Hard to swallow that Achilles is portrayed through most of Troy as an uncaring, selfish, s.o.b. Yet in the last 30 minutes he does a 360o and becomes the opposite of what he was for most of the film.
shareI guess he was never really an SOB sure he was arrogant but he always believed in right and wrong. He always had honor and respected the good kings even if they were his enemies.
He spends most the movie pouting in his tent
shareStrange, I didn't really see him that way even early in the movie. He was arrogant, brash, somewhat immature in some ways, and could be a real ass hat when he was royally pissed. But he was never a pure rear end, at least I didn't think so. He definitely had some principles and certainly cared for his cousin Patroclus as well as even Breseus in the end. He correctly identified Agamemnon as a tyrant and a pig, and at first had no interest in going to war or fighting for him, which indicated some moral code. In the end his hunger for glory overrode that though, but he also wanted to leave the war as soon as Agamemnon humiliated him over Breseus, but they were never really reconciled. He was motivated by other factors, to go and kill Hector he was motivated by greef and revenge, and he stayed with the Greeks to sack Troy primarily to get Briseus out. But he sent his men home so they wouldn't be a part of that.
shareIf you truly believe that's all he did in that tent you weren't paying very close attention.
shareEveryone has their breaking point; he'd had enough killing.
shareWell, that's part of it maybe. But also, think about his reasons for going in the first place. His mother prophesied that if he went, he would not come home but would win enough glory for himself that his name would live forever. So part of him understood from the first that he was doomed, but doomed with a plus; he would be famous forever, which is what he wanted. By the time the sack of the city is going on, he's pretty much got what he was after. And since he got to spend time with Briseis, and met Hector and Priam, I think he stopped seeing the Trojans as enemies. He saw them as people, people who were suffering for the greed of Agamemnon.
Whores will have their trinkets.
To be honest, after my first glimpse of Brad's bare body, I was too busy drooling to notice how his characterization of Achilles was.
shareMost of us shared that feeling on our first watch of this film.
I later did pay attention to everything else but on my first watch of this flick I only cared for the hot men of the movie.
Many years latter Thor The dark world also had that effect on me. I don’t remember much about the plot or anything just Chris Hemsworth looking super hot.
I don't go for the Brad Pitt persuasion, but my "type" got introduced to Diane Kruger, so it's all good.
But I do know that Pitt and Bana, in particular, looked like they stepped out of the marble for this one, and the fact that the characters look like living myths is one more piece on the "plus" column for the movie. It's grown on me over time, I think it's cool.
It’s a Pretty good blockbuster to enjoy for the action and eye candy.
It’s more of an epic blockbuster to watch in theaters than an Oscar drama that many people wanted it to be.
I’d like to see a remake with this casting
Chris Hemsworth- Achilles
Henry Cavil-Hector
Paris - Kit Harrington
Agamemnon-Brad Pitt
Yeah, it's a blockbuster film, not so much a drama. I think they could have had both, if they had wanted, but the studio would have had to green light a 3 hour film (or longer) to accommodate all of it. I think they could have done it, too. I think one of my favourite aspects of this film, weird as it sounds, is the choreography. The fight between Achilles and Hector really shows off the two fighting styles, and while we see Hector's ability and skill, we also see why he's the best of the mortals, but Achilles' power, grace, acumen, and even wrath are godlike.
A remake would be cool, because maybe they could hit what they were going for in the first place, and actually make a spectacle action film AND a gripping drama. They'd need somebody who understood Old Hollywood films like Ben-Hur, though.
Those are good choices for the main cast, if a remake were attempted. Seeing Pitt as Agamemnon would be interesting.
Here are my choices:
Achilles - Michael Fassbender
Hector - Tom Hardy
Agamemnon - Daniel Craig
I'd add:
Priam - Patrick Stewart
I don't really have a Paris, although maybe Tom Holland?
Helen would be one of the hardest to cast, and I don't really have a good choice there, either.
For Hellen I thought: Lily Collins. That girl is just stunningly beautiful few actresses I think are as beautiful as she is.
Briseis could be Anya Taylor Joy because right now she is the same age Rose Bryne was when she did Troy or I was also thinking about Margot Robbie.
And Hector’s wife Gal Gadot.
I like your cast too not bad at all, but I really think Chris Hemsworth needs to be Achilles because of how much he reminds me to a young Brad Pitt.
Ohh and Brad Pitt returning this time as a bad guy would be nice wink to the fans of this version.
Lily Collins is very pretty, but I'd probably go with Margot Robbie over Collins.
Gal Gadot is a great choice for Andromache!
Chris Hemsworth is a great choice for Achilles, but I have a hard time un-seeing Thor, and I think if he was another mythological combat bro it would make it that much harder to reconcile the difference there. Truthfully, though, he is a great choice. With that said, I still think Fassbender would be a good choice for Achilles. Ten years ago, I'd have bumped Daniel Craig up, actually.
Pitt might also be able to take over as Odysseus, too.
Yes, Margot Robbie might be a better choice looks wise, my only problem is that she might be older than My Paris Kit Harrington.
In the 2004 film Orlando bloom was much younger than Brad Pitt and Eric Bana. So Paris should have a Younger Hellen of Troy.
Fassbender is a great actor and definitely good looking but something about him screams Villain to me, just like Hidleston very good looking but so much villain vibes.
It’s so crazy but there so many stars of today which remind me to a movie star of the 90s
Chris Hemsworth to Brad Pitt.
It’s like I’d cast Hemsworth in every remake of a film where Brad Pitt was the star and if Chris Hemsworth films would have been in the 90s my first choice would have been Brad Pitt starting with Thor or Rush.
Henry Cavil reminds so much to George Clooney with the only difference that Cavil looks do fit well in period pieces like Ancient Greece or duhh the Tudors era and Clooney wouldn’t fit in those kind of movies.
But other than Cavil like Clooney has that posh and cool vibe.
Ryan Gosling has so much Tom Cruise vibe. He is today’s Tom Cruise except less action flicks for Gosling. But have that pretty boy look but a little smugness to them.
Michael Fassbender reminds to Sean Bean. Both good looking and talented but something about them just don’t give me mainstream movie star vibes. Sure they can be leads in more artistic films but don’t give the movie star look.
Tom Hidleston reminds to Ralph Fiennes. Both great looking guys but always fit more villainous parts except when they do John le Carre adaptations.
Tom Hidleston the Night Manager and Ralph Fiennes The Constant Grdener.
I'd rather have Robbie look like a definitive Helen and deal with a Paris-Helen age gap than have a Helen where I look at her and do the Arrested Development, "Her?" (Not that Lily Collins would produce that reaction). Kruger's casting in the original was perfect. You take one look at her and go, "Yeah, that's what Helen should look like."
I think some of my casting choices are because I wouldn't be remaking Troy the film, I'd be looking for another adaptation of the historical-mythological event. So, Chris Hemsworth does have a Brad Pitt vibe and Paris was much younger than Hector in the original film, but I wouldn't want a remake to tread closely to the original. I have the original. I want another take.
Fassbender has Magneto vibes, but in Inglourious Basterds he doesn't come off as a villain (to me, anyway). I think he could do something cool with Achilles, including bringing out more of his "prideful jerk" side.
Cavill's does have a vibe that lets him be in medieval films. Some actors don't. I almost put Bradley Cooper on my list for a potential Odysseus, but I'm not sure Cooper would "translate" to the Classical world. I think he might just scream "contemporary," even though he also is extremely talented, good-looking, and gives off enough of a "crafty" vibe to work for Odysseus.
Did you ever watch Dragonslayer? Old '80s Sword & Sorcery flick. Peter MacNicol stars in it, and while I enjoy the movie as part of that pantheon of '80s S&S stuff, MacNicol always seems like he just walked in from the present day. He's not even doing a bad performance, he just seems contemporary.
Gosling's too "art house" to be Tom Cruise. I know what you mean, but Gosling is focused on indie flicks.
Hiddleston's a good guy in The Deep Blue Sea, too. That's a great catch with Fiennes and Hiddleston both being baddies until they're in a Le Carre film.
So so true on Cavil and Bradley Copper would be an interesting oddyseous. We have never seen him ain’t a period piece but I think he could fit.
It’s funny how some actors do fit medieval times and others just don’t.
And it’s inexplicable how can this happen.
Clooney was in the 90s one of the most attractive men in the business but I just can’t see him on something like Troy or the Tudors.
I have a good feeling that Bradley Cooper can fit in an Ancient Greece type of period piece and who was oddyseous. Was that Sean Bean’s character ?
I just remember well the main characters names and the actors who portrayed them.
there are other characters I remember but always forget their names.
Examples hector’s wife and remember she was portray by Safron Barrows, I also remember Sean Bean was part of Achilles crew but forgot the name of his character.
Another character I always forget his name was Paris and Hector’s father but I know he was portrayed by Peter O’tool
I'd give Cooper a shot. He's a really good actor, so he might pull it off. But "good" doesn't always enter into it. Some actors just read as contemporary irrespective of skill. Tommy Lee Jones has a limit, too. Can you imagine him as a knight commander in some film about the crusades? Neither can I. Yeah, Clooney is definitely contemporary. He's got a really casual speaking style, which doesn't help. It's his demeanour as much as anything.
Yeah, Odysseus was Sean Bean's character. He's the sly fox dude who comes up with plans involving wooden horses. I kinda wished that they did the Odyssey as a sequel to Troy, and actually get Sean Bean home. This is maybe not that important, but Odysseus isn't one of Achilles' crew. Achilles and Odysseus are both kings of different states in Greece. I don't remember Achilles' state's name. Odysseus' was Ithaca. Achilles' warriors are the Myrmidons, who are renowned for their prowess in combat.
Hector's wife is Andromache, Peter O'Toole played King Priam.
I've been a reader of Greek myth since I was young, so a lot of this stuff was rattling around in my skull prior to seeing the film. Just trivia that stuck in there.
Omg Achilles was a king in the myth the Iilaid ?
What a huge change, the film portrayed him just as a revel warrior. Actually in the beginning he says it would be great if king’s fought their own battles.
In the film Aquillies hated kings and mostly hatted Agamemnon and maybe I need To watch the film again but Oddyseous in the movie was very close to Achilles.
Damn the movie changed way too much of the myth. Now a good change they made is: to not include gods as characters. Everything would have been too confusing.
And true Wolfgang should have made the odyssey latter on as sequel damn what a missed opportunity.
Anyway I did enjoy this flick very much as it was but really I’d definitely watch a remake with the right cast.
Yeah, Achilles was a king, although most of those old myths speaking of "kings" doesn't always mean the all-powerful monarch of a vast empire that we picture. Basically, my understanding is that Greece was a bunch of small states who decided to act as one (kinda like the US before the US was the US, although a little less centralised). The Hellenes (how the ancient Greeks referred to themselves - again, from what I recall) ruled themselves, but helped each other out and recognised the authority of a king of all Hellenes. In the Iliad, that's Agammemnon. That's why Aggy can summon the others to war.
So, while Achilles is a king, it would have been a small territory, and his dislike of big rulers still makes sense. He certainly quarrels with Agammemnon in the OG Iliad. The Iliad also basically starts with that argument. Imagine switching Troy on at the scene where Agammemnon takes Briseis from Achilles - that's the start of the poem.
Odysseus in the film does respect Achilles and recognises his power, but I think he is still meant to be part of his own group. I'd have to watch the film again to confirm it, but I think Achilles' guys are all in that one ship. I could be wrong about that.
I liked that they didn't include the gods, but just because then we got a cool sword-and-sandals epic instead of a mythological film. I like those, too, but it's neat to see Greek myth as "history".
How old is Sean Bean? He'd basically be the only holdover character. A touch of de-aging and we're there! Technically there are others in The Odyssey who have roles in Troy, but the film altered it so they die. Agammemnon and his brother Menelaus both make it out, for instance. If they stuck with "real" stories over myths, Odysseus probably wouldn't talk to Achilles' ghost, either, but it'd be cool to have Pitt back for that cameo.
I, too, would watch more Troy-inspired films, if they looked cool. I haven't tried the Netflix show yet.
OMG I love all this trivia data you are giving me it’s so interesting.
Sean Bean with some digital de aging could have his sequel but I doubt Wolfgang Petersen now would like to make the sequel, especially now because he is quite old.
Maybe Nolan could take the challenge. It’s something like I can see him doing either the odyssey or a new take on Iliad
It’s been like 10 years since the last sword and Sandals Hollywood movie. The last one I remember was Pompey with Kit Harrington that’s why he is my Paris.
He was pretty good.
I'm glad you're enjoying the trivia. I love learning about stuff like this, too (hence my enjoyment of Greek mythology).
Yeah, Petersen probably wouldn't be interested. I don't know if Bean would be, either, although the right paycheck might do it. Heck, I have a theory that Sean Bean will take pay cuts if his character survives the movie. He's the only actor where you have to say, "Spoiler alert," before saying he lives at the end.
Nolan could make a great Troy movie. I love Nolan's work, and my only quibble tends to be that he makes his endgames in his films too complicated. Not that I can't follow it, it's that he winds up trying to be so original and unpredictable that he often opens up a bunch of plot holes. It's a small quibble (he's basically trying to give audiences something they haven't seen before, and respecting audiences too much is not the worst thing). But with Troy, he'd have a set plot and he could just focus on making the movie amazing.
With that said, he's also not the best action director, and this story demands amazing battle scenes... I think my choice of director would be Alfonso Cuaron, who gave us Children of Men. He could give us the large scale, incredible combat, and deliver on the drama.
For the Odyssey, if it were being done realistic (no gods, monsters are changed to scary bad guys, witches to seductresses, etc.) again, yeah, Nolan could tackle it. I think I'd want Robert Eggers to do it. His weird semi-fantasy worlds would give us something spooky, but personal.
If they did the Odyssey as a fantasy film, I'd go with Guillermo del Toro. I'm shaking my head at myself a bit - I feel like he's my go-to for fantasy cinema - but his monster design would be amazing, and he is just a solid filmmaker.
True on Nolan complicating things too much and another issue I have with him. It’s like with some exceptions he is not a good actor’s director.
I think he is not interested in making great character, he Is more about writing a good story or interesting plot but his characters are forgettable.
Other directors I could see tackle either the Iliad or the odyssey are: Ridley Scott, Keneth Branagh or Steven Spielberg.
But I have a small problem with Spielberg and that is his vision is too black and white.
Achilles is a sort of grey character and for Spielberg is everything you are good/ you are terribly bad.
Nolan's a director where I see a lot of small flaws, but I think I only see them because he's so good that I notice the minor stuff. He's not a great action director, he gets overly complicated, but boy do I love Inception and The Prestige (among other films). One of my favourites of his is Following, which I think is underrated and far less well-known than his other work.
Great choices. Ridley Scott would be awesome at translating mythology to the screen. (Although I didn't see Exodus, which got poor reviews.)
I'm mostly with you on your evaluation of Spielberg, although he does occasionally find room for a little grey. Saving Private Ryan has a touch here or there (although, he also bookended that film with eye-rolling flag-waving that it didn't need to be patriotic and touching). Still, the dude gave us Jaws, Close Encounters, ET, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Catch Me If You Can, and Bridge of Spies (just to name a few) and he'll always be one of the best.
Darren Aronofsky might be interesting. He's not an action guy, but maybe for the Odyssey his diving into the uncanny elements would be cool.
Or, how about the Odyssey by Brian Henson? Get a little Dark Crystal or Labyrinth up in there (I know those were Jim, but Jim's RIP, more's the pity, and I think Brian could get something similar done).
Yes. Nolan is an amazing director: from the Dark knight trilogy actually my favorite is Batman begins. everyone raves about the dark knight but i like Batman begins the most. ( maybe it’s because I have a soft spot for origins movies of our super hero).
I also enjoyed Dunkirk so much.
Exodus was quite Mehh not awful but just didn’t work for me.
Nw Ridley Scott is one of the best directors of all time so I forgive him the exodus slip up.
Darren Aronofsky could be good too but Noah was also slightly strange for a biblical movie.
Now I’m sad my main choice for Aquillies decided to take a sort break in acting since he found out he has a bigger risk than everyone to get Alzheimer.😢😢😢
He ain’t sick. but he did many blood tests for his Disney plus documentary limitless and found out he has more probabilities than all of us to get the disease.
So he decided to take a break from acting that’s sad and maybe a panicky decision since he is still healthy just has the gene to be in more risk to get it.
I like Batman Begins very much. It's Gotham is WAY better than "Basically Chicago" in TDK. The only things holding it back and elevating TDK are, in my opinion, Katie Holmes as Rachel just doesn't have the presence to sell her assistant DA character; and Heath's performance as Joker. I could've used some more Scarecrow, too - but that's actually a problem I have with the whole trilogy. I really wanted Cillian Murphy's fearsome villain to come back and do some damage, but nah... never happened...
Oh, yeah. Ridley Scott can bunk up a lot of films and between Alien and Blade Runner by themselves, I'll spot him some flops. I also love The Duellists, Gladiator, American Gangster and Black Hawk Down. I didn't mind Robin Hood, although it wasn't great. Kingdom of Heaven's director's cut is pretty great. I still have to see The Martian and Thelma and Louise, though. Oh, and The Last Duel.
I actually didn't see Noah. If I did, I would definitely calibrate myself to "weird" rather than "Cecil B. DeMille," which is what I think people wanted. I think - based on reviews I read - people were expecting some Biblical Epic like DeMille usd to make and they got a weirdo action movie. I'm not saying it's good or bad (I haven't seen it) but I suspect a lot of people went into that film "calibrated" wrong.
Weirdly, I was thinking more of The Fountain, which is this love story about lovers kept apart by time and there's all this weird, beautiful imagery and strange symbolism, and if he did something like that with The Odyssey, it would truly be beautiful.
It is said that Hemsworth is worried about Alzheimer's; I hope he dodges that bullet. However, I always like hearing about celebrities who have their priorities right. He's not worried about fame and fortune, he's worried about his time and loved ones. Good on him.
The other thing is that there are ways to strengthen the mind and reduce and delay the effects of things like Alzheimer's, so he can implement some strategies.
Noah was definitely disappointing to me. I didn’t hate it but expected something better the same Exodus.
I could definitely qualify both as weird and was expecting something great from both but noo.
And with Chris it’s really good he has his priorities straight but sucks for us fans who love to see him in everything he does.
And as I said he is not sick, not even symptoms but just got really scared due to those blood tests telling him has a big risk to get Alzheimer.
Well, according to the Illiad, Achilles was even more irrational and driven by his desires than Agamemnon - kind of hard to make such a character loveable, but it's very possible given the right setting and actors.
Here, Achilles got none. I like Brad Pitt, but here, in this particular movie, he is lacking in stature besides the others, and it looks like what he lacked in stature he made for in arrogance. Worse, the film completely wrapped itself around Pitt as to condone it. Appollo didn't got half the treatment Achilles got.
This would have been a good role for a more mature-looking actor, such as Gerard Butler. Both Troy and Alexander made the mistake of miscasting their main character for the flavour of the day.
Gerard Butler? Sorry, but Gerry's acting is about two notches dimmer than Brad's. He's good in action films, and there's a reason you only see him in such roles. Remember when Gerry did RomComs? P.S. - I love you was probably the only tolerable one but even in that role his exposure was minimal since he was playing a deceased character
share360 would be the same as he was. you meant 180. jesus, read a book.
shareI just assumed he had fallen in love & he had to get to her, before someone else did as he knew what would happen to her. Maybe Love does conquer all
shareI disagree. He's not uncaring so much as he's jaded and cynical. He wants glory and renown, but he's also disgusted at how unscrupulous and vicious Agamemnon is, and recognizes that Helen's only a pretext. He's perceptive and keenly spots the faults of everyone around him -- even the supposedly noble Hector. He mocks Hector at their first meeting, when Achilles tells him to go home and make love to his wife, Hector indignantly asks him "how many wives wait at Troy's gates for husbands they'll never see again?" Achilles replies "perhaps your brother can comfort them; I hear he's good at charming other men's wives." It's a bullseye retort. In just a few words it sums it up: "what did you think was going to happen when you let your prissy little brother take Menelaus's wife away from him? Menelaus, a proud king with an army, and brother to the most powerful ruler in Greece, said brother also just looking for further pretexts for future conquests. And you let Paris bring her to Troy anyway." Hector can't completely escape responsibility for the situation.
Achilles is selfish, but less so than many of the other characters, and he's genuinely loyal to his men and his cousin. His biggest fault is probably a quick temper: his anger and grief at Patroclus' death moves him to act viciously and unjustly himself -- which he recognizes and regrets when Priam comes to plead for the return of Hector's body. He does have nobility as well as flaws in his character, and his love for Briseis brings out the better parts of his nature by moving him to want to be a better man. Note he's also prepared to give up the quest for immortal fame to leave with her. But it's too late, and his fate his set by his earlier choices -- a hallmark of Greek tragedy.
Early in the movie he cared about being remembered in years to come, being someone special. But could see he was starting to have doubts and didnt respect the main king he was fighting for.
He had to be convinced to sail and join the invasion, but after the beach invasion he had the same doubts again after an argument with the main king and at that point decided to leave it behind him.
But then his brother wanting to fight for the greeks put on his armour and led his fighters in to battle, after the death, vengeance took over for a short time before his doubts came back. In the final scenes could see he had set on a new path, but it was too late and his end finally came.
At the start I wouldnt have called him a selfish sob, he still answered the call of his king, and even when considering backing out, he was convinced to take on the one on one to save lives of the army.