Unlike the epic TROY, which spent much time and money recreating the spectacle of the Trojan War with CGI, the emphasis here is on the political ambitions and prophecies leading up to the start of the siege of Troy. Rufus Sewell as Agamemnon gives a performance (as the man who would conquer Troy) which eerily evokes Oliver Reed at his sinister best, as he makes it clear that the romance of Helen and Paris was merely a convenient excuse for the events that followed, and that the war came out of his own thirst for conquest. Sienna Guillory is attractive as Helen, but her role is rapidly reduced to that of a bystander in the great events that swirled around her. And the film makes clear its logic about this: how could a woman be responsible for a war in a time when even princesses were chattels of the royal houses to be auctioned off in marriage for political gain? As it deals more intimately with its characters and looks more closely at social power structures and gender roles of the period, this film is much more interesting as a human drama than the rather empty spectacle TROY.
176 Reviews
Spectacular portrayal about Troy war with great cast and impressive battle scenes
ma-cortes2 March 2018
Greek warriors attack and besiege Troy when Paris takes Helen and both of them escape. This mythological fantasy finds Helen , the beautiful wife falling in love with prince Paris , an event that leads to the siege of Troy .Director John kent Harrison picked two bright young stars Matthew Mardsen and Sienna Guilery to play the lovers in this breathtaking Tv story in 2 episodes of the Trjan War and the motives led up to it. As Greek warriors under command of Agamenon, Ulysses , Achilles and Menelao get to hide out in the Trojan Horse with fellow fighters and then get those Trojanswhen they take the wooden beast into the city and they are successful.
After a hardworking shooting and budget enough the results were only fair and passable.the picture ignores script for lavish effects , most of them made by means of computer generator.In the picture appears several historical and mythological characters played by notorious actors as Priamo:john Rhy Davies ,Agammenon : Rufus Sewell, Achilles: Joe Montana,Hector:Daniel Lapine,Theseus: Stellan Skarsgard, Clymnestra: Katie Blake , Menelao : James Callis Hecuba: Marian Dabo, and the Medium Cassandra performed by Emily Fox.
These events about Troy war has been adapted several times such as :Italian version titled Trojan Horse 1962 by Giorgio Ferroni with Steve Reeves Juliette Mayniel Lidia Alfonsi Mimmo Palmara. Rendition by Robert Wise with Rossana Podesta Jacques Sernas Brigitte Bardor Stanley Baker Cedric Hardwicke . TROY by wolfgang Petersen with Brad Pitt Diane Kruger Rose Byrne Orlando Bloom
After a hardworking shooting and budget enough the results were only fair and passable.the picture ignores script for lavish effects , most of them made by means of computer generator.In the picture appears several historical and mythological characters played by notorious actors as Priamo:john Rhy Davies ,Agammenon : Rufus Sewell, Achilles: Joe Montana,Hector:Daniel Lapine,Theseus: Stellan Skarsgard, Clymnestra: Katie Blake , Menelao : James Callis Hecuba: Marian Dabo, and the Medium Cassandra performed by Emily Fox.
These events about Troy war has been adapted several times such as :Italian version titled Trojan Horse 1962 by Giorgio Ferroni with Steve Reeves Juliette Mayniel Lidia Alfonsi Mimmo Palmara. Rendition by Robert Wise with Rossana Podesta Jacques Sernas Brigitte Bardor Stanley Baker Cedric Hardwicke . TROY by wolfgang Petersen with Brad Pitt Diane Kruger Rose Byrne Orlando Bloom
Not a bad job
don-keck5 July 2004
I disagree with the reviewer who thinks Paris is prettier than Helen. Sienna Guillory is gorgeous! As in the Iliad Paris & Helen are a matched pair. I also disagree with the reviewer who panned the movie because it was not faithful to the Iliad. No movie, not even a TV miniseries, can be expected to be totally faithful to any book. A movie is always a selection. The question should not be what was omitted, or whether it compressed or altered the text for cinematic purposes. Of course it did! The question is whether or not it captured the spirit of the original, or whether it did violence to that spirit, as too many movies do. In my view this movie captured the spirit of the Iliad surprisingly well. Perhaps the Greek heroes, especially Agamemnon, do not come off as heroically as the modern viewer has come to expect. But then our idea of heroism, (confused as it too often is with idealism), is not Homer's; and, then again, this movies portrayal of the Greeks as devious aggressors plotting the conquest of Troy is both historically accurate and does nothing to distort Homer's portrait of them. He certainly would have agreed. I did feel that the movie became somewhat rushed at the end. Unfortunately, this seems to be a common problem with many movies based on classic works of literature. The director seems to lavish most of his energy and resources on the beginning and middle of the story. Then, as time and money begin to run out, the ending becomes hurried, episodes are combined, the story becomes perilously compressed. But even here, the movie does not really leave the viewer disappointed. The scene in which the Trojan Horse suddenly appears without explanation outside the walls of Troy is particularly effective, because it appears to the viewer just as it must have appeared to the Trojans. Even though one may wish for more, nothing in the movie's ending distorts Homer's tale of the fall of Ilium.
The Illiad was not a love story
treagan-222 April 2003
The Helen of Troy miniseries on USA today failed apparently because the writer lacked the nerve to tell the classic story, and instead made up his own. Instead of using Homer's Illiad as a starting point, the TVsters seemed to turn to the 1956 film as the primary source--turning the seduction/kidnap of Helen into a big ol' love story.
So many key elements were missing: the interventions of the gods, the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon, the killing of Patroclus in Achilles armor, Achilles subsequent killing of Hector, etc. This was the storyline of what we know of the myth of the Trojan War.
And major characters are triviliazed or disappeared: Hector's glory on TV is as a second banana to Paris; mighty Ajax gets a mention, little more; Diomedes, Nestor, Idonmoneus are absent. On the Trojan side, Aeneas, Sarpedon, Glaucus, Deiphobus and others are equally invisible.
Agamemnon is seen, not as a hero with the fatal flaw of hubris but a Hitlerian monster. Menaleas, a strong warrior in the Illiad, seems like he attended all the sensitivity training classes avaiable to the Achians, (the Greeks were referred to as "the Ageans" in the series), but wasn't much of a fighter.
But my biggest beef is with the character of Paris (Helen seemed commonplace, but acceptable). Paris was not much of a hero in the Illiad; actually, he was a bit of a feckless bounder. Helen's feelings toward him were decidedly mixed, with lust, pity, and contempt thrown together. Hector upbraided Paris on several occasions for his cowardice and sloth, but then, Paris occasionally entered the fray as an experienced soldier as well.
I sense the writers chickened out of grappling with a different kind of plot, and thereby missed an opportunity. The difficult interplay among the Greek heroes, the complicated moral choices on both sides, the tragic savagery of war, while existing to small degrees in the series, took back seat to a more or less conventional love story.
Too bad. Production values were fair, and some of the elements were there to make something better.
So many key elements were missing: the interventions of the gods, the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon, the killing of Patroclus in Achilles armor, Achilles subsequent killing of Hector, etc. This was the storyline of what we know of the myth of the Trojan War.
And major characters are triviliazed or disappeared: Hector's glory on TV is as a second banana to Paris; mighty Ajax gets a mention, little more; Diomedes, Nestor, Idonmoneus are absent. On the Trojan side, Aeneas, Sarpedon, Glaucus, Deiphobus and others are equally invisible.
Agamemnon is seen, not as a hero with the fatal flaw of hubris but a Hitlerian monster. Menaleas, a strong warrior in the Illiad, seems like he attended all the sensitivity training classes avaiable to the Achians, (the Greeks were referred to as "the Ageans" in the series), but wasn't much of a fighter.
But my biggest beef is with the character of Paris (Helen seemed commonplace, but acceptable). Paris was not much of a hero in the Illiad; actually, he was a bit of a feckless bounder. Helen's feelings toward him were decidedly mixed, with lust, pity, and contempt thrown together. Hector upbraided Paris on several occasions for his cowardice and sloth, but then, Paris occasionally entered the fray as an experienced soldier as well.
I sense the writers chickened out of grappling with a different kind of plot, and thereby missed an opportunity. The difficult interplay among the Greek heroes, the complicated moral choices on both sides, the tragic savagery of war, while existing to small degrees in the series, took back seat to a more or less conventional love story.
Too bad. Production values were fair, and some of the elements were there to make something better.
Beware of Greeks Bearing Gifts
Bcaldc1024 April 2003
This was a very entertaining movie that focused more on the love affair between Helen and Paris and international intrigues than the battles between Troy and the Greek city-states. There were several deviations from Homer's Iliad such as the placement of Troy on a cliff above the shoreline. In actuality Troy was several
miles inland from the bay on a broad agricultural plain. The battle scenes were very limited, probably to save money, but the Trojan Horse was nothing less than spectacular! One clear element in the film was the unmistakable portrayal as the Trojans being noble and gallant set against the greed, dishonesty, and brutality of the Greeks, especially King Agamemnon. John Rhys-Davies made a great King Priam of Troy. Seeing this film affirms the ancient saying "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts".
miles inland from the bay on a broad agricultural plain. The battle scenes were very limited, probably to save money, but the Trojan Horse was nothing less than spectacular! One clear element in the film was the unmistakable portrayal as the Trojans being noble and gallant set against the greed, dishonesty, and brutality of the Greeks, especially King Agamemnon. John Rhys-Davies made a great King Priam of Troy. Seeing this film affirms the ancient saying "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts".
Beware of Greeks Bearing This (possible spoiler)
The Overdrama21 April 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Although it is evident that painstaking detail was ensured in the props and cinematography, all other aspects of this mini-series fall half-and-half.
Casting: Rufus Sewell was top-notch as the despicable Agamemnon and John Rhys-Davies was a superb Priam, but whoever thought of Stellan Skarsgård as Theseus (whose death was depicted incorrectly in the movie)?
Characters: All characters in the movie were well-developed, but major characters were unnecessarily omitted. It accounted for Helen as a curse to her family because of her illegitimate conception when her mother's husband was away; however, she, Polydeuces, Clytemnestra, and Castor were all born simultaneously, the males from one egg, the females from another (her mother's husband at home with his wife). Polydeuces was Zeus's son, but he was not labeled as a curse like Helen. Castor was not even in the movie. Laocoon, the Trojan seer strangled by serpents after trying to warn about the Trojan Horse, and Aias (more commonly known by his Latin name Ajax) were no shows as well, even though the latter was mentioned once briefly.
Names: Helen's brother Polydeuces was called by his Latin name Pollux.
Personae: Hector was depicted as the noble prince as in the myth, but Achilles was the complete antithesis of what he should have been. More like the the god Ares, Achilles was out for blood and cold-bloodedly killed Hector; however, the mythical Achilles was honorable and only killed Hector to avenge the death of his pupil, Patroclus, even then feeling bad and trying to negotiate an end to the war. He was also in love with one of Priam's daughters and wanted to trade Hector's body for her. In the movie, though, Helen offered herself to Agamemnon in trade for Hector's body. Achilles death remained unexplained, too, only the myth buffs knowing of his vulnerability.
Style: Needless narration was used. Also, time was halted a couple times to afford Meneleaus room for epiphany... and a chat with Paris.
These discrepancies are only the tip of the iceberg. Some people may not mind these changes, and I wouldn't either were it not for the fact that these changes and ommissions were completely unnecessary.
One omission that cannot be supported, however, is that of the goddess Eris, for it was she who begat the pageant between the goddesses, getting the ball (or apple) rolling.
Casting: Rufus Sewell was top-notch as the despicable Agamemnon and John Rhys-Davies was a superb Priam, but whoever thought of Stellan Skarsgård as Theseus (whose death was depicted incorrectly in the movie)?
Characters: All characters in the movie were well-developed, but major characters were unnecessarily omitted. It accounted for Helen as a curse to her family because of her illegitimate conception when her mother's husband was away; however, she, Polydeuces, Clytemnestra, and Castor were all born simultaneously, the males from one egg, the females from another (her mother's husband at home with his wife). Polydeuces was Zeus's son, but he was not labeled as a curse like Helen. Castor was not even in the movie. Laocoon, the Trojan seer strangled by serpents after trying to warn about the Trojan Horse, and Aias (more commonly known by his Latin name Ajax) were no shows as well, even though the latter was mentioned once briefly.
Names: Helen's brother Polydeuces was called by his Latin name Pollux.
Personae: Hector was depicted as the noble prince as in the myth, but Achilles was the complete antithesis of what he should have been. More like the the god Ares, Achilles was out for blood and cold-bloodedly killed Hector; however, the mythical Achilles was honorable and only killed Hector to avenge the death of his pupil, Patroclus, even then feeling bad and trying to negotiate an end to the war. He was also in love with one of Priam's daughters and wanted to trade Hector's body for her. In the movie, though, Helen offered herself to Agamemnon in trade for Hector's body. Achilles death remained unexplained, too, only the myth buffs knowing of his vulnerability.
Style: Needless narration was used. Also, time was halted a couple times to afford Meneleaus room for epiphany... and a chat with Paris.
These discrepancies are only the tip of the iceberg. Some people may not mind these changes, and I wouldn't either were it not for the fact that these changes and ommissions were completely unnecessary.
One omission that cannot be supported, however, is that of the goddess Eris, for it was she who begat the pageant between the goddesses, getting the ball (or apple) rolling.
Helen of Troy is a movie full of passion and hurt. A must see!
monicaikaa8 August 2005
The movie Helen of Troy directed by John Kent Harrison is a combination of Drama, Adventure and Romance. The film was released last 2003. It lasts for 175 minutes and for the DVD copy, 177 minutes. John Kent Harrison is a well-known director and was known to be a part of 13 movies; he has directed 10 out of the 13 movies he was involved in and was the director screenwriter and director writer for the other 3. The story of Helen plays a big role in the world history. The movie that John Kent Harrison has directed tells us the story of the war between the Spartans and the Trojans in the eyes of Menelaus, King of Sparta, who was married to Helen (Sienna Guillory) who falls madly in love with Paris (Matthew Marsden) a handsome Trojan prince. Helen goes with Paris to Troy, where she was welcomed by Paris' father, King Priam (John Rhys-Davies). After discovering her elopement with Paris, Menelaus, desperately wanting Helen back, asks help from his brother Agememnon (Rufus Sewell) to start a war with Troy to get Helen back. And from there, the story begins. The movie is full of greed, wanting to have power and everybody just wants to have their hands on the most beautiful lady Helen. And this is where the death of a thousand men happened. The roles of the Gods weren't really evident in the movie unlike in the text. The movie portrayed Gods as the immortals' "advisers". They ask them for help and they follow whatever signs it is they give them. The movie Helen of Troy has a lot of versions from different points-of-view from the different characters in the story. The one that was most recently released was out last 2004 and was directed by Wolfgang Petersen he was known to be directing since 1967 and this was his 31st movie and was announced to release "Poseidon" in 2006, the one he released was different, it was also from the Trojans' point-of-view but ironically was entitled Troy. This movie focused more on the development of Achilles' character and it showed how he acts through out the whole film. Unlike in the version of Harrison, Achilles' character was portrayed to be rather flat and was focusing more on death and more on being a "hoodlum" kind of character. In Troy, Achilles (Brad Pitt), started out as someone who was really brave and was really powerful and such a champion. They portrayed him to be someone really affectionate, even at the start, when he was training his cousin Patroclus to be like him and how he wanted to seek revenge when he died. I found his character to be well-rounded and how it developed until the movie ended. Both of the versions showed us how each of the kingdoms wanted power and how they wanted Helen as much as Menelaus and Paris. Honestly, I found it weird that in Petersen's version, the brothers, Menelaus and Agamemnon were old men unlike in Helen of Troy. Combining the two versions would result to the true story that was shown in the Iliad. Although, major details, were shown in Helen of Troy, like the three goddesses, the sacrifice Agamemnon made to offer to Artemis. Troy focused more on the emotions in the story. I like the version of Petersen more because if your purpose is just for entertainment, it gives more emotion and but less information to the audience and entertains them as well. But if you are looking for more on the background of the story, you should watch Helen of Troy. I highly recommend people to watch Helen of Troy because like what I said, it gives more information and the actors portray them well. I just would like to react on Helen and how she acted throughout the whole film, they had shown us how her character evolved from such a baby girl to a woman responsible for her actions, the script they made for her and the way they portrayed her was a little dragging. Throughout the film, honestly, I felt like wanting to dictate to her what she should and shouldn't do. She just followed what was going on and didn't really have a mind of her own. Helen there, was very fickle minded, like when Paris was about to leave, she kept on hugging him while telling him to just go and leave. Then when he left, she suddenly decides to join him. She wasn't really responsible for her actions, and if ever she was, she didn't handle it carefully, she was formulating the wrong solutions to the right problem. In conclusion, I give the movie a 3 out of 5. The movie is good enough to rent.
Great parody of Iliad
callisto_gr21 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Ii just watched this movie and I must say it's awful.I don't care if it has suspense,fun or whatever.To me it matters that it is really imprecise.This movie has nothing to do with the Iliad.The screenwriters must have never read Homer's poem,that's sure. i don't want to expand to the the wrong plot details,because then I would have to write the whole screenplay from the start.
In addition to clothes are SO not according the time of the story,which I remind takes place in 11th century b.C..The clothes in this film are roman empire's era clothes.And for goodness sake;did you just see those suits of armour?I was under the impression that Russel Crow would jump in the scene in a moment!
And last(but probably the thing that made me laugh the hardest) (quote from this ridiculous movie) -...and the world is spinning...
Wow that guy was really forward from his era!!!!
In addition to clothes are SO not according the time of the story,which I remind takes place in 11th century b.C..The clothes in this film are roman empire's era clothes.And for goodness sake;did you just see those suits of armour?I was under the impression that Russel Crow would jump in the scene in a moment!
And last(but probably the thing that made me laugh the hardest) (quote from this ridiculous movie) -...and the world is spinning...
Wow that guy was really forward from his era!!!!
My copy of this movie is definitely for keeps!
first_kyute5 August 2004
Shown last year, Helen of Troy would have to be one of the rather remarkable films of all time. Having been a believer of quality movies, I have come to the conclusion that this is something that is definitely worth remembering and recommending to others. Without doubt, Adam Shapiro, Ted Kurdyla and Ronnie Kern made a good choice in producing this three-hour 'action-packed, adventure, drama & romance package' movie.
The film brought to life Homer's poem, The Iliad, through a group of talents in its cast and crew and our generation's newfangled technology. Contrary to what most people know, Helen was not the real reason of the Trojan War but rather the Judgment of Paris. Because of Helen's decision to be with Paris, two great empires were given a reason to go to war that lasted for a decade. Over those years, the gods of Mt. Olympus were divided, helping the camp that they supported. Thus, the Greeks and Trojans both had the enjoyment of feeling how it was to be favored by the gods. They played with the fate of the different characters in the story. Hence, they showed their roles in the lives of these mortals.
In the text, Helen goes off with Paris which pushed the Greeks to attack the Trojans. In the course of Paris and Menelaus battling over the right to Helen, both sides suffered from problems within their own camps. Agamemnon and Achilles disapprove of each other because of their prizes of honor. Hera diverts Zeus' attention so that the tide would be turned against the Trojans again. The royal family of Troy loses their first-born, Hector, because of their son mistaking Patroclus for Achilles. The Trojans get even when Paris shot Achilles at his weakest point his heel. With Achilles' death, the Greeks fight over their once great warrior's position. Paris gets killed by Philoctetes' arrow and the Greeks continue to destroy his city. The famous wooden horse's entry to the gates of Troy brings their city into ashes. The war ends with the death of Polyxena and Astyanax, signifying the women of Troy's submission to Greek slavery.
If compared with the movie Troy, this film was more faithful to the original text. It also did not fail to explain the story so they did not leave their viewers thinking of the reasons why such events occurred. Because of this, the audience was able to sympathize with the characters in the movie. A good understanding of a character's personality enables one to put himself/herself in the shoes of that character and thus allowing him/her to feel exactly how a character in the story would feel in certain events. The acting of the cast is quite convincing and worthy of Oscar nominations. They may not be instant winners for they still have to prove themselves to everyone but for the people who do not have that much name in the industry and are still able to perform well, the fruits of hard work are surely rewarding.
The background music in crucial parts of the film helped a lot in connecting with the characters of the story. The foreign chants that were heard in dramatic parts of the film such as the burning of Troy allowed a more serious atmosphere. Those scenes became more dramatic because of a musical score that has been well thought of. The lighting as well as the cinematography has also been prepared for. With these elements, the Trojan horse had even more impact when it was shown in the film. Lighting and cinematography emphasized its size and beauty. Though some scenes cannot be helped but be injected with a touch of our modern computer technology, they still put up with the audience's expectations as they segued to the next segment.
The plot is simple but the numerous characters in the story complicated it. Each had his/her own opinion and so it may appear confusing for someone who would just read the story and not visualize what is really happening. The flow of events is simple. The only thing that complicates it is the challenge of putting all the characters' personalities together without having anyone down staged. People are not expected to understand the story by heart on their first time of encountering The Iliad. It is when you connect with the story that you are able to answer anything about any character. With the good job of selecting the lines for the script, the story became easier to follow.
One good question about Helen's character would be if she was that tramp who left her family and waged a war that took many lives. She is actually one of the first feminists who challenged the status quo. Unlike the women of her time, she was not submissive and she stood for her beliefs. We must remember that the writer of The Iliad was not a woman and may have written this poem from a man's point of view. Thus, we should be open to the idea that Helen was not just a tramp but more importantly a fighter.
There are some actors that I would like to commend for their wonderful performances in this film. Matthew Marsden had that charisma that was fit for Paris. Rufus Sewell portrayed Agamemnon superbly and he was able to explain his character's personality. Emilia Fox also gave justice to her role as Cassandra, and as James Callis was very natural in his portrayal of Menelaus. These people, though not really famous as some Hollywood stars, have great potentials and are effective in their roles.
This film has proven how far love can go. It can move mountains, cross the longest bridge, drive endlessly or climb the highest peak. And yes, it can launch a thousand ships, too. My DVD copy of this film is definitely for keeps!
The film brought to life Homer's poem, The Iliad, through a group of talents in its cast and crew and our generation's newfangled technology. Contrary to what most people know, Helen was not the real reason of the Trojan War but rather the Judgment of Paris. Because of Helen's decision to be with Paris, two great empires were given a reason to go to war that lasted for a decade. Over those years, the gods of Mt. Olympus were divided, helping the camp that they supported. Thus, the Greeks and Trojans both had the enjoyment of feeling how it was to be favored by the gods. They played with the fate of the different characters in the story. Hence, they showed their roles in the lives of these mortals.
In the text, Helen goes off with Paris which pushed the Greeks to attack the Trojans. In the course of Paris and Menelaus battling over the right to Helen, both sides suffered from problems within their own camps. Agamemnon and Achilles disapprove of each other because of their prizes of honor. Hera diverts Zeus' attention so that the tide would be turned against the Trojans again. The royal family of Troy loses their first-born, Hector, because of their son mistaking Patroclus for Achilles. The Trojans get even when Paris shot Achilles at his weakest point his heel. With Achilles' death, the Greeks fight over their once great warrior's position. Paris gets killed by Philoctetes' arrow and the Greeks continue to destroy his city. The famous wooden horse's entry to the gates of Troy brings their city into ashes. The war ends with the death of Polyxena and Astyanax, signifying the women of Troy's submission to Greek slavery.
If compared with the movie Troy, this film was more faithful to the original text. It also did not fail to explain the story so they did not leave their viewers thinking of the reasons why such events occurred. Because of this, the audience was able to sympathize with the characters in the movie. A good understanding of a character's personality enables one to put himself/herself in the shoes of that character and thus allowing him/her to feel exactly how a character in the story would feel in certain events. The acting of the cast is quite convincing and worthy of Oscar nominations. They may not be instant winners for they still have to prove themselves to everyone but for the people who do not have that much name in the industry and are still able to perform well, the fruits of hard work are surely rewarding.
The background music in crucial parts of the film helped a lot in connecting with the characters of the story. The foreign chants that were heard in dramatic parts of the film such as the burning of Troy allowed a more serious atmosphere. Those scenes became more dramatic because of a musical score that has been well thought of. The lighting as well as the cinematography has also been prepared for. With these elements, the Trojan horse had even more impact when it was shown in the film. Lighting and cinematography emphasized its size and beauty. Though some scenes cannot be helped but be injected with a touch of our modern computer technology, they still put up with the audience's expectations as they segued to the next segment.
The plot is simple but the numerous characters in the story complicated it. Each had his/her own opinion and so it may appear confusing for someone who would just read the story and not visualize what is really happening. The flow of events is simple. The only thing that complicates it is the challenge of putting all the characters' personalities together without having anyone down staged. People are not expected to understand the story by heart on their first time of encountering The Iliad. It is when you connect with the story that you are able to answer anything about any character. With the good job of selecting the lines for the script, the story became easier to follow.
One good question about Helen's character would be if she was that tramp who left her family and waged a war that took many lives. She is actually one of the first feminists who challenged the status quo. Unlike the women of her time, she was not submissive and she stood for her beliefs. We must remember that the writer of The Iliad was not a woman and may have written this poem from a man's point of view. Thus, we should be open to the idea that Helen was not just a tramp but more importantly a fighter.
There are some actors that I would like to commend for their wonderful performances in this film. Matthew Marsden had that charisma that was fit for Paris. Rufus Sewell portrayed Agamemnon superbly and he was able to explain his character's personality. Emilia Fox also gave justice to her role as Cassandra, and as James Callis was very natural in his portrayal of Menelaus. These people, though not really famous as some Hollywood stars, have great potentials and are effective in their roles.
This film has proven how far love can go. It can move mountains, cross the longest bridge, drive endlessly or climb the highest peak. And yes, it can launch a thousand ships, too. My DVD copy of this film is definitely for keeps!
TV miniseries is far inferior to the Warner Bros. 1956 Robert Wise epic
ccmiller14923 January 2004
This mini-series was a major disappointment and doesn't hold a candle to the wonderful 1956 Warner Bros. version directed by Robert Wise. These characters are very flat and miscast with the exception of Agamemnon and Menelaus. This tilts the interest solely to the Greek side. The only laudable bits were the sequences of sacrificing Iphigenia and the final vengeance of Klytemnestra. Other than that, give me Jacques Sernas, Rossana Podesta, Stanley Baker et al in the much preferable 1956 version.
Horribly inaccurate
krish-422 April 2003
Rape of Mythology.
Helen of Troy was nothing short of rape of Homer's Iliad and other sources.
Cassandra was portrayed as having the gift of seeing the future as a child. According to the myths she got it from Apollo when she agreed to be his lover. However she later spurned him and so she was cursed that no one will believe her. So according to the writer, Apollo lusted after a five year old child :)
Helen walking nude was good viewing but has no truth. But then again, in the end all one will remember from this TV movie are shots of Sienna Guillory's perfect ass ...
The whole thing about Achilles is absolutely scandalous .. Despite his great strength Achilles actually wanted to avoid battle .. In fact he argued with Agamemnon over a slave girl and stopped fighting .. So the greeks started losing ground ... Here he is portrayed as a retarded warrior. An insult to the greatest Greek warrior since Hercules.
Then after much pleading Achilles sent Patroclus to fight for him in his armour ... The TV movie portrayed Achilles as a monster wearing no armour .. Another falsehood .. Achilles in fact had his new armour built by the god Hephaestus ...
There is no mention of Patroclus here ... And Paris is shown as a great fighter - He was not .. Troy actually relied solely on Hector's capabilities... Here Hector was not portrayed as the great hero he was...
Hector's defeat and slaying of Patroclus finally aroused Achilles' anger and he took his revenge over Hector in a fair fight (not like the one in the TV)... The TV confrontation of Achilles and Hector was sheer stupidity.
Achilles returned Hector's body .. something the writer of the TV movie forgot ...
Achilles was later killed by Paris's arrow which struck his heel but not like the way in showed on the movie ... And the whole myth of his vulnerable heel was left unexplained. Maybe the writer didnt know himself.
Whatever happened to the great Ajax ... his great battle with Hector .. and his subsequent suicide ..
Paris was killed by the famous archer Philoctetes who owned the bow and arrow of Hercules ... But obviously that was too complicated for this piece of TV crap.
In the movie they showed Clytemnestra in Troy - rubbish. She killed Agamemnon once he had returned. There is absolutely no truth that Agamemnon raped Helen as is shown ... The acting was all wooden .. wasting good actors in a ridiculous adaptation...
Hardly any part of the trojan war was touched upon .. And those parts touched were displayed with breathtaking lack of accuracy. Who do the director/writer think they are ? Homer? Virgil ?
Only if one is completely ignorant of Greek myths, one can tolerate this piece of nonsense. Rating it one out of ten is being generous.
Helen of Troy was nothing short of rape of Homer's Iliad and other sources.
Cassandra was portrayed as having the gift of seeing the future as a child. According to the myths she got it from Apollo when she agreed to be his lover. However she later spurned him and so she was cursed that no one will believe her. So according to the writer, Apollo lusted after a five year old child :)
Helen walking nude was good viewing but has no truth. But then again, in the end all one will remember from this TV movie are shots of Sienna Guillory's perfect ass ...
The whole thing about Achilles is absolutely scandalous .. Despite his great strength Achilles actually wanted to avoid battle .. In fact he argued with Agamemnon over a slave girl and stopped fighting .. So the greeks started losing ground ... Here he is portrayed as a retarded warrior. An insult to the greatest Greek warrior since Hercules.
Then after much pleading Achilles sent Patroclus to fight for him in his armour ... The TV movie portrayed Achilles as a monster wearing no armour .. Another falsehood .. Achilles in fact had his new armour built by the god Hephaestus ...
There is no mention of Patroclus here ... And Paris is shown as a great fighter - He was not .. Troy actually relied solely on Hector's capabilities... Here Hector was not portrayed as the great hero he was...
Hector's defeat and slaying of Patroclus finally aroused Achilles' anger and he took his revenge over Hector in a fair fight (not like the one in the TV)... The TV confrontation of Achilles and Hector was sheer stupidity.
Achilles returned Hector's body .. something the writer of the TV movie forgot ...
Achilles was later killed by Paris's arrow which struck his heel but not like the way in showed on the movie ... And the whole myth of his vulnerable heel was left unexplained. Maybe the writer didnt know himself.
Whatever happened to the great Ajax ... his great battle with Hector .. and his subsequent suicide ..
Paris was killed by the famous archer Philoctetes who owned the bow and arrow of Hercules ... But obviously that was too complicated for this piece of TV crap.
In the movie they showed Clytemnestra in Troy - rubbish. She killed Agamemnon once he had returned. There is absolutely no truth that Agamemnon raped Helen as is shown ... The acting was all wooden .. wasting good actors in a ridiculous adaptation...
Hardly any part of the trojan war was touched upon .. And those parts touched were displayed with breathtaking lack of accuracy. Who do the director/writer think they are ? Homer? Virgil ?
Only if one is completely ignorant of Greek myths, one can tolerate this piece of nonsense. Rating it one out of ten is being generous.
Wow!
Peachesandfluff12 June 2003
This has got to be one of the better miniseries I have seen in a while. The costumes were gorgeous, and the location had one believing that you really were looking at Troy as it may have been.The actors were all excellent, however, one stood out more than the others, and that actor was Rufus Sewell. He brought a certain intensity to the film that I could actually FEEL right in my living room. I was so enamored of this particular film that I have actually put in an order for it as soon as it's released. If you missed it, I feel for you, because, as I said it will draw you in.
Helen of Troy
shallowcuts9 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
With the combined prowess of director John Kent Harrison, producer Ted Kurdyla, and writer Ronni Kern, Homer's timeless poem The Iliad has been raised from the ashes of time grazing the 2003 silver screen with graphic enhancements of epic proportions. Helen of Troy, a 3-hour long action and passion-packed movie portrays the story of two great empires in ancient Greece, both destined to have its share of sweet victory and bitter loss. Ruled by the submissive King Menelaus, the broken house of Sparta is set out to break into the golden walls of Troy the rich kingdom of great King Priam. When Helen, the coveted queen of Sparta falls in love and flees with the Trojan prince Paris, Menelaus' ambitious brother Agamemnon is driven to conquer the opposing empire. After 10 long years of ruthless warfare, the crafty Spartans were finally able to trick their way into entering Troy with the help of the fabled Trojan Horse. The richest city in the Aegean was crushed and burned to the ground - the Greeks hoarding its wealth and reclaiming their beautiful, yet broken queen Helen. One scene in particular the rape of Helen by Agamemnon portrayed the bitter fate of Troy, wherein the city was taken and pillaged, as the people were rendered helpless like Menelaus.
The themes of ambition, honor, vengeance, leadership, and of course love echoes throughout this movie, and were effectively portrayed and accented by the skilled actors, well-crafted flow of scenes, and impressive graphic special effects. Although the movie itself is not completely faithful to Homer's original text, it is still sure to capture the interests of people who appreciate the timeless concepts of beauty, romance, adventure, and history.
The themes of ambition, honor, vengeance, leadership, and of course love echoes throughout this movie, and were effectively portrayed and accented by the skilled actors, well-crafted flow of scenes, and impressive graphic special effects. Although the movie itself is not completely faithful to Homer's original text, it is still sure to capture the interests of people who appreciate the timeless concepts of beauty, romance, adventure, and history.
Desecrate something else, please....
billy_man7814 May 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I was getting ready to watch "Troy" when I heard of these mini-series which was on TV as a complete movie. And then I made the terrible mistake....and I watched it....
**SPOILERS**
Nothing I ever watched or read or heard ever made me more furious than this unspeakable desecration of Homer's Iliad.NO, ladies and gentlemen, Paris was not borne as Alexander, neither was he abandoned on the mountains.No, Menelaus did not become Paris' friend neither did he ask him whether Helen was talking about him or not.EVER!!And, for your information, NO, Achilles was not a professional wrestler, nor was he bold, or mad and he did not kill Hector without a reason. He killed him because Hector had killed Patroklus first, whom Achilles loved.And much more than that, which I was not able to watch, because my TV is not expendable... But, I guess, all these are meaningless details to those, whose brains are not too sharp and their education not that high...And for those who had not been taught that people should respect what's above them, older than them, unreachable by them.... I have only one request from them:Go and desecrate something else! Homer's saga is not a toy to play with!And if you ever feel the need to "shoot" Odyssey too, please....DON'T....
**SPOILERS**
Nothing I ever watched or read or heard ever made me more furious than this unspeakable desecration of Homer's Iliad.NO, ladies and gentlemen, Paris was not borne as Alexander, neither was he abandoned on the mountains.No, Menelaus did not become Paris' friend neither did he ask him whether Helen was talking about him or not.EVER!!And, for your information, NO, Achilles was not a professional wrestler, nor was he bold, or mad and he did not kill Hector without a reason. He killed him because Hector had killed Patroklus first, whom Achilles loved.And much more than that, which I was not able to watch, because my TV is not expendable... But, I guess, all these are meaningless details to those, whose brains are not too sharp and their education not that high...And for those who had not been taught that people should respect what's above them, older than them, unreachable by them.... I have only one request from them:Go and desecrate something else! Homer's saga is not a toy to play with!And if you ever feel the need to "shoot" Odyssey too, please....DON'T....
Remembered This Way
silverpr1nt_029 August 2004
There are many different stories and interpretations of Homer's Iliad, or better known as the 'Trojan War.' 'Helen of Troy' is one movie that showed a different perspective of the events in the leading lady's point of view.
The Iliad written by Homer, from which this film was based on, talks about the 'greatest war story ever told': the infamous 'Trojan War.' This legendary epic began with the elopement of Helen, the fairest woman in the land, and Troy's cursed Prince Paris. Menelaus, her husband, mad with jealousy and broken pride, allied with his brother, Agamemnon, to wage a war against Troy. They put together a great army consisting of the greatest and bravest warriors of their land, Greece. When they arrived at Troy, a dispute rose between Agamemnon and Achilles because of their women prizes, Chryseis and Briseis. This resulted to Achilles' refusal to participate in the war for nine years. During that time, victory for each country wavered as the gods and goddesses in Olympus helped their favorite side. When Achilles decides to fight at last, it is in revenge for his best companion, Patroclus who was killed by Hector. He slew Hector and dragged his body to his camp. Despite Zeus' disagreement, Hector died because he was fated to do so. Odysseus came up with the idea of the Wooden Horse. He planned to get inside the gates of Troy so they could finally attack. The Trojans brought in the horse and when night fell, the Greeks attacked the Trojans, burnt their houses, killed their children and took their women as prizes.
The characters portrayed in the movie were fashioned in such a way that they appeared to be real and complex human beings. They gave in to their desires and to their human weaknesses such as pride, jealousy and anger but they also fought for justice, honor and love. Therefore you can easily sympathize and understand their actions and decisions since we all have the same human flaws and experiences. Most of the characters in 'Helen of Troy' were very much true to the original text in the Iliad. However, some key roles were fabricated to make the audience sympathize and admire characters like Paris, Helen and Menelaus as opposed to their selfish and arrogant personalities in the Iliad. They acted very well and very convincing such that they become distinct from the other characters in the story. Each person was unique to the other.
The script of the movie was true to the text to some extent. The beginning of 'Helen of Troy' started with the judgment of Paris in Mount Ida, which first introduced the prince to Helen. He was banished from Troy to the mountain as an infant because of Cassandra's prophecy that he will cause the end of their country. He finds out that he is a prince of Troy when he defeats Hector in a game and is finally accepted into the family despite his sister's constant protests. During her sister's wedding, Helen was abducted by Theseus and was brought to his country. They stayed together for a few years and Helen started falling in love with him until Pollux came to save her and was killed in the process. Theseus also died and Helen was brought back to Sparta where her father, Tyndareus, gave her away to the soldiers. The soldiers couldn't deny her beauty but decided to choose the husband by tossing rings. The one closest to the jar was Menelaus' and therefore, they married. Once, Paris went to Sparta to make peace with the city but when he sees Helen, they fall in love. They elope and when Menelaus found out about this, he associated with his brother, Agamemnon. Upon Reaching Troy, Menelaus first decides to talk to Priam, the country's king. Priam refuses to give Helen back and that's where the war began.
Overall, the movie, 'Helen of Troy', has been loyal to the original text in the Iliad except in some aspects. They both portray roughly the same roles and personalities of the characters. Although love was not a plausible theme in Homer's text as shown in the movie and the gods' influencing the waves of war weren't concretely depicted in the film, other themes like pride and honor coincided in both. The changes in the script didn't ruin the outcome of the movie. They just served as a form of exaggeration to further establish the uniqueness of the characters. The Iliad is classic, and it should be remembered this way.
The Iliad written by Homer, from which this film was based on, talks about the 'greatest war story ever told': the infamous 'Trojan War.' This legendary epic began with the elopement of Helen, the fairest woman in the land, and Troy's cursed Prince Paris. Menelaus, her husband, mad with jealousy and broken pride, allied with his brother, Agamemnon, to wage a war against Troy. They put together a great army consisting of the greatest and bravest warriors of their land, Greece. When they arrived at Troy, a dispute rose between Agamemnon and Achilles because of their women prizes, Chryseis and Briseis. This resulted to Achilles' refusal to participate in the war for nine years. During that time, victory for each country wavered as the gods and goddesses in Olympus helped their favorite side. When Achilles decides to fight at last, it is in revenge for his best companion, Patroclus who was killed by Hector. He slew Hector and dragged his body to his camp. Despite Zeus' disagreement, Hector died because he was fated to do so. Odysseus came up with the idea of the Wooden Horse. He planned to get inside the gates of Troy so they could finally attack. The Trojans brought in the horse and when night fell, the Greeks attacked the Trojans, burnt their houses, killed their children and took their women as prizes.
The characters portrayed in the movie were fashioned in such a way that they appeared to be real and complex human beings. They gave in to their desires and to their human weaknesses such as pride, jealousy and anger but they also fought for justice, honor and love. Therefore you can easily sympathize and understand their actions and decisions since we all have the same human flaws and experiences. Most of the characters in 'Helen of Troy' were very much true to the original text in the Iliad. However, some key roles were fabricated to make the audience sympathize and admire characters like Paris, Helen and Menelaus as opposed to their selfish and arrogant personalities in the Iliad. They acted very well and very convincing such that they become distinct from the other characters in the story. Each person was unique to the other.
The script of the movie was true to the text to some extent. The beginning of 'Helen of Troy' started with the judgment of Paris in Mount Ida, which first introduced the prince to Helen. He was banished from Troy to the mountain as an infant because of Cassandra's prophecy that he will cause the end of their country. He finds out that he is a prince of Troy when he defeats Hector in a game and is finally accepted into the family despite his sister's constant protests. During her sister's wedding, Helen was abducted by Theseus and was brought to his country. They stayed together for a few years and Helen started falling in love with him until Pollux came to save her and was killed in the process. Theseus also died and Helen was brought back to Sparta where her father, Tyndareus, gave her away to the soldiers. The soldiers couldn't deny her beauty but decided to choose the husband by tossing rings. The one closest to the jar was Menelaus' and therefore, they married. Once, Paris went to Sparta to make peace with the city but when he sees Helen, they fall in love. They elope and when Menelaus found out about this, he associated with his brother, Agamemnon. Upon Reaching Troy, Menelaus first decides to talk to Priam, the country's king. Priam refuses to give Helen back and that's where the war began.
Overall, the movie, 'Helen of Troy', has been loyal to the original text in the Iliad except in some aspects. They both portray roughly the same roles and personalities of the characters. Although love was not a plausible theme in Homer's text as shown in the movie and the gods' influencing the waves of war weren't concretely depicted in the film, other themes like pride and honor coincided in both. The changes in the script didn't ruin the outcome of the movie. They just served as a form of exaggeration to further establish the uniqueness of the characters. The Iliad is classic, and it should be remembered this way.
Helen of Troy: A Movie Worthy of Your Time
e_v_k_c_117 August 2005
Last week, our class watched the movie Helen of Troy. The first thing that I noticed was it was a long movie (175 minutes). Helen of Troy was released in the year 2003, bringing to life the famous Greek poem The Iliad written by Homer. It was produced by Ted Kurdyla and was directed by John Kent Harrison. This adventurous/tragic epic showed the story of the battle between the Greeks and the Trojans. It depicted the complexity of the events and characters in the story. One of the visible aspects shown in the movie was the difference of the relationship of Agamemnon and Menelaus between that of Hector's and Paris'. Agamemnon's and Menelaus' relationship was more like that of a leader-servant. Agamemnon being the commanding older brother while Menelaus being the submissive one. On the other hand, Hector's and Paris' was more of the brotherly type. They respected each other and even if they didn't often show it they worried for the other's welfare. The distinction of the two relationships was clearly seen in the fight between Menelaus and Paris. Agamemnon didn't care if his brother would be killed unlike Hector who even sacrificed his life for the sake of Paris. For Agamemnon, he valued his life more than his brother's while for Hector he valued his brother's life more than his own.
All in all, the movie was an effective adaptation of the poem. The crew used elements that are similar to the period when the story was made. They have shown successfully the idea of what it would be like during those times. Also, the actors were perfect for their roles. They evoked different feelings such as anger, irritation and empathy from their audience a clear sign that they did a good job. They also did a good job in editing and directing the movie, only the important events were included. The only negative aspect of the movie that I saw was the incomplete portrayal of some of the characters like Achilles. All things considered, my final rating for the movie is 4.
All in all, the movie was an effective adaptation of the poem. The crew used elements that are similar to the period when the story was made. They have shown successfully the idea of what it would be like during those times. Also, the actors were perfect for their roles. They evoked different feelings such as anger, irritation and empathy from their audience a clear sign that they did a good job. They also did a good job in editing and directing the movie, only the important events were included. The only negative aspect of the movie that I saw was the incomplete portrayal of some of the characters like Achilles. All things considered, my final rating for the movie is 4.
Great Mini Series
Ashwindow22 April 2003
I thought it was a good series. I have seen a lot of mini series and and I can say that this is one of the good ones. I am into historical movies. Ruffus Sewell did a great job in this movie. The war part of it was good as well as the drama and love scenes.
Helen's Trojan horse
carmaPMAHC15 October 2006
Helen of Troy, just one of the many tireless adaptations of the Iliad. Unfortunately, movie writers decided to put a fancy Hollywood twist and Dada
this is the result. Having read the Iliad, you will be very disappointed by the fact that the producers seem to keep only the names of the characters from the original story. I never wanted to be cynical about the movie but as a lover of Greek Literature since Elementary the movie left a bad taste in the mouth. It was a good Hollywood movie, yes but as an adaptation to the Iliad? It's way below the scales. Another bad point is that the movie, exactly 175 minute long is cut. Yes, cut and horrifyingly done at the most important events. Students who have to do the review have to surf the net or else dig out the pirated DVD movies available in Mangagoy.
Let me describe it as cheerfully as I can. Have you ever tried watching those after-news soap opera's? Well, that's exactly how the story was told. Like a soap opera. Most of the important characters in the story were turned to extras and the unimportant ones took on major roles. What happened to the two heroes of mythical proportions, Hector and Achilles? One is an arrogant teenager (in mentality) who couldn't hurt even a fly and the other one seems Vin Diesel or Kurt Angle the wrestler. What happened to the fact that Paris was only good as an archer? What happened to the honor, the heroism? Where is Pollux' twin Castor? Both saved Helen when she was kidnapped. I didn't know that Agamemnon took a liking to Helen, and that rape scene. How disgusting, immature and perverted can they be? The worst and most obvious was the ransom of Hector's body. Originally it was between Priam and Achilles but since the movie was Helen of Troy, who else would be the star and be on the spotlight but Helen herself and her rapist Agamemnon? It was supposed to be an outstanding scene; they turned it into a failure. Let's not get started about the war scenes they used barbed wires in the background (They existed in the past???)
On the bright side, students liked the movie. They cherished Cassandra's line; "Kill him! Kill him!" It stood the test of time and lasted up to the socialization. Oh, and they thought Helen was a flirt and her face could only launch a 100 ships, if people would bother! Paris, the ever handsome Paris. One flaw, though, he's got scoliosis. People have to love Agamemnon's eyes, cold and wicked, a sex maniac as students opt to say. The musical scoring was good; a woman singing in the background was quite eerie. Overall, the movie was good enough. Be warned though, don't read the Iliad or anything relating to it before and after watching the movie. You'll be thoroughly disappointed.
Let me describe it as cheerfully as I can. Have you ever tried watching those after-news soap opera's? Well, that's exactly how the story was told. Like a soap opera. Most of the important characters in the story were turned to extras and the unimportant ones took on major roles. What happened to the two heroes of mythical proportions, Hector and Achilles? One is an arrogant teenager (in mentality) who couldn't hurt even a fly and the other one seems Vin Diesel or Kurt Angle the wrestler. What happened to the fact that Paris was only good as an archer? What happened to the honor, the heroism? Where is Pollux' twin Castor? Both saved Helen when she was kidnapped. I didn't know that Agamemnon took a liking to Helen, and that rape scene. How disgusting, immature and perverted can they be? The worst and most obvious was the ransom of Hector's body. Originally it was between Priam and Achilles but since the movie was Helen of Troy, who else would be the star and be on the spotlight but Helen herself and her rapist Agamemnon? It was supposed to be an outstanding scene; they turned it into a failure. Let's not get started about the war scenes they used barbed wires in the background (They existed in the past???)
On the bright side, students liked the movie. They cherished Cassandra's line; "Kill him! Kill him!" It stood the test of time and lasted up to the socialization. Oh, and they thought Helen was a flirt and her face could only launch a 100 ships, if people would bother! Paris, the ever handsome Paris. One flaw, though, he's got scoliosis. People have to love Agamemnon's eyes, cold and wicked, a sex maniac as students opt to say. The musical scoring was good; a woman singing in the background was quite eerie. Overall, the movie was good enough. Be warned though, don't read the Iliad or anything relating to it before and after watching the movie. You'll be thoroughly disappointed.
Homer meets Joe Eszterhas!
benoit-312 September 2003
I saw this piece of cr*p last night on TV. My jaw dropped during a scene where Paris and Menelaus basically mend their wounds together after a failed duel while bitching about Agamemnon. This is so far removed from the spirit of Homer's characters, I could have screamed! What is this, I thought? "Days of our Lives"?
I was equally appalled by the numerous uncalled-for scenes of torture, violence, sadism, gore, nudity, soft-core porn and violent sexual content, none of which are even remotely present or suggested in Homer. This is Greek mythology for the troubled, the uninformed, the blighted, the poor in spirit and the ignorant.
This is all the more troubling as this mini-series has the same name as Robert Wise's unqualified masterpiece, which is rarely shown nowadays and probably never will be again, after this one gave it the kiss of death.
I was equally appalled by the numerous uncalled-for scenes of torture, violence, sadism, gore, nudity, soft-core porn and violent sexual content, none of which are even remotely present or suggested in Homer. This is Greek mythology for the troubled, the uninformed, the blighted, the poor in spirit and the ignorant.
This is all the more troubling as this mini-series has the same name as Robert Wise's unqualified masterpiece, which is rarely shown nowadays and probably never will be again, after this one gave it the kiss of death.
Excellent Film
aesgaard4121 April 2003
I'm a big fan of mythology films even if I end up taking them apart by the end, but this movie probably has the least consistency errors in it than any other myth movie out there. The actress playing Helen is perfect with a lot of the beauty I expected while without being buried under make-up. I might have recast Achilles though and Odysseus for that matter. What ? No effort to get Armand Assante back as Odysseus to link his movie to this ? The film is obviously being told through the eyes of Menelaus while trying to keep as much of the original fantasy aspect out as possible. What the movie has is actually a expanded version of the original story taken to its most logical scenarios, but with a few liberties to the legend. Neither Pollux or Theseus actually killed each other. A bit of character goes into Paris this time to make him more worthy and deserving of Helen's hand. Helen is established as a woman looking for love than the idea she was the unworthy victim of a war created out of her fault. This is definitely told as a love story and the moving script keeps it interesting instead of bogging down on details. Ten stars for this movie !
A surprisingly satisfying version of the Iliad from John Kent Harrison
thrishyuh8 August 2005
"Loving me kills people, destroys families, causes such grief you cannot imagine." It did just that. After Paris steals Helen from Menelaus, a thousand ships set sail for Troy to get her back. The Greeks and the Trojans fought outside the walls of Troy, losing heroes in the process. Even the gods took sides, helping their 'favorites', so to speak. For 10 years the bloodshed went on until one day, the Greeks entered Troy via the wooden horse. They caught the Trojans off guard and killed them all, sparing only the women and children. Troy lay in ruins and Helen was given back to her rightful owner. That is Homer's Iliad. The epic-drama film, Helen of Troy, however, revolved more around the love triangle of Paris, Helen and Menelaus. John Kent Harrison's 175-minute version, which was released in 2003, was told from Menelaus' point of view. He was shown as a faithful and heartbroken king slash husband overshadowed by his evil brother Agamemnon. In the scene where time stopped as he saw Helen, he convinced me that he really loved her and was really fighting for her. If it were from another character's point of view though, Achilles' for instance, he probably wouldn't be given much appearance in the film since he wasn't really 'the' major character. He would be but an extra and Achilles would be portrayed as an admirable warrior rather than a ruthless one who was just itching for royal blood. The film would also be more faithful to the original story since Achilles is 'the' main man of the Iliad.
I enjoyed the movie. The actors did justice to their characters, especially Rufus Sewell (Agamemnon). His eyes said everything. The lighting and sound effects for the respective scenes were good, too. They contributed a lot to how a scene made the viewer feel, whether it be fear for Paris' life or utter hatred for Agamemnon. The same goes for the editing, though the 'slow-mo' scene made me laugh. Overall, I give it a 4/5.
I enjoyed the movie. The actors did justice to their characters, especially Rufus Sewell (Agamemnon). His eyes said everything. The lighting and sound effects for the respective scenes were good, too. They contributed a lot to how a scene made the viewer feel, whether it be fear for Paris' life or utter hatred for Agamemnon. The same goes for the editing, though the 'slow-mo' scene made me laugh. Overall, I give it a 4/5.
Slightly less fun than slitting your own throat and jumping in a pool of vinegar.
gothic-212 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Here's the thing. The production value was not too shabby. Sure, the budget wasn't up there with Troy but you could tell that decent efforts were made by the CGI guys. And that's where the decency stops.
It's just sad that Homer's epic Iliad hasn't been told yet. Not just properly but, at all.
I've read reviewers talking about various interpretations and different points of view.
Bull. Crap. The book is there. It's clear as daylight. And yet, still no decent portrayal of Homer's 3.000 old writings.
This is not bad just as far as accuracy goes. 300 for example was as accurate as an 80 year old man, trying to shoot a humming bird with a weakly stringed bow from a 2000 yard distance while wearing a blindfold, but still it was fun and well filmed with a high re- watching value.
But this? Dear Zeus. Poor Gimli was trying to save the day, but the rest were overacting like Calculon from Futurama. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at Achilles. I was expecting Vince McMahon to jump at the roidraged monster and yell "Y'er fired" when he got lanced, something that finally ended his WWE rantings. Hell, he should have his own theme and Titantron whenever he showed up.
I definitely did laugh at the part where they find the Trojan horse and someone is supposed to tell them in ancient fluent "Greek" that this is an offering to the goddess Athena. Too bad he was speaking a mix of Italian and Southparkish derka derka and not a single word was actual Greek. Not even Athena. Which in ancient Greek it's.... well... Athena. Watching Homer's Iliad being violated in such a way, is like giving Michael Bay to do his own rendition of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
I do get the ones who liked or even loved it, if they recently discovered Western Civilization (like the week before they watched it) and this was the second movie they watched in their life, right after Miami Connection.
Another prerequisite to really enjoy this movie is that the only Homer you know, is the beloved character by Matt Groening.
The rape at the ending is yet another thing that was never in the book. It's just a subtle metaphor from the director and screenwriter that this is what they did to our precious time which we'll never get back.
It's just sad that Homer's epic Iliad hasn't been told yet. Not just properly but, at all.
I've read reviewers talking about various interpretations and different points of view.
Bull. Crap. The book is there. It's clear as daylight. And yet, still no decent portrayal of Homer's 3.000 old writings.
This is not bad just as far as accuracy goes. 300 for example was as accurate as an 80 year old man, trying to shoot a humming bird with a weakly stringed bow from a 2000 yard distance while wearing a blindfold, but still it was fun and well filmed with a high re- watching value.
But this? Dear Zeus. Poor Gimli was trying to save the day, but the rest were overacting like Calculon from Futurama. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at Achilles. I was expecting Vince McMahon to jump at the roidraged monster and yell "Y'er fired" when he got lanced, something that finally ended his WWE rantings. Hell, he should have his own theme and Titantron whenever he showed up.
I definitely did laugh at the part where they find the Trojan horse and someone is supposed to tell them in ancient fluent "Greek" that this is an offering to the goddess Athena. Too bad he was speaking a mix of Italian and Southparkish derka derka and not a single word was actual Greek. Not even Athena. Which in ancient Greek it's.... well... Athena. Watching Homer's Iliad being violated in such a way, is like giving Michael Bay to do his own rendition of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
I do get the ones who liked or even loved it, if they recently discovered Western Civilization (like the week before they watched it) and this was the second movie they watched in their life, right after Miami Connection.
Another prerequisite to really enjoy this movie is that the only Homer you know, is the beloved character by Matt Groening.
The rape at the ending is yet another thing that was never in the book. It's just a subtle metaphor from the director and screenwriter that this is what they did to our precious time which we'll never get back.
Helen's GREED brought the downfall of Troy
daphne_pretty7 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Helen of Troy: Helen's Greed Helen of Troy is a film that covers the story of Homer's Iliad. Directed by J.K. Harrison, written by Ronni Kern and produced by Adam Shapiro c/o the Universal Television Studio, it was released in 2003 on US television as a mini series. My classmates and I, however, watched it on DVD (from Universal Home Video) last week (July 25 August 5, 2005) during our English classes. The whole film is 175 minutes long. It was about the fate of Helen, Zeus's bastard, who was the root of the Trojan War and the Fall of Troy. The film started with a childish feud between the goddesses Aphrodite, Hera and Athena who were fighting over Eris' Golden Apple of Discord that was marked For the Fairest. Zeus advised them to go to the Trojan Paris who was said to have a remarkable taste for beauty. Weak Paris chose Aphrodite who promised love, passion and Helen the fairest woman on earth over Hera's gift of wealth, and Athena's gift of victory. Paris, whose kingdom was faced with a conflict with the Greeks, had to sail to Sparta to make peace with the king, Menelaus. Instead of making peace, Paris triggered the conflict by bringing Helen to Troy making the Greeks think that their queen was abducted. This angered the Greeks and then the Trojan War began. Greeks won the ten-year war and Helen was reclaimed. Troy was destroyed and Helen was back, all right, but many innocent lives were wasted. The war would have ended peacefully if Helen surrendered to the Greek Commander-in-Chief, Agamemnon. In the film, she gave herself up but didn't surrender. Note the words of Paris' psycho-psychic half sister Cassandra to Helen, "You gave yourself up but you didn't surrender, did you?!". Helen didn't surrender because she didn't yield to the Greeks or even abandoned her love for Paris. What she did was definitely unacceptable for Agamemnon. Helen's greed failed to save Troy.
Beyond the fact that the story was well written, the direction was laudable. The director was able to pull out from every actor the right emotion that each needed to play. Actor Rufus Sewell who played the evil and lustful Agamemnon acted so well that he was able to make everyone in our class despise him. The use of computer-generated graphics (CG) on the Greek vessels was a wise move. It helped the filmmakers save money and time in creating the film. Although I believe that there is more to computer effects, the use of CG was not that bad. The sound effects wasn't that bad either. Overall, I give the movie 3.75 stars out of five. It's not a movie that I will eagerly watch but it's good enough to see compared with other movies about the Iliad especially when you're after a more accurate account of the Greek epic.
Beyond the fact that the story was well written, the direction was laudable. The director was able to pull out from every actor the right emotion that each needed to play. Actor Rufus Sewell who played the evil and lustful Agamemnon acted so well that he was able to make everyone in our class despise him. The use of computer-generated graphics (CG) on the Greek vessels was a wise move. It helped the filmmakers save money and time in creating the film. Although I believe that there is more to computer effects, the use of CG was not that bad. The sound effects wasn't that bad either. Overall, I give the movie 3.75 stars out of five. It's not a movie that I will eagerly watch but it's good enough to see compared with other movies about the Iliad especially when you're after a more accurate account of the Greek epic.
comparison with the Iliad :)
denise_angel138 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The famous epic, the Iliad by Homer, featured the mighty Achilles and his adventures while at war with Troy. The tale started with the Judgment of Paris and. The movie version of the Iliad Helen of Troy was directed by John Kent Harrison. The film was released in 2003. This 2 hour and 55 minute romance, action and adventure flick featured the love story of Paris of Troy and Helen of Sparta (who soon became Helen of Troy). There were some key differences in the movie compared to the text. The Iliad is focused on Achilles and his heroic adventures. The main characters of the film were Paris and Helen, while Achilles was just a warrior who helped the Greeks defeat Troy. Helen of Troy began with the birth of Paris and Cassandra's premonition. The Iliad however began with the goddess Eris causing dispute between the three goddess, who then made Paris chose among them. The film portrayed Agamemnon's character better than the text's portrayal of him. Different sides of him were shown, such as the very brutal side of Agamemnon. The scene where Helen came to him and "surrendered" showed his love for Iphigenia and his guilt for killing her. The scene where he raped Helen showed how brutal and merciless he was. Also, according to the movie, Sparta took part in the war against Troy for riches and for them to get to Byzantium. The text however stated that their main reason was to retrieve Helen who was rightfully theirs. The movie failed to show the death of Patrolocus which urged Achilles to fight thus leading to the death of Hector. In the movie, Achilles was killed almost right after Hector's death. According to the text however, he died after his battle with Memnon. In the movie, the gods weren't shown visibly though we know that they actively took part in the war of Sparta and Troy, especially during the battles of Hector and Achilles' and Paris and Menelaus. At the beginning of the story, Pollux told Helen, "what madness lies in men." These wise words of Helen's brother were portrayed in the story through the pride of men and the consequences this brings. The "kidnap" of Helen caused the war. Sparta and Menelaus were deeply insulted by this, thus letting their pride get the better of them. The war that Sparta waged is a perfect example of the "madness" Pollux warned Helen about. Another simple example of the saying was when Menelaus made Helen walk into the feast and display herself, naked, to everyone. The saying could possibly be a premonition of everything that would happen in the story. The rape of Helen was the effect of the pride, guilt and anger of Agamemnon. He did not act rationally, which led to Helen's demise.
In a more technical aspect, the effects used in the film were excellent. The sound effects did a great job of putting "feeling" into each scene. Each scene where Helen and Paris were together was accompanied by music that brought feelings of love and romance to the viewers. I especially liked Rufus Sewell's portrayal of Agamemnon. His acting was perfect for the character because he showed that Agamemnon was a tough, "war-loving" person. He was very expressive. The scene where he poured out his guilt and sadness and love for his daughter to Helen proved this most. The actor I least liked is James Callis, who played Menelaus. I imagined Menelaus (based on what I've read) to be more assertive. The actor portrayed him as a passive man, inferior to his brother. I particularly like the costume used in the movie. Everything, even the props were realistic and Greek-like. The Trojan horse was also very realistic. I looked exactly like I pictured it to be something hand made by the Greeks and wasn't perfectly done. In general I really appreciated the movie and would rate it as a 3.5 on a 1 5 scale, 5 being the highest.
In a more technical aspect, the effects used in the film were excellent. The sound effects did a great job of putting "feeling" into each scene. Each scene where Helen and Paris were together was accompanied by music that brought feelings of love and romance to the viewers. I especially liked Rufus Sewell's portrayal of Agamemnon. His acting was perfect for the character because he showed that Agamemnon was a tough, "war-loving" person. He was very expressive. The scene where he poured out his guilt and sadness and love for his daughter to Helen proved this most. The actor I least liked is James Callis, who played Menelaus. I imagined Menelaus (based on what I've read) to be more assertive. The actor portrayed him as a passive man, inferior to his brother. I particularly like the costume used in the movie. Everything, even the props were realistic and Greek-like. The Trojan horse was also very realistic. I looked exactly like I pictured it to be something hand made by the Greeks and wasn't perfectly done. In general I really appreciated the movie and would rate it as a 3.5 on a 1 5 scale, 5 being the highest.
Big mistake to watch this one.
nittany8921 April 2003
I watched the first part, and couldn't bear to watch part 2. The main question in my mind was: Did the people who made this movie even read the story of Helen, Paris, and the Trojan War? It seemed that they didn't. The acting is mediocre, but the sets are good. The storm at sea near the end of part 1 was contrived. A sailor is washed overboard, but I could have sworn he jumped. Probably because he realized what a dud this film is.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
