Mythology Purists Go Home

Rating: 9/10 (30 January 2005)

****Spoilers Within*****
I usually don't like to respond to other reviews but after seeing this movie I was interested to see what IMDb addicts like myself thought and was thoroughly disappointed to see some of the trashing it got though I expected some of it.
First off, this movie is INSPIRED by the Iliad, it's not meant to be a totally accurate portrayal of it. Secondly, just how can you have a "historically accurate" film of a Greek myth? The concept in and of itself is laughable. The other fact being there are literally hundreds of translations of the Iliad so you can take your pick of which of the hundreds you would like to be true to if you're making a film.
I believe the approach that Petersen (a true auteur director of our day) was trying to take was imagine that these events really did happen, what would they look like? I like the interpretation and if you like that interpretation you'll like that film. If you're gonzo about a film sticking to its source material you won't like it, but you knew you wouldn't like it in the first place wouldn't you? I don't think audiences would be too enthralled to know that Hector's son was thrown from the walls of Troy when the city was sacked. Of course the purists would have just assumed the movie ended before Achilles dies or the Trojan Horse is employed, or the film should not cover what led up to the Trojan War because none of those events are depicted in The Illiad. Issues unresolved lead either to sequels or bad movies and i don't think sequels were on their minds when they made this film.
Now, how about we talk about the movie? To me, this is the finest work Pitt (Achilles) has done since 12 Monkeys, he is absolutely superb and I am not a big fan. I believe he portrays the essence of Homer's Achilles -- a person living within a life already determined for him ("I was born, and this is what I am") who then is forced to question whether that life that he thought was just and honorable really is after all. The way he carries himself and his athletic performance are absolutely first rate and not something he is normally identified with. Overall a job very well done.
Eric Bana (Hector) steals the film and rightfully so because most people who walk away from The Iliad leave it thinking the story is really about Hector more than Achilles or the Greeks. He gives another glimpse inside the warrior mentality but unlike the lone-wolf, solitary warrior he portrays in Blackhawk Down, he's a man fighting for his family, his home and his way of life. It is at the moment that Priam (Peter O'Toole in another great performance) tells Achilles all that he has lost that Achilles realizes who the true immortal hero should be and it is not himself. Bana's portrayal brings the audience to that point and I think it brilliantly illustrated the underlining subtext of what The Iliad is about in the end.
The gods and goddesses and their interferences, games, and tricks that take such a major part in The Iliad and made it interesting in its time have been told over and over again. A focus on the HUMAN side of these events and what all the characters would be if left to their human limitations has not been done before and for that Petersen is to be applauded. This film does an excellent job, in a short amount of time, in conveying those ideas in an entertaining way. To me, the concept of this film is to depict actual events that could have inspired Homer to write his mythological masterpiece, approach the film in that manner and you'll likely enjoy it. Approach it as if it is supposed to be an "accurate" reflection of something that is myth and you will certainly be disappointed. You should just ask yourself, isn't accurately depicting myth an oxymoron?