Mostly agree with these shortcomings. I dunno, it's been ten years since I read the Iliad, and almost as long since watching the movie, but I seem to remember Hector definitely being aware he was going to his death. Maybe it doesn't make as much sense for him to perceive Achilles as invincible in the movie, since it shies away from the River Styx dunking, but I think the movie accurately portrays Hector of the poem in his dutifully going to his doom. His reluctance checks out, given that he runs around the city a bunch before turning to face Achilles in combat.
My other problems are:
1) not enough Odysseus
2) the movie clearly wants the audience to prefer the Trojans over the Greeks
3) no gods
4) Paris still alive at the end (I know you already mentioned this, but it bears repeating)
If I remember correctly, Hector runs around the city because he's trying to delay the fight so that Achilles will calm down enough for Hector to reason with him, not necessarily because he's scared of fighting Achilles.
I 100% agree with you about the movie needing more Odysseus (shoutout to Sean Bean), and about how the writers go overboard with vilifying the Greeks.
I must say that though you predicted I'd tear you a new one, while I love this movie... I gotta admit that I really do agree with your points on it. You're quite right about the diminishment of Menelaus, while I do think he should be portrayed as a villain, there's such a thing as nuance and depth, and this movie missed the boat on that one.
Hektor should be portrayed as more than just a mope, and then there's the major fight that while I love does have some issues.
I gotta include this one on Saturday in S&S. You make a lot of great points Josh, and damn but I really can't wait to get you on the show, if only to get the regular podcast out of the way so we could in a few months just do a Greek/Roman movie podcast geeking out about ancient Greece/Rome!
Nice post, man. I especially agree with points 2 and 3, and I'd add: why on earth did Achilles need to use a shield or armor? He could have just as easily fought bare-chested like one of the 300 Spartans.
I haven’t seen this movie in ages, but I remember liking it when I was younger. Another interesting casting choice was Sean Bean as Odysseus. I’m saddened we never got a proper adaptation of The Odyssey starring Sean Bean (plus spoilers, he would survive) Maybe that’s why Hollyweird didn’t make it, because they love to kill Sean Bean for some reason. lol!
One point about your third thought (Achilles vs. Hector) -- this actually would have made more sense if the movie had portrayed Achilles as the demigod of the Iliad as opposed to the supremely skilled but still mere mortal that was shown in the movie. At least if he were half-god the fight being so one-sided would've made some sort of sense.
“Similar to Gandalf (among others) in Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings film trilogy, the filmmakers decided to subvert a powerful and noble hero by transforming him into a nihilistic defeatist.”
Excuse me sir, but I’m going to need you to expound upon this. Is this subtle shade being thrown at Gandalf (Ian McKellen’s portrayal)?
Absolutely not! Ian McKellan is obviously unimpeachable as Gandalf. It's more to do with the inexplicable doom and gloom attitude the writers gave the character.
Wow! Missed the really big one, that Patroclus was likely Achilles’ lover and most definitely not his cousin. Hollywood of the early 2000s was too afraid of that inconvenient truth.
Well, it's certainly true they weren't cousins in The Iliad, but it's also true that there's nothing in the original text to suggest they were lovers. That interpretation of their relationship came later on. Alexander was released around the same time period, and that movie explicitly showed that Hephaestion and Alexander were lovers, so I don't think they would've been shy about adding it into Troy if they felt it was pertinent to the story.
Mostly agree with these shortcomings. I dunno, it's been ten years since I read the Iliad, and almost as long since watching the movie, but I seem to remember Hector definitely being aware he was going to his death. Maybe it doesn't make as much sense for him to perceive Achilles as invincible in the movie, since it shies away from the River Styx dunking, but I think the movie accurately portrays Hector of the poem in his dutifully going to his doom. His reluctance checks out, given that he runs around the city a bunch before turning to face Achilles in combat.
My other problems are:
1) not enough Odysseus
2) the movie clearly wants the audience to prefer the Trojans over the Greeks
3) no gods
4) Paris still alive at the end (I know you already mentioned this, but it bears repeating)
If I remember correctly, Hector runs around the city because he's trying to delay the fight so that Achilles will calm down enough for Hector to reason with him, not necessarily because he's scared of fighting Achilles.
I 100% agree with you about the movie needing more Odysseus (shoutout to Sean Bean), and about how the writers go overboard with vilifying the Greeks.
I didn't remember the scene well enough, so I found an online translation (Alexander Pope on wikipedia). It does sound like Hector's spirit fails him and he runs away (book XXII, line 179). https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%3AHomer_-_Iliad%2C_translation_Pope%2C_1909.djvu/395
But when Hector stops running he does turn and try to reason with Achilles!
I must say that though you predicted I'd tear you a new one, while I love this movie... I gotta admit that I really do agree with your points on it. You're quite right about the diminishment of Menelaus, while I do think he should be portrayed as a villain, there's such a thing as nuance and depth, and this movie missed the boat on that one.
Hektor should be portrayed as more than just a mope, and then there's the major fight that while I love does have some issues.
I gotta include this one on Saturday in S&S. You make a lot of great points Josh, and damn but I really can't wait to get you on the show, if only to get the regular podcast out of the way so we could in a few months just do a Greek/Roman movie podcast geeking out about ancient Greece/Rome!
Have you ever seen “Helen of Troy”? Not as big of a budget but I liked the writing better.
I'm sure I saw it at some point in the distant past. I was all about those epic TV miniseries back in the day.
Nice post, man. I especially agree with points 2 and 3, and I'd add: why on earth did Achilles need to use a shield or armor? He could have just as easily fought bare-chested like one of the 300 Spartans.
I haven’t seen this movie in ages, but I remember liking it when I was younger. Another interesting casting choice was Sean Bean as Odysseus. I’m saddened we never got a proper adaptation of The Odyssey starring Sean Bean (plus spoilers, he would survive) Maybe that’s why Hollyweird didn’t make it, because they love to kill Sean Bean for some reason. lol!
One point about your third thought (Achilles vs. Hector) -- this actually would have made more sense if the movie had portrayed Achilles as the demigod of the Iliad as opposed to the supremely skilled but still mere mortal that was shown in the movie. At least if he were half-god the fight being so one-sided would've made some sort of sense.
My thoughts exactly. They tried to have it both ways, and it just doesn't work with the more realistic approach of the rest of the movie.
“Similar to Gandalf (among others) in Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings film trilogy, the filmmakers decided to subvert a powerful and noble hero by transforming him into a nihilistic defeatist.”
Excuse me sir, but I’m going to need you to expound upon this. Is this subtle shade being thrown at Gandalf (Ian McKellen’s portrayal)?
Absolutely not! Ian McKellan is obviously unimpeachable as Gandalf. It's more to do with the inexplicable doom and gloom attitude the writers gave the character.
Okay, our friendship is still in tact then!
One Thing I Love About Troy: watching it with my Mister.
😍😘
Wow! Missed the really big one, that Patroclus was likely Achilles’ lover and most definitely not his cousin. Hollywood of the early 2000s was too afraid of that inconvenient truth.
Well, it's certainly true they weren't cousins in The Iliad, but it's also true that there's nothing in the original text to suggest they were lovers. That interpretation of their relationship came later on. Alexander was released around the same time period, and that movie explicitly showed that Hephaestion and Alexander were lovers, so I don't think they would've been shy about adding it into Troy if they felt it was pertinent to the story.