Troy

I don't get the mediocre reception. This is a solid movie which handles its subject in an effective if not inevitable manner. It's like Titanic, taking the most straightforward cinematic angle on an epic premise; yes it's corny, but isn't almost every movie after 20 years? And you don't see rotten reception on some of the corniest ones? So I don't get it. I'm as sensitive as anyone to bad writing, and Troy's was no worse than we should have expected. No worse than 2026's adored Odyssey! I think Troy will age better and feel more definitive than The Odyssey -- perhaps not in public recognition, but for those who look closely. Troy will stand as a fair monument to The Iliad while The Odyssey withers as an expensive yet uninspired transposition.

I concede that Troy is too obvious. When Paris needs to look concerned, Orlando Bloom is too obviously trying to look concerned. Some of the dialogue is super on-the-nose. Although now that I think about it, much of the cringey obviousness just comes through the acting. Paris and Helen are in a perpetual state of questionably-acted sappiness; Hector's wife is too much; Brad Pitt can't figure out whether to play Achilles or James Dean. And acting in particular sours after 20 years, for nearly all movies. So I can't find a major blemish with this film.

I don't really think Brad Pitt did a bad job, though I can imagine better versions of his character with another actor. He's being a bit of an American heartthrob when he needs to be a Greek warrior. He's too likable -- Achilles should only be lovable, and then only in the old Greek way. Hector is decent, although again I think I could love that character with another actor. Something about Eric Bana never quite hit for me, hence my opinion of Hector was lukewarm until I read The Iliad. Now I realize he might be the best hero in the whole cycle, and Bana just wasn't exactly my speed. I don't think Orlando Bloom was actually that bad... he's a kid anyway. Same with Helen; both lovers don't seem to know how to make a facial expression, but it's fine because we can just say they're teenagers or something.

Odysseus of course is spot on. He's just doing his thing, he doesn't even need to think about his character. Just put Sean Bean in the roles that need him and (optionally) tell him what to say. Then forget he's even there -- he's got it covered, go fight other fires. Never worry about Sean Bean. My one complaint - my ONE complaint - is his bangs. We'll take it though - not his choice anyway. Sean Bean is doing what he needs to do, as usual, a beacon of reliable acting, and my one and only man-crush who I also wish was my father. And brother. And "captain and king". It's funny to see him kill the Old Bear Mormont. That would be so anti-character if it happened in GoT.

Brian Cox is effective, and the writer's characterization of Agamemnon is effective, though he's lacking the majesty of The Iliad and Nolan's Odyssey.

Okay that's enough talking about anyone other than Odysseus. This movie solidifies that he's one of my favorite characters ever. It doesn't blow it out of the water -- he's a side character, humbly written, humbly acted, leading through servitude as he says in the movie -- but that only solidifies his solidity. He doesn't need the limelight to shine. In this movie, as in The Iliad, as in GoT, he/Ned/Sean is strong, wise, a natural leader yet a devoted servant, likable and lovable, respected, sharp, honorable. Achilles respects him over every king of Greece, yet he fights for Agamemnon because that's what his country calls for. And they need him: he leads a legion while conniving the end of the war. Only Zeus knows what would have happened in Troy and what we'd be saying about it today without Odysseus' intervention. Homer calls Odysseus godlike, but let's scale it to familiar standards: Achilles is godlike, and Odysseus is nothing more or less than the best man of Greece.

What a movie The Odyssey could have bean. If it had happened 10 years ago, the timeline would have bean perfect. It would have bean strange to persist a casting across productions and personnel, though maybe Benioff would have bean the right writer anyway, so it could have lined up well enough... In fact, GoT was full-swing at that point, so it could have bean a GoT-infused, GOAT-infused Odyssey. Benioff writes, Odysseus gets Ned, Telemachos gets Robb, Penelope gets... lol Cat needs to shed a few years if she's to be the prize of Ithaca's youth. I guess Odysseus' family doesn't literally have to be Ned's family. But it almost works. Circe gets Cersei, come on. Well, names aside, Cersei and Dany could both be effective witches in the style of Circe or Kalypso. Nestor: Barristan? Athena: Sansa? Obviously Dany is an option as Athena, considering Targaryens are the closest to gods, but Athena is such a protector in The Odyssey, and Dany never made me feel warm inside.

I could use a slightly less heartthrobby Achilles. Brad Pitt is too much of a normal guy. It's like getting Matt Damon for The Odyssey, although it's better, because Brad Pitt is a little more glorious and glimmering. It's not terrible. But he's a little too soft. It's like Russell Crowe as Maximus, or Ryan Gosling as anything serious. These folks were designed to be relatable studs, not tall classical men... except that Matt Damon isn't even a heartthrob, he's just wrong for Homer altogether.