty, Troy would not fall, but that was not to be. Achilles was overtaken with desire for him as they were fighting. "I will kill you, unless you yield to my caresses," threatened the hero. The youth refused, and ran to hide inside a temple of Apollo, but Achilles barged in, offending the god, and since the young man still resisted, beheaded him upon the altar.
Click to expand...

KD, I had a prof that was big on all that sub-texty stuff. He was fond of pointing out The Iliad was oral tradition, and usually Homer would recite it in front of large households. He had certain censorship restrictions. If you look at passages like the bit where Patroclus follows Achilles out of the council tent, you can see how Homer has organized it in such a way that with a single flowery gesture as he tells the story it becomes instantly obvious what Achilles and Patroclus are all about. It's kind of like the way they do modern cartoons, where there's stuff buried for adults, but the show is fine for kids, because they don't have the references to notice what's really being said.
 
i haven't read that version yet. i remember the dressing up as a girl thing tho. not the war trumpet. version of that i read there were a few tables one with weapons, which was the one that achilles stayed at. which...wouldn't he need to be just a lil androgynous? or...i dunno, i don't think they were that dense...i know it didn't much matter guy or girl back then, at least not so much as it does now.
i wasn't really expecting them to follow the sub-texty stuff from the Illiad, hoping but not expecting. I was hoping for them to kill Achilles at the right time tho. I was also really hoping for the god's to be in it, as they sorta factored in it a bit but...🙁
it was ok, coulda been so much better but...lots of people i know loved it, but...i know the one just liked it for the pitt-ness of it, i'm not sure any of them read a lot of greek myths, so they might not know, i know we read the odyssey in class but....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom