Their bad.

Rating: Null/10 (15 May 2005)

(Never have so many missed so much.
Fist, who is this Homer that wrote the poems, accompanied by lute, the two songs, The Ilyad and The Odyssey? A first year student knows that there is but one survivor, Odysseus, Song of Zeus "brackets not allowed" Son of Zeus, which is to say, Son of God. And these are his stories. Because only he survived, there can be no other Author than this king, of the Achayans and Ithaca (the rocky island), Odyesseus, whom many have tried to rename as Hercules, aka, Herakles, son of Hera, which Odysseus was not. That would be Ars, not Aries whom the Romans called Apollo (again, not Apollyon his antithesis of the Roman Herodians) who, when felled by Pallas Athena, goddess and sister of Odysseus, through their Father Zeus, created the Seven Hills of Rome, and where Romulus and Remus claimed their Spartan ancestry. ("wherefrom" was edited by the site speller, apparently, a non-English speaking native.)
Second, what are both the Ilyad and the Odyssey about? The life of Odysseus. No more, no less. Ilyum, erroneously called "Troy" again by the Herodians, is the land of the Hitites and bears their symbol, the Swastika, which 3,000 years later was to be embraced by the Nazi's in a vain attempt to claim lineage from them.
It is a hill about 12 miles south of Phildelphia in Turkey.
The Turks, in their white slave trading habits (how Priam got so rich), have kidnapped Helen.
The first epoch, The Ilyad, is the united Greek Empire punishing these Eastern civilizations for their slave trade of Greek women.
The second epoch, The Odyssey, is about the sole survivor's return home to the treachery in the now capital of the empire. The politicians to be most bloodily slain for their own transgressions against the king, the recognized ("reconised" edited by bonehead speller) son of the Greek king of the gods, Zeus.
If Odyesseus is not the focal point of the story, then the story is false. And in history when falsehoods replace truth via poetic license, it is called propaganda, or, a lie. A prettied pictured as given by the men who rewrite history past. You cannot take poetic license with a poem. Period. You can only tell a lie thereby. The poet does not grant to Hollywood any such license to alter his works. And there is the Amercian tragedy, they do it anyway because they "think" they are artists; worse, they "think" they are poets. A poet and an artist is the man who lives the story and writes about it, and never the ones who simply rewrite it for personal gain and fortune.
Had the actual epoch been read, and the proper research done, it would have been quite clear to both recent filmmakers that their vision was blind. Not just in the account, but severely in the cast.
The same university scholars that acclaim these films are from those institutions that also called Heinrich Schliemann a fool for thinking the Trojan War was anything more than a myth, and then reversed face when the first archaeologist ("archaeologist edited by bonehead speller). (The sound is Latin, bonehead, "ae" pronounced "a" not "e") taught the universities the first real archeology (bonedhead edit two on ("archaeology") while proving the fact of The Ilyad and The Odyssey.
And throughout this they have all missed the basis of the Swastika, symbol of the Hitites and their rebirth as ash can ("ashkenazi" edited by bonehead who obviously does not know Hebrew), as opposed to edit far deem, ("sephardim" edited by bonehead, who needs to go to school to learn how to spell, and learn some poetry and art).
In the end, the two films are the myths, and the epochs are the facts as misrepresented and entirely not entertaining versions of the not entertaining industry thereby. You cannot justify the "cutting" floor by revenues. How many times will the "dudes" in Hollywood make this mistake and blame others before admitting their own myopic not creative vision?
A cell phone with Internet would be more entertaining than a cast of LA's who have no idea of what part they are playing in LaLaland.
And one other fact they all missed. To feed 100,000 soldiers, you pit broil cows ("heffers" edit). Thus, the sacrifice to the gods is that of feeding your army. And what exactly happens when you fail to do this? Don't 100,000 men get a little riled about this and impose the will of the gods? What did you think? That Zeus cared all that much about a few cows and not about feeding his followers? Historians and Hollywood, two blind directors they have heard somewhere, but not being the "traveller," the Bard, have no idea of what the Warrior was talking about. (edit too long; again, bonehead site) Where was all this "vision" by these two directors and these two casts? With the Cyclops, obviously.
Kirk Douglas still rules as the only one to get the part right, and his director to get the story right.
And neither these two directors nor casts of this end of our millennium set of inept even comes close. These productions are so "mish-mosh" edit by bonehead and watered down for some PG rating attempt, that they hang like an albatross about Beverly Hills. A Know Nothing story by Know Nothing story repeaters. How then do they question the box office flops?
Thank God Hollywood rejected "The Lord Of The Rings." Else Tolkien and the history of Midgarde as well would have been a LaLaland "candycane".
Claim what you will, but do not claim the existence of "vision" in Hollywood. It is the vision of the idiot bonehead who did the spelling for a movie site. How stupid can you get?