Helen of Troy

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 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.

DVD borrowed from my local public library, DTS sound, widescreen, each half on each of two disks, I watched it on consecutive nights. I was most drawn to it for Sienna Guillory, young British actress and daughter of a famous musician from Cuba, whom I had seen in the modern remake of 'The Time Machine.' She plays Helen of Sparta, who becomes Helen of Troy, and is the default object of passion which sparks the war and eventual fall of Troy, via the Trojan Horse. Agamemnon and Achilles are depicted as heartless killers with no redeeming qualities. I don't know what Homer had in mind, but this seems to be decidedly different from most earlier treatments of these mythical characters. The video transfer to DVD is very high quality, but the sharpness and realistic colors are not as effective as some period pieces (e.g. Gladiator) which use a mildly tinted image and selective focus to better depict the olden times. Still, for the type of movie it is, a worthwhile depiction of some important Greek mythology.

In connection with mythology, our class was given the opportunity to view the film, Helen of Troy, last July 26 to August 2, 2005. Helen of Troy, released during the year 2003, is a movie produced by Ted Kurdyla and directed by John Kent Harrison. It was based on Homer's "Iliad" and its primary focus is "The Trojan War", which is one of the greatest stories in Ancient Literature. The film involves the story of Helen, the most beautiful woman in the world, being married to Menelaus in a land called Sparta. When Prince Paris comes to seek peace with Sparta, Helen falls madly in love with him and follows him to Troy. Enraged, Menelaus calls upon the Greek army to fulfill the oath they once swore: to defy anyone who stole Helen. From thus, the battle for Helen's love was started, putting the lives of many great warriors at stake. Although, the story presented a different plot from the text, people who haven't read it would be able to grasp the main idea from the movie. I was disappointed by the way the writers portrayed the character of Achilles, especially his line: "I stand before High King Agamemnon". Achilles was not under anyone, not even the highest of Kings; he cared for his own skin and fought for his own glory. Making him faithful to Agamemnon and responsible for no one else was a mistake because it means to show there were no other people involved who concerned Achilles. I also did not like the reason the writers made for Achilles killing Hector. According to the text, Achilles kills Hector to avenge his best friend's death – not to save Agamemnon. Another significant difference was Helen begging for the body of Hector from Agamemnon, which was wrong; I believe it's important that Priam, Hector's father, was the one who asked for his son's body from Achilles because it shows that despite all the people Achilles has killed, there was still compassion left in the heart of even the most ruthless warrior. What worked particularly well for the film was the focus on Helen's royal family; it explained a lot about Helen's background, thus giving the audience more information than in the text.

I give this movie, a final rating of 4. The setting, effects and the cinematography was great. It made me feel as if it's the exact place where the battle happened. Helen of Troy is a movie that immediately captures its audience, engraving into their hearts the message it wishes to impart, which is: there will always be people who are ready to fight, whether it be for love of country, love of glory, or simply loving someone.

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.