FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Cody One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Steven Torrey I liked the movie. It gives a good review of the events that led to the Trojan war. Questions regarding the exact nature of Helen are still debated in scholarly circles. Was she manipulator of people and events, or a victim of events? Did she run off willingly with Paris/Alexander or was she abducted? Was she a flake or was she some sort of über-woman? Sienna Guilory plays to all of these questions. At one moment a waif and when needed--über-woman; at one moment a victim, at another a perpetrator. The role is not as easy to play as one might think.But what if someone like Elizabeth Hurley was cast as Helen? Someone with body size to go with the indomitable and chameleon spirit of Helen? Would there be a different sense to the movie and to Helen as a theatrical role? Complaints about fidelity to the ancient text are duly noted; like reading the Cliff notes, a movie ain't the best way to crib for tomorrow's exam on the Iliad. Helen of Troy. Her story is one that grew over the years and with every accretion changed. In 'Agamemnon', Aeschylus doesn't even want to mention her name, she is a betrayer of Greece. Euripides' "Helen" might be regarded as the first bastardized story-line of the original from the Iliad. The Trojan Horse is an incident from the Odyssey and takes very few lines; Vergil's Aeneid discusses the Trojan Horse in any detail. So to think the viewer is watching an interpretation of Homer's Iliad, better re-read the original.The Greek story can be complicated to follow, especially for the modern viewer. I thought they did an admirable job of getting the general idea--even if some of the details were lost in translation.

Robert J. Maxwell The story is pretty well known, at least in some sectors of social space, so I'll just make some observations as I watch this longish version through.Briefly: It's about 1200 BC. Paris, a young man of Troy, falls in love with, Helen, the wife of a Greek king and runs off with her to his home. This annoys the Greeks. They launch a thousand ships and wage a ten-year war against the walls of Troy. The Trojan forces include the noble Hector. The Greeks have Achilles and the wily Odysseus. The war is brutal but finally ends, although the in-family tsuris persists through the post-war period.First, half an hour in, I haven't seen anything in the wardrobe or weapons that was disturbing but I'm not a historian. True, some of the armor looks left over from a movie about the Roman Empire, and in battle the swords don't look like Greek choppers but like the Roman gladius, but it doesn't poison the story. What I definitely could not wrap my head around was Achilles -- a muscle-bound, bald-headed street thug who would have fit very well into one of Cinecitta's sword-and-sandal epics starring Steve Reeves from the 1950s or, better yet, into a modern urban action movie. All that's missing are the barbed wire tattoos. There have been complaints that it wanders too far from Homer's original but so far it resembles the original story, at least the translation I read years ago. I doubt anyone know what the ACTUAL original was like. Homer's version was written down hundreds of years after the event. And I understand it was all memorized oral folklore. The iambic pentameter was a mnemonic device. If the orator screwed up the meter he'd know he'd made a mistake, but it's easy to imagine that improvisation to bring back order was a common event. I doubt that Homer hewed to closely to the hundreds-of-year-old original tale, but then there might not have been that much left for Homer to hew to.At least this one has the gods and goddesses mucking around with things, although not much. Paris gets the golden apple for choosing Aphrodite as the most beautiful of three competing contestants, and she backs Paris in the Trojan War. Next time he should be a bit more pragmatic and choose Athena. Even if she had a face like the rear end of an International eighteen wheeler, she knows about war. Nothing here though about Aphrodite back Troy in the war. There are also complaints about Helen not being worth a war because she's not as bewitchingly desirable as she should be, but in my opinion she looks just fine and would do in a pinch. She's spirited, slender and blond, with a piping voice, a la gamin, and looks vaguely French. If you watch it, you'll see what I mean.I have no memory of Paris on his first visit to Troy being pitted in games against the finest Trojan warriors. (He beats Hector in a knife fight in the arena.) Maybe the scenes were added to juice up the story with more action and to turn Paris into more of a hero, or it may be that my brain is turning to tofu, in which case I will leave it for analysis to the American Culinary Institute. I don't recall that Helen was first kidnapped by the agents of one of the Greek kings either. It looks like padding. But the honorable kidnapper is played by Stellan Skarsgaard whose work I've always admired, whether his character is good or evil. The other performers who stand out are John Rhys-Davies as King Pryam, James Callis as the sneaky Agamemnon, and Rufus Sewell as the honest Menelaus.In the end, only the bare bones of the original remain. We hardly see Odysseus. There is no Patroclus. Achilles never has a hissy fit over his girl friend being taken away. But there IS the Trojan Horse, Achilles dragging Hector's body around the walls of Troy, Paris killing Achilles with an arrow to the heel, and Cassandra's prophecies being realized. A revenge incident is tacked on at the end to provide a sense of justice prevailing. The underhanded Agamemnon is murdered in his bath by his jealous wife, Clytemnestra. But that's from a different play altogether. It's like taking a shoe horn and working the Doolittle raid into the climax of the wretched "Pearl Harbor," only there to provide a feeling of justice having been done.I kind of enjoyed it. The production values are high, the use of CGIs is modest and effective, the photography isn't too gloomy or in high contrast or tinted a ghoulish green, and the editing is sane and classical instead of lightning fast and disorienting. It's a sad story but a very human one. The only characters with truly out-sized flaws are Agamemnon and Achilles. All the other characters are shown as admirable in some way, or at least understandable.

buiger A very ambitious project for a made-for-TV-movie, also rather well crafted I might add.It's a pity it takes so many liberties with the 'official' storyline, the one told by Homer and recanted for generations thereafter, it would have been a much better movie if it was 'historically' (or better said, mythologically) accurate. The Greeks will definitely not be pleased...Unfortunately, the film also has far too many flaws, and among others I believe it is an understatement to say that Achilles is ridiculous... With some small adjustments in the script and casting, this could have been a much better film. In this way, it is just below average.

jen John Kent Harrison's Helen of Troy, a 3hour Action/Drama movie was released in 2003. It is based on the famous poem of Homer, The Iliad. It portrays the mysteries behind the Fall of Troy, told upon the point of view of Menelaus, King of Sparta. The story started when Helen, Menelaus' wife runs away with Paris, the Trojan Prince and because of this Sparta starts war between the Trojans. Women before are treated like "prizes of honor". They are not allowed to do what men do because women are not equal with men. They are treated like a thing that they can borrow and return or throw away after they got bored with it. Women before just follow what men ask them to do. Just like what happened to Helen when she walks naked in a room full of Kings to prove her love for Menelaus. Now women are respected. They are equal with men. They can do men's work too, and sometimes they are achieving more than men do.For me the movie in general is a 5. The actors did well on their parts. The viewers can easily relate with the actors' feelings and actions. They portrayed their roles perfectly. The well-crafted flow of scenes lets the viewers wanting for more of the action packed film. The cinematography, the lighting and special effects captured the essence of the Iliad making the story line be more like the text itself. Viewers who love drama, romance and action movies will surely want to watch it over and over again.