WARNING: "Story Spoilers" spoilers below
Troy is a brutal criticism on the pointlessness of faith, honor, religion, and warfare. It's ultimately a tale of fools. The absence of fantasy elements in the movie was criticized and terribly misunderstood, when said absence actually has a point to it, to show that the Trojan priests who blindly worshiped gods that we never see are as foolish as the Greek soldiers who fought for an honor that's as meaningless as their blind faith. Both the priests and the soldiers were driven by abstract ideals into making some very foolish decisions. Paris' (Orlando Bloom) honor, for example, has as much meaning as his supposed love for Helen of Sparta (Diane Kruger), when he cowardly ran from the fight against Menelaus (Brendan Gleeson) despite proclaiming earlier that he'd die for Helen. Where's the honor in that?
Furthermore, Paris' revenge for Hector (Eric Bana) seemed to have been done out of obligation, not out of his love for his brother. After giving Achilles (Brat Pitt) the killing strikes, Paris witnessed Briseis (Rose Byrne) holding onto Achilles, the man she loved, the same way he would have held Helen, yet Paris showed no emotions and was clearly indifferent towards Briseis' feelings of love as he tried to drag her away. It might have been due to Orlando Bloom's poor acting, but it works in showing Paris' inability to understand love. Paris' capability of processing Briseis' love pragmatically like an emotionless robot was due to his ignorance towards the true value of love as his brother had foretold, much like the Greeks' ignorance towards the true value of honor. They claimed to kill for honor, and yet they rape the Trojans' wives like honorless men. And on that note, yes, the excessive violence has a point in the story too. Greek tragedies are usually violent, and in this case, it's to show how hypocritical these men and their ideals really are. For all their violent pursuits of glory, they (including Achilles) will ironically not be remembered as heroes, but as savages who rape women and kill each other for senseless vengeance. They are as terrible as the gods they worship.
I was initially mildly concerned as well about Wolfgang Petersen's more realistic take on what was essentially a mythological world. I had thought that Aphrodite's Golden Apple would have added more context to Achilles' criticism of the Greek gods, whom as most of you might know, were complete a-holes. For those of you who don't know, Aphrodite was one of three goddesses competing for the Golden Apple of Discord, one that says "To the most beautiful". Paris was chosen for his fairness to be the judge of the one who shall earn the Apple. To gain Paris' favor, Aphrodite offered him Helen of Sparta as a gift, thus triggering the Trojan War. The changes here might seem appalling to the fans of the original tale, but I'm going to call 'blinded fanboyism' on this one. The rewritten story works without my knowledge of the literature, which is no more sacred than a Marvel comic book (look how faithful those Marvel movies turned out to be). While I admit that an exploration of the foolishness of men as they are manipulated by terrible gods would have made an interesting story, I don't really see how this variation is a more terrible retelling as well.
In fact, Petersen's avoidance from using fantasy elements, including any telltale signs that Achilles was in fact invulnerable like some kind of ancient Superman, was a stroke of genius. It's to further the belief that any character's mentioning of "seeing god" might have been a symbolic expression and nothing else. In this age of mysticism, we see these fools fought among themselves for gods, for honor, for love - none of which hold true in the end. The gods' existence was disproven by the Trojan Horse (ironically, it's supposed to be a tribute to the sea god, Poseidon), the love was disproven by Paris' indifference towards Briseis' love for another man, and the honor was disproven when those men began humping the Trojan wives in the middle of the street. The reality of man's terrible nature sets in among their foolish ideals. And you know what's the worst part? Paris passed on such ignorance and idealism onto the next generation, Aeneas, when he gave him the Sword of Troy, something that practically didn't help Paris at all when he fought Menelaus. So much for all that spiritual nonsense about the Sword bearing some mystical power.
The best part of the movie is that it never hammers the audience with its criticism of blind faith. Rather than spending its time preaching about philosophy, it often focuses on character relationships and how those relationships affect them and the people around them. More importantly, it shows the philosophy through the characters' foolish actions, not through expositions or preaches. Show, not tell. The best example of this is when the soldiers ransacked the temple and destroyed the idols. Priam (Peter O'Toole') shouted in rebellion, "Have you no honor?!" right before he was backstabbed by Agamemnon (Brian Cox) in the very place where he worshiped his all-powerful gods.
When Priam asked Agamemnon to spare the innocent children, he spatted in his face, telling him "Nobody's innocent. Nobody." And indeed, nobody was. Paris started this war for love he never understood, Hector accidentally killed Achilles' cousin when he followed Priam's foolish commands of ambushing the retreating Greek soldiers, Achilles' pursuit of glory left him ended up being remembered not for his heroic deeds but for the weakness in his heels, and so on and so forth. They are all embroiled in an honorless world where backstabbing and sneak attacks hold the true power, not gods, not honor, not love. It's a vicious cycle they'll not be getting out for as long as the Sword is passed on.
The movie's 'epic' quote from Iliad is laughable in hindsight. "If they ever tell my story let them say that I walked with giants. Men rise and fall like the winter wheat, but these names will never die. Let them say I lived in the time of Achilles, the guy who took an arrow in his heel." Giants indeed.
Troy is a brutal criticism on the pointlessness of faith, honor, religion, and warfare. It's ultimately a tale of fools. The absence of fantasy elements in the movie was criticized and terribly misunderstood, when said absence actually has a point to it, to show that the Trojan priests who blindly worshiped gods that we never see are as foolish as the Greek soldiers who fought for an honor that's as meaningless as their blind faith. Both the priests and the soldiers were driven by abstract ideals into making some very foolish decisions. Paris' (Orlando Bloom) honor, for example, has as much meaning as his supposed love for Helen of Sparta (Diane Kruger), when he cowardly ran from the fight against Menelaus (Brendan Gleeson) despite proclaiming earlier that he'd die for Helen. Where's the honor in that?
Furthermore, Paris' revenge for Hector (Eric Bana) seemed to have been done out of obligation, not out of his love for his brother. After giving Achilles (Brat Pitt) the killing strikes, Paris witnessed Briseis (Rose Byrne) holding onto Achilles, the man she loved, the same way he would have held Helen, yet Paris showed no emotions and was clearly indifferent towards Briseis' feelings of love as he tried to drag her away. It might have been due to Orlando Bloom's poor acting, but it works in showing Paris' inability to understand love. Paris' capability of processing Briseis' love pragmatically like an emotionless robot was due to his ignorance towards the true value of love as his brother had foretold, much like the Greeks' ignorance towards the true value of honor. They claimed to kill for honor, and yet they rape the Trojans' wives like honorless men. And on that note, yes, the excessive violence has a point in the story too. Greek tragedies are usually violent, and in this case, it's to show how hypocritical these men and their ideals really are. For all their violent pursuits of glory, they (including Achilles) will ironically not be remembered as heroes, but as savages who rape women and kill each other for senseless vengeance. They are as terrible as the gods they worship.
I was initially mildly concerned as well about Wolfgang Petersen's more realistic take on what was essentially a mythological world. I had thought that Aphrodite's Golden Apple would have added more context to Achilles' criticism of the Greek gods, whom as most of you might know, were complete a-holes. For those of you who don't know, Aphrodite was one of three goddesses competing for the Golden Apple of Discord, one that says "To the most beautiful". Paris was chosen for his fairness to be the judge of the one who shall earn the Apple. To gain Paris' favor, Aphrodite offered him Helen of Sparta as a gift, thus triggering the Trojan War. The changes here might seem appalling to the fans of the original tale, but I'm going to call 'blinded fanboyism' on this one. The rewritten story works without my knowledge of the literature, which is no more sacred than a Marvel comic book (look how faithful those Marvel movies turned out to be). While I admit that an exploration of the foolishness of men as they are manipulated by terrible gods would have made an interesting story, I don't really see how this variation is a more terrible retelling as well.
In fact, Petersen's avoidance from using fantasy elements, including any telltale signs that Achilles was in fact invulnerable like some kind of ancient Superman, was a stroke of genius. It's to further the belief that any character's mentioning of "seeing god" might have been a symbolic expression and nothing else. In this age of mysticism, we see these fools fought among themselves for gods, for honor, for love - none of which hold true in the end. The gods' existence was disproven by the Trojan Horse (ironically, it's supposed to be a tribute to the sea god, Poseidon), the love was disproven by Paris' indifference towards Briseis' love for another man, and the honor was disproven when those men began humping the Trojan wives in the middle of the street. The reality of man's terrible nature sets in among their foolish ideals. And you know what's the worst part? Paris passed on such ignorance and idealism onto the next generation, Aeneas, when he gave him the Sword of Troy, something that practically didn't help Paris at all when he fought Menelaus. So much for all that spiritual nonsense about the Sword bearing some mystical power.
The best part of the movie is that it never hammers the audience with its criticism of blind faith. Rather than spending its time preaching about philosophy, it often focuses on character relationships and how those relationships affect them and the people around them. More importantly, it shows the philosophy through the characters' foolish actions, not through expositions or preaches. Show, not tell. The best example of this is when the soldiers ransacked the temple and destroyed the idols. Priam (Peter O'Toole') shouted in rebellion, "Have you no honor?!" right before he was backstabbed by Agamemnon (Brian Cox) in the very place where he worshiped his all-powerful gods.
When Priam asked Agamemnon to spare the innocent children, he spatted in his face, telling him "Nobody's innocent. Nobody." And indeed, nobody was. Paris started this war for love he never understood, Hector accidentally killed Achilles' cousin when he followed Priam's foolish commands of ambushing the retreating Greek soldiers, Achilles' pursuit of glory left him ended up being remembered not for his heroic deeds but for the weakness in his heels, and so on and so forth. They are all embroiled in an honorless world where backstabbing and sneak attacks hold the true power, not gods, not honor, not love. It's a vicious cycle they'll not be getting out for as long as the Sword is passed on.
The movie's 'epic' quote from Iliad is laughable in hindsight. "If they ever tell my story let them say that I walked with giants. Men rise and fall like the winter wheat, but these names will never die. Let them say I lived in the time of Achilles, the guy who took an arrow in his heel." Giants indeed.
Reply to Topic
and, uh, you know Glasgow, right? Now how about gasglow? Now that's far more interesting I can tell ya. 
