So average it hurts

Rating: 6/10 (25 May 2004)

This film is so average it makes me want to dislike it more than is strictly fair.
The actors were almost universally below par, even the likes of Peter O'Toole which is a great shame. For the duration of the film I was hoping that someone would give the ever-infuriating Orlando Bloom the kicking that he so clearly deserved (how on earth has he convinced Hollywood that he can act!?!?!?), Brad Pitt was given some fairly shocking dialogue to deliver and ended up competing with Brian Cox for the most overly-grand performance award. Only Eric Bana and Sean Bean did themselves justice, though surely the woeful script writing team should take most of the blame.
The character development was minimal and with such a rich original to work from this is unforgivable. In the first half of the film we are reminded about half a dozen times in the most unsubtle manner that Achilles is in it for the glory. That is his motivation taken care of. Then we learn that Agammemnon is something of a megalomaniac. That takes care of his character.
Hector is the all round good guy fighting someone else's war (cut to cute shots of him with his wife and kid). Paris and Helen spend a good five minutes wrestling with the guilt and then figure what the hell, we are young and pretty and can't possibly get our come-uppance in this piece of Hollywood schamltz.
Finally there is the dialogue, the biggest weakness of this film. Almost every speech is delivered as if it was the climax of the greatest epic ever made. Imagine every conversation conducted as if it was Russell Crowe in Gladiator revealing himself to the upstart emperor (Pheonix). It is beyond over the top and grates from start to finish.
The fight scenes are impressive, especially the showdown between Hector and Achilles, but it is not as if the result is ever in the balance. As for the scale, I only appreciated when watching Troy just how high Lord of the Rings had raised the bar. A valiant effort was found wanting in almost every department as it could just not match the tension, the balance between the individual characters and the overall sweep nor the detail of the Rings films.
Perhaps a lesson reveals itself in all this: Tolkien and Homer essentially wrote similar stories involving strong and memorable characters, long time-scales, detailed mythologies and themes of sacrifice and greed etc etc.
The LOTR scriptwriters tried to stay a lot more faithful to the strengths of their source while one gets the feeling that with Troy the makers just wanted a summer blockbuster and Homer provided a must on which to hang their budget. What a pity, they have squandered a magnificent opportunity.
Still, Helen looked nice...
PS A different reviewer seemed to think that a better option would be to see Van Helsing. I could not disagree more, for all its faults Troy is a whole universe better than Van Helsing, which is among the worst pieces of cinema I have ever had the displeasure to endure.