Meant to be a blockbuster, but comes across as a TNT miniseries

Rating: 7/10 (1 May 2005)

This is a very curious case of the whole being less than the sum of its parts. The supporting cast is very strong, the big stars do a creditable job, and there is great photography, wonderful sets and costumes, and soundtrack. but somehow it just doesn't have the impact of a major Hollywood movie. In spite of the big screen "A" list production values, somehow this version of the Iliad looks as if it should have been done as a 2-5 part miniseries for one of the cable channels.
I think part of the problem is the way the whole siege of Troy is chopped down so that somehow the whole thing seems to take maybe a week to 10 days, instead of the years and years of the original story. You get no sense of a lengthy siege, or of repeated skirmishes and ebbs and flows in the morale and effectiveness of the troops on each side. Instead you have the thrust for the capital, a counter attack that pushes the Greeks back, a bit of waiting, a skirmish where Achilles' friend dies, the duel between Achilles and Hector, and the actual incident with the Horse. And that's about it for the "war".
Another part of the problem is Brad Pitt. The film chooses to play his character Achilles as a sullen, fey (in the 'doomed' sense of the word ) passive-aggressive battle Diva who only fights for people he respects (or likes) or for personal glory. I realize that a lot of the actual Iliad is spent with Achilles sulking in his tent and the Greek commanders trying to get him to come out and fight for them, but Pitt just isn't imposing enough a presence to justify all this fuss in the film. Yes, he's buff, but he isn't dangerous or legendary looking, just kind of weary and sullen and glum. (BTW I'm not a Pitt basher on principle - I thought he was hilarious and believable as the Gypsy bare-knuckle boxing champ in 'Snatch' and as Tyler Durden in 'Fight Club').
Similarly, the director and the main actors all seem to choose to play their historical counterparts as limited, self-aware, troubled men who seem overburdened by the demands of their stations and of the war. The one exception is King Agamemmnon, who is a completely despicable one dimensional power monger. Oddly, he is also perhaps the most compelling figure in the movie - perhaps this is because Brian Cox is capable of playing some of the most menacing villains and bad guys in the history of film. (As good as Anthony Hopkins' version of Hannibal Lector was,Cox's was even better and more subtle). So possibly going for the 'human' dimension of the main characters in the Trojan war made the actual epic scale of the conflict shrink somewhat.
One high point in the film is the early duel between Paris and Menelaus (Helen's cuckolded husband). Watching Brendon Gleeson play Menelaus as a huge, scary, burly warrior in a towering rage, it's hard to believe that this is the same actor who played the sad-sack hick sheriff in "Lake Placid", or the amiable father who offers refuge to the lovers in "28 Days Later". That's amazing range in a heavyset middle aged male actor. And Orlando Bloom keeps his ego out of the picture (this is the guy who played the invincible Elven warrior Legolas in LOTR, remember) and lets reality rule as Menelaus absolutely demolishes the smaller, younger Paris and sends him crawling to his brother for help. That, to me, was cool film making.
I enjoyed the film quite a bit, and admired quite a few things about it, but nevertheless felt somewhat let down. But I'd watch it again, and probably enjoy it more, on the small screen.