It’s Greek to Me: Films #015 & #016 – Troy (2004) & 300 (2006)

Much better than I expected when I first saw it, Troy has held up over time. An obvious attempt at a more “modern” approach to the sword-and-sandal film, it succeeds because of how it tackles the basic plot. Rather than dramatize the historic tale or creating a fake “truth” (like King Arthur), it tells a story that *could* be true and could naturally have led to the myth as it developed. Great performances from everyone, anchored by Eric Bana’s Hector. It never succeeds in making Brad Pitt’s Achilles entirely sympathetic, but I’m not sure it wants to. Interesting decision to basically make Paris a coward. The “director’s cut” I watched this time on HD DVD is probably too long. I didn’t see anything that justified the added length. Even with the unnecessary extension, it’s a strong film.

After re-watching Troy, I decided to watch 300 again. While Troy attempts a new approach, 300 delivers it. The look and feel of 300 is unlike anything to precede it and gives the film a visceral power that Troy simply lacks. Despite its original take on the story, Troy is still a traditionally shot film. Beautiful, but traditional. 300 throws all the rules out the window, recreating Frank Miller’s graphic novel with alarming fidelity (while expanding it just enough to flesh out a theatrical film). Over the top? Yes. And gloriously so.

As a side note, I was surprised to note Vincent Regan’s appearance in Troy. Appearing in that earlier film as Achilles’ right hand man, I can’t help but wonder if that experience led to his casting as the Captain in 300. Similar parts on paper, but so different on film. A neat connection between the two best modern examples of the sword-and-sandal genre.

The full review of Troy can be found here.

(Note the dig at 300 – which I hadn’t seen yet. I’m eating those words.)

A full review of 300 (the one I was writing last year, but never finished) is forthcoming.

2 Responses to “It’s Greek to Me: Films #015 & #016 – Troy (2004) & 300 (2006)”

  1. sophiabrooks Says:

    What about Alexander? ; (

  2. Philip Says:

    I’ve not seen “Alexander”, partly because I don’t think much of Oliver Stone as a director, partly because I can’t stand Colin Farell as an actor, but mostly because I can’t fiugre out which one to watch: the theatrical cut, the “Director’s cut” or the “Final Cut”. I suppose the first one I come across really cheap will be the deciding factor.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.