Beware of Hollywood bearing Greek skits.

Rating: 3/10 (19 June 2007)

I read in some of the reviews, within this site, of how historically balanced and/or accurate Troy is. In what alternate reality or universe would that be in? This movie is historically and geographically inaccurate from the get go. If you visit Sparta and then visit the ancient areas of Menelaos or Agamemnon, you will realize that the nearest beach is about 30 miles away, not port cities as the opening of the movie portrays. Second, if you should read the Iliad you would see that: A) Menelaos does not die, but in fact is reunited with Helen and both go back to Sparta. B) There were two characters named Ajax, and they did not die on the beach. C) The war lasted 10 years, not a few weeks as portrayed in the movie. D) Achilles and Petrocles were lovers, not cousins.
I could go on, but what is the use. Hollywood did it once again, deciding to take what is already a great epic, with great characters and great plots and twist them into a mindless spectacle (as they Did with "Alexander" and "Kingdom of Heaven").
I also find it old and irritating that the same character actors who portray Barbarians, or other medieval warriors, are here portraying Greeks. Are there not enough actors, or make up artists, to make actors look and sound like the characters they are supposed to be portraying? Must English (or for that matter, Irish or American) actors sound English? Even on the shores of Troy and in the palaces of Peloponneso?
If you read any review that tells you this movie is in any way faithful or close to or has only slight variances to the real Iliad, please inform them to either take a Western Humanities I college course, or to pick up a copy of the Iliad and read it before they go on to make such blatantly incredible statements.
The irony is, that the director could have stuck with the original poem as story line, and it would have been more interesting in suspense, character development, drama and alike, than the movie they made.
But why do that, the Iliad has only been around for approximately 2800 years, where as Hollywood has been around for approximately 100 years. Of course the latter would know better what the former was trying to articulate and do it so much better.
As far as the acting, Pitt and Bana are excellent, and the movie oscillates in drama and action between these two. Bloom does not convince me of anything in the movie, let alone a Lover and stealer of other men's' women. This is where the idea of Helen, being given to him as a prize for naming a most beautiful Goddess, would come in handy, for Bloom does not have what it takes to steal another man's wife. His best acting came when he had to portray the real Paris, as sniveling, kneeling coward begging for his life. Peter O'Toole is a great actor, one of my favorites, but this movie was not for him.
Final assessment: some great acting by a few, the cut and paste warriors is old, the scenery is magnificent, the history is laughable, and finally, when will Hollywood even attempt to get something right?