Troy - The movie

Textkit is a learning community- introduce yourself here. Use the Open Board to introduce yourself, chat about off-topic issues and get to know each other.
User avatar
Emma_85
Global Moderator
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: London

Post by Emma_85 » Wed Jun 02, 2004 6:17 pm

i also imagined odysseus to look much stockier and hairier ... more like the agamemnon actor, if they had to pick someone around that age.
Really? I thought uhh... what ever his name is (Boromir :P ) was great as Odysseus. When they said it was going to be him playing the part of Odysseus I wasn't too sure, but when I saw Odysseus in the film my first reaction was: that's just how I'd imagined him!

I didn't like Helena much either, she nearly spoilt the movie. I don't think she's not pretty or anything, but she is a bit bland, but worst of all she couldn't really act. They were wrong to pick her, she hadn't done many films before and she had a terrible accent anyway (sounded like a mix between a German, South African and American accent :P ). Anyway, she didn't have to say much luckily, but I would still have preferred a more experienced actor with more character.
phpbb

copain
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 9:05 pm

Post by copain » Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:47 pm

I have just seen this film too and I really enjoyed it ! My intention for seeing this film was not to brush up my history knowlege about those ancient greeks - I had done this afterwards inspired by this film :) - but to have just nice entertainment.
And this really it was!
Great battles, great feelings (both pleasure and pain) great pictures
- the huge greek fleet approaching the troyian coast, this proud town of Troy (and it´s destruction) and a plot that seems conclusive to me (not knowing the exact course of the troyian war told by Homer at this moment)
And I was really pleased that I understood most of what the actors said, because I watched the english version of it even though I am not a native english speaker. So I care rather about a clear pronunciation than about the dialects of some actors (or actresses).
And by the way, was the acting performance of Helena really so bad. :o
First she had to look - as Helena - pretty nice, and so she did! :-)
Second the conflict of her feelings to be the cause of that war, she displayed well I think.
Ok, the performance of Briseis I found more lively but this depends more on the roll than on the actress I suppose.

User avatar
Thucydides
Textkit Fan
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 9:46 pm
Location: Christ Church Oxford

Post by Thucydides » Wed Jun 02, 2004 9:03 pm

Well I've seen it now....

it was really painful. I'm sorry.

NOT because it was historically or homerically inaccurate - because it was bad film

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Thu Jun 03, 2004 4:35 am

Here here, Thucydides.

Et Copain, est-ce que je peux deviner que tu parles français?
At the risk of derailing the main point of the thread, I've often noted that gay male designers produce female models with the bodies of young men. There are a few grotesque statues of women by Michaelangelo, generally not paraded before first-year art history classes, which seem to have the same problem.
Well observed.
So I don't see the beauty as academic, but rather aiming for something else entirely, though probably not on purpose most of the time.
Quite so, Annis; I'd certainly have to agree with you. I wouldn't dare criticize lifestyle choices or the modes of thought which appear to go with them, but I think it's important for women to know that this (the Helen in Troy) is not what beautiful is. Most men in my experience, of course, are not mature enough to make that distinction clear, or to venerate women properly to begin with; but even behind their cynical veneer, I doubt there is much which finds beautiful this repulsive fashion model extreme. I mean no offense to Diane Kruger personally, but she simply is not pretty, or a good actress, which just compounds the miscasting a thousand fold. Rose Byrne, conversely, truly was the shining star of the film; her warmth on the screen made the gratuity of Brad Pitt bearable.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

copain
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 9:05 pm

Post by copain » Thu Jun 03, 2004 12:01 pm

Lucus Eques wrote:Here here, Thucydides.

Et Copain, est-ce que je peux deviner que tu parles français?

  • No, je parle allemand. :)

    Every time has its own ideal about beautiness and Diane Kruger represents the one which the public nowadays wants to see - otherwise she would not have been choosen. And as a matter of fact I can´t find nothing about her appearance in this film which indicates her as a representative of an "repulsive fashion model extreme"
    Considering her acting performance she may stay behind those of Rose Byrne, I have to confess. Maybe it is this which takes a slight negative touch about her appearance. :?
    Because beautiness is not only a matter of good looking but also how someone is able to express himself.

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques » Fri Jun 04, 2004 4:32 am

copain wrote:No, je parle allemand. :)
Ah, fantastisch! Ich kann Deutsch viel besser als Französisch, meine ich, weil ich die liebste teutonische Sprache in Hochschule gelernt habe, seit sechs Jahren. Also, toll! Aus welchem Teil Deutschlandes kommst du?
Every time has its own ideal about beautiness and Diane Kruger represents the one which the public nowadays wants to see - otherwise she would not have been choosen.
Not at all; I've not yet met a single heterosexual man who finds appealing Fräulein Kruger's appearance in the slightest. If this majority does not want to see it, then they correctly speak for what is indeed the contemporary "ideal;" and moreover, they lead towards hints on the fundamental truth of beauty itself. Beauty is not an artificial construct; it is as eternal as a Platonic Idea.
And as a matter of fact I can´t find nothing about her appearance in this film which indicates her as a representative of an "repulsive fashion model extreme"
I think she looks worse than a fashion model; she looks like a mannequin. Though she certainly fits the "repulsive...extreme," if I may quote myself; she is skinny and unappealing physically; her face lacks feature, generally, and certainly bears nothing striking. Her lips are thin, her eyes are rather far-apart-looking (a feature in Indian women which I actually find particularly stunning; but with Diane Kruger's bone structure, it just isn't at all inspiring); I don't quite understand her nose, which I find too small (I prefer a classical Roman or Greek nose anyday), or her jaw, which appears too square. And none of these are in actuality faults or blemishes; it's not even the combination which detracts from her loveliness, or lack thereof; it's simply an absense of essense, that certain je ne sais précisement quoi. I love the color of her eyes, but I see no enchanting spirit behind them, no draw at all of the venifica we would come to expect from "the most beautiful woman who ever lived." She just seems blank -- much liker her performance, which brings us to...
Considering her acting performance she may stay behind those of Rose Byrne, I have to confess. Maybe it is this which takes a slight negative touch about her appearance. :?
Because beautiness is not only a matter of good looking but also how someone is able to express himself.
Truly! Personality is everything, and even in still photos it is quite visible, as well as in motion picture and in person. That spirit, that animus, jene besondere Seele, die diese Fräulein nicht hat, oder die durch das Gesicht dieser Dame nicht scheint, that is what is fundamentally essential to a person's beauty; for beauty is not found upon the face, aber im Herz, in corde, nel cuore, dans le cœur, in the heart.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

bingley
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:04 am
Location: Jakarta

Post by bingley » Fri Jun 04, 2004 7:50 am

I've not yet met a single heterosexual man who finds appealing Fräulein Kruger's appearance in the slightest
Are beautiful and appealing to heterosexual males necessarily the same thing?

User avatar
Eureka
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Eureka » Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:23 am

bingley wrote:
I've not yet met a single heterosexual man who finds appealing Fräulein Kruger's appearance in the slightest
Are beautiful and appealing to heterosexual males necessarily the same thing?
It's one definition of the term.

And it's the definition that must apply to Helen of Troy.
phpbb

bingley
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:04 am
Location: Jakarta

Post by bingley » Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:44 am

But if beauty is a Platonic ideal of which Helen of Troy is the embodiment, wouldn't she have to be recognisably beautiful to everyone, whatever their sex, orientation, or culture?
Last edited by bingley on Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Eureka
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Eureka » Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:49 am

bingley wrote:But if beauty is a Platonic ideal of which Helen of Troy is the embodiment, wouldn't she have to be recognisably beautiful to everyone, whatever their sex or orientation?
I don't see why she should be an embodiment of anything except sex-appeal. After all, the only thing that's important is that Paris wants her enough to start a war for her.
phpbb

User avatar
Eureka
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Eureka » Sat Jun 05, 2004 1:34 am

mingshey wrote:And it's "heureka(<εὕρηκα)" to transliterate in latin. :mrgreen:
(Er, my daughter's "εὖ" couldn't be the first syllable of "heureka", just to add a comment ;))
Well apparantly, the word Archimedes shouted out as he ran naked through the streets of Syracuse was "εὔρηκα", so he must have dropped the aspiration.


In any case, the word 'heureka' wouldn't have that special dual-significance that only the Aussies, here, would know about. :D
phpbb

copain
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 9:05 pm

Post by copain » Sat Jun 05, 2004 7:35 pm

Lucus Eques wrote:
.....Also, toll! Aus welchem Teil Deutschlandes kommst du?

....Beauty is not an artificial construct; it is as eternal as a Platonic Idea
  • Hey,Du kannst ja richtig gut Deutsch ! Also ich komme aus der Pfalz, das ist ne kleine Region im Südwesten von Deutschland, nahe der französischen Grenze. Und wo kommst eigentlich Du her ?


    Now I will switch to english again, because beside the talking about the greek and roman world and their ideals I want to improve my english as well! :)

    In some points beaty is eternal as a Platonic idea. Beaty and symmetry of the body and face goes side by side as well as the body of a beatyfull woman - and man of course - has to be proportioned in a special ratio. But other things may change in the course of time. Long before the the greek the ideal figure of a woman has to be plump not to say fat as the sculptures of that pre greek time show us. And not long ago in former centuries the color of the skin from european women has to be white to correspond to the idea of beaty of that time. In these days we tent more to a sun-tanned skin.
    And concerning Helen as "the most beautiful women ever lived" for me it´s hard to say how close Mrs. Kruger to this idealistic description come to ! :? But she fit´s well beside Mr. Bloom.
    And at least to see the film as a whole her part in it is not as important as the one´s of Hektor or Achilles so it is - for this film - not to important if she is really the right one for the part of Helen or not!

User avatar
Emma_85
Global Moderator
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: London

Post by Emma_85 » Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:56 pm

Well, just stop discussing Helen, who cares? :wink:
The most important thing is that they cast Achilles right... Achilles is a half god, so he needs a god's body... hehehe, they got that bit right :lol: !
phpbb

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Post by benissimus » Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:21 pm

They should have cast Episcopus.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

User avatar
Raya
Textkit Fan
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 9:27 am
Contact:

Post by Raya » Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:40 pm

Hmm... with him as Achilles and you as Hector, a certain fight scene should prove very interesting indeed...
:lol:
phpbb

User avatar
Emma_85
Global Moderator
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: London

Post by Emma_85 » Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:42 pm

Hehehe, yes :lol:
phpbb

bingley
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:04 am
Location: Jakarta

Post by bingley » Tue Jun 08, 2004 4:27 am

The most important thing is that they cast Achilles right... Achilles is a half god, so he needs a god's body... hehehe, they got that bit right
Do I detect a certain disloyalty to Mr. Depp? :twisted:

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Post by benissimus » Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:04 am

Raya wrote:Hmm... with him as Achilles and you as Hector, a certain fight scene should prove very interesting indeed...
:lol:
If that fight had taken place, the outcome would have been different... :P
Last edited by benissimus on Wed Jun 09, 2004 5:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

User avatar
Eureka
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Eureka » Tue Jun 08, 2004 10:08 am

Raya wrote:Hmm... with him as Achilles and you as Hector, a certain fight scene should prove very interesting indeed...
:lol:
Why do I get the image of Achilles and Hector pulling eachother's hair? :P
phpbb

User avatar
Emma_85
Global Moderator
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: London

Post by Emma_85 » Wed Jun 09, 2004 5:21 pm

Do I detect a certain disloyalty to Mr. Depp? :twisted:
Me? Disloyal? :o
It's his birthday today! :D :D :D
Happy birthday Johnny!
phpbb

Sayre
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 8:29 pm
Location: U.K

Post by Sayre » Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:48 pm

On the topic of the film, I think we should all quite simply be thankful that, whilst there were the expected omissions and mistakes, they at least left out the catalogue of ships (book 2, if memory serves me).

Fair Terentia
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cambridge

Post by Fair Terentia » Sun Jun 20, 2004 6:48 pm

Well, I didn't think the film was half as bad as some of my Classical friends thought. Admittedly, the acting was not brilliant, but I did find it entertaining as a battle epic.

Things that I really did like about it:
-Odysseus. He was just as I imagined him and I thought his expression somehow really lived up to his 'polymetis' epithet.
-The way they dealt with the gods. I mean, in my ideal world, the film would have been a word for word adaptation in Ancient Greek (Homeric dialect!), but that would hardly been a successful film. As it was, they kept mentioning them and they were treated very much as the Greeks themselves probably would have treated them.
-The way they presented the 'feel' of the Iliad and didn't just make it some crazed battle story. They did give an impression of the horror and sorrow of war, I thought.

Things I didn't like:
-The gratuitous changing of the plot. I could understand their changing it to make it a better film, but why kill off Menelaos and Agamemnon? I don't see the point! Homer's plot has been good enough for the last 2 millenia but it isn't good enough for Hollywood!
-Helen. Yes, well, I think everything's been said about that already!
-The random cameo appearance of Aeneas. Isn't he meant to be related to Paris, anyway!?

I don't know what it will do for Classics. Perhaps it will have a beneficial effect, or perhaps not. At least it remained reasonably accurate as far as details went.

Post Reply