Hannah Bisbing

CAMS 499A

Dr. Ann Killebrew

4/14/17

Critique of Wolfgang Petersens Troy

Wolfgang Petersens 2004 cinematic masterpiece entitled Troy is a modern interpretation

of the historical-mythical Trojan War story. The film describes the infamously destructive war

between the Greeks and the Trojans that occurred during the 13th century BCE in the Late

Bronze Age. Written by David Benioff, it stars Brad Pitt as Achilles, Eric Bana as Hector,

Orlando Bloom as Paris, Diane Kruger as Helen, and Sean Bean as Odysseus, amongst other

famous actors. While based on the original Trojan War story as told by Homer, the movie

chooses to describe the events of the actual war more so than the quarrel between Achilles and

Agamemnon, which is the main topic discussed in the Iliad. The film also takes significant

artistic liberties with its plotline and historical representations, choosing to change entire events,

to alter chronologies, and to ignore certain archaeological evidence from the time associated with

the Trojan War. Petersens Troy is, thus, vastly different from Homers Iliad in terms of plot and

purpose. Troy ultimately combines the stories of Homers Iliad and Virgils Aeneid with

Petersens own artistic image to create an epic adventure tale with which audiences across time

and cultures can empathize (Petersen, 2004). In this paper, I will critique Petersens Troy

primarily by comparing the film to the original Trojan War story and Bronze Age

historical/archaeological evidence.
 Troy describes the Trojan War in a contemporary way that is fairly significantly altered

for modern audiences understanding and enjoyment. Considering adaptations appropriate for the

time, Homers Iliad and Petersens Troy are generally the same in plot. Helen is taken to Troy

from Sparta by Paris, the young, Trojan prince. This causes Menelaos, Helens husband and the

king of Sparta, to ask his brother Agamemnon to help him wage war against the Trojans, to seek

vengeance, and to get Helen back. Achilles character is also involved in this interpretation and

is largely similar to his portrayal in the Iliad. He is still the best, strongest, and most hot-headed

warrior in the Greek military that resents Agamemnon. Like in the Iliad, Agamemnon steals

Briseis from Achilles, which causes Achilles to withdraw from the fight. He also does not rejoin

the effort until Patroklos is killed while wearing Achilles armor into battle. The Trojan

characters are largely the same as well. Hector is still described as the best fighter on the Trojan

front. Paris is the cowardly, shameless prince who retreats from one-on-one combat with

Menelaos and hides safely within Troys walls. Priam is the wise, elderly king and Andromache

is the dutiful, doting wife to Hector (Homer 1951). Broadly speaking, there are many

comparisons between Homers epic and Petersens movie, especially considering the main

characters involved in each tale (Petersen 2004).

However, there are many key differences between Homers tale of Troy and Petersens

depiction of the Trojan War. These alterations will be addressed here, including variations in the

main plot, specific events in the tales, and overall purposes.

To begin, there is a clear distinction between the plot in Homers Iliad and Petersens

storyline in Troy. Written down in the 8th century BCE but having been passed down for

hundreds of years through oral tradition, Homers tale largely deals with the rage of Achilles in
response to Agamemnon stealing Briseis from him (Homer 1951: Book 1). This differs greatly

from Petersens film, which deals primarily with the war aspect of the Iliad, not the infamous

argument between Achilles and Agamemnon. Petersen still pays homage to this quarrel by

having Achilles and Agamemnon bicker about leadership, power, and ability throughout the

film, but it is a secondary component in the background of the battle against the Trojans. Even

the geographic significance of Troy varies between the two pieces. Since Homers tale largely

revolves around one individuals experience with societal issues of power and allegiance, the

story could have, theoretically, taken place anywhere; Troy, itself, is not that significant, nor is

the specific war being fought there. Meanwhile, Petersens film focuses specifically on the

Trojan War, meaning the location is integral to the storyline.

The purpose of these two artistic pieces differ as well. Homers Iliad is a story that

mainly focuses on the individual in a larger context. It also raises important questions that

resounded in Homers society, such as how the government should function and how power

should be distributed amongst people (Winkler, 2007, 36). Throughout the epic, Achilles

struggles with the idea that Agamemnon possesses more power and influence than he, the

greatest warrior of the Greek army, does. How could a king who often does not even fight in the

war, let alone is relied on to win the war, have more power than Achilles? Homers tale about the

war at Troy was merely a backdrop for which to discuss relevant problems within his society.

This is precisely why the Trojan War story has been told time and time again in different cultures

and time periods. It acts as a literary foil that is essentially the same even when retold and

adapted by different cultures, historical ages, and specific societal issues.

 Furthermore, the Iliad was also an iconic piece of Greek culture that brought people

together from all across Greece into one shared background, regardless of which specific

city-state you lived in. Petersens Troy does this to an extent as well, but in a different way.

Petersen really dramatizes and emphasizes the love affair between Paris and Helen, as well as the

competition and excellence in battle that is shared between Hector and Achilles. The themes of

love and loss are what bring the audience together as one race of humans because they are

fundamental to human nature.

Although these two works seem quite similar superficially, there are major variations that

exist. Petersens Troy drastically alters many of the main portions of the original story. These

adaptations are made not from lack of historical knowledge, but rather by purposeful artistic

choice to accommodate modern audiences and cultural contexts. Petersens film makes a

conscious effort to explain how and why the events of the movie occur. This is necessary for

current audiences as opposed to ancient ones; in Homers time, people would have already

known the background information about the war due to oral tradition. The same few stories

were passed down in their culture for hundreds of years. On the other hand, Petersen had to

rewrite Homer for modern people to understand what was happening in the movie. This is

precisely why instead of talking about the wrath of Achilles at the beginning of the film, Petersen

shows Paris and Helen sneaking off to have sex while in Menelaos palace, aka the main event

that originally sparked the Trojan War. This scene also jumpstarts the movie with an intriguing

plot twist and conflict that immediately captures viewers attention.

Petersen continues this trend throughout the film with several, notable plot alterations.

For example, in the beginning of the film, Agamemnon suggests having the best Trojan warrior
and the best Greek warrior fight each other in one-on-one combat. This offer occurs in the Iliad,

but Hector is the one who has this idea. The Trojan War in Homer also spanned for a much

longer time period than the movie implies; rather than presumably a few weeks or months of

fighting, the war lingered on for ten years (Homer 1951). The Trojan Horse is not used in the

timeframe of Homers Iliad either. Rather, this portion of the war is recounted several hundred

years later in Virgils Aeneid (Virgil 2017: Book 2).

The character of Helen is also rather different in Petersens film. While Helens motives

and willingness to leave Sparta are never confirmed in Homers epic, Helen willingly leaves

Menelaos and Sparta. In the Iliad, she appears to be abducted against her will, like a stolen piece

of property or a prize, not an active participant. In the movie version, Helen is also clearly in

love with Paris, while in the original poem Helen grows to resent Paris and views him as a

coward. Furthermore, Helen was not brought to Sparta after being married off to Menelaos at age

sixteen. Rather, Helens parents were the king and queen of Sparta, making her a princess of the

land. Menelaos - and several other notable men like Odysseus and Achilles - courted Helen and

succeeded in winning her hand. Only after marrying Helen did Menelaos become king of Sparta.

There are also several deaths that occur in the film that do not happen in the Iliad, most

notably those of Menelaos and Ajax. In Petersens adaptation, Hector kills Menelaos after Paris

runs away from his one-on-one fight with the Spartan king. In the book, Menelaos lives through

the war and returns home with Helen on his arm. Hector also kills Ajax, the biggest and one of

the most terrifying warrior in the Greek force. Ajax dies in the Iliad, but it is self-inflicted after

being denied Achilles armor upon the demi-gods death. Petersen likely made this artistic choice

to make Hector appear more like an equal to Achilles. By having him kill the biggest and best
Greek fighters fairly easily, there is more of build-up for the eventual duel between Hector and

Achilles (Tunzelmann 2008: 1).

Petersen also alters which characters kill others. The most striking example of this is

when Briseis fatally stabs Agamemnon during the sack of Troy. Although Agamemnons death

is not captured in the events of Homers Iliad, his demise is detailed in Aeschylus Agamemnon.

When Agamemnon returns home from war after ten years, his wife Clytemnestra kills him to

avenge their daughter Iphigenia, whom Agamemnon sacrificed before going to Troy. Thus,

Petersen still has a woman murder Agamemnon for the wrongdoings that were done against her,

but he uses Briseis in order to create the best cinematic effect in the given context and

availability of characters. His death was a way to drive his enormous hubris into the ground and

to give the movie a greater climax.

The most significant difference between this film and Homers Iliad, though, is the

complete absence of the gods in Petersens vision. This is a very interesting and influential

alteration since it inherently changes how and why certain events occur. The gods actions are

largely how the plotline is driven; in fact, the gods ultimately decide the events and outcome of

the war for themselves, not the mortals going to battle with each other. In the Iliad, it is divine

intervention, not human skill and merit, that makes the Trojans fall and the Greeks prevail. By

Petersen not including the gods, he makes the story more realistic; it resembles a real war, not a

mythical story where gods and humans interact. Thus, he also has to improvise the plot a bit.

Instead of using divine reasoning for certain characters struggles and demises, it is simply bad

luck or defeat in battle by skilled warriors.

 Another striking alteration that surrounds modern social issues is the portrayal of

Patroklos and Achilles relationship. In the Iliad, Patroklos is described as Achilles closest,

lifelong companion, and potentially his lover. Meanwhile, in the film Patroklos is said to be

Achilles cousin. This makes the film appear to promote a strong sense of heteronormativity, as

well as the idea that non-heterosexual men cannot be great, stereotypically manly warriors.

Petersen always makes Achilles look as characteristically masculine as possible as well, from his

highly defined musculature, to his sexual voraciousness, to his prowess at fighting. He also never

mentions how Achilles originally tries to avoid going to war: dressing up as a woman. The most

feminine-looking clothing Achilles ever wears is the blue sarong shown while he is still in

Thessaly, which does not look much different from the Trojan princes blue outfits that are worn

on the boat back to Troy from Sparta (Tunzelmann 2008: 1).

The way several characters are written also vastly differ between Petersens film and

Homers poem. Personally, I actually favor these alterations to the original portrayals. For

instance, Paris is seen by viewers as a naive, romantic, lovestruck young man, not an arrogant,

shameless, trouble-making jerk. There is much more sympathy for him in the movie; Benioff

wrote him to be immature, but truly in love with Helen and to possess a good heart and morals.

Achilles also has more depth to his character in the movie. Instead of just being a rageful, selfish,

and petty killing machine like he largely is in the Iliad, Achilles has several solemn, intellectual

conversations about mortality and morality. He also saves Briseis from being gang raped by

several Greek soldiers, which was extremely positive and valiant. He is generally more relatable

and, thus, even more tragic given his fate (Petersen 2004).
 Interestingly, Achilles love story with Briseis is dramatized and emphasized in the film

adaptation as well. This is not evident in the original story. Briseis is much more reciprocal in

her feelings of love for Achilles in Petersens Troy than is ever seen or presumed in Homers

Iliad. These two characters and their love stories are likely a main focus of the film due to

contemporary societys infatuation with romance and love stories, especially when attractive

actors are involved.

Additionally, the women of Troy are more prominent and agentic than they are in the

Iliad. Helen ultimately leaves Sparta on her own initiative and by her own choice. Briseis sticks

up for herself - verbally against Achilles and physically against Agamemnon at the films

conclusion. Andromache is also seen helping fellow Trojans flee from the city once Troy starts

burning to the ground, rather than just crying for her husband and being taken as a prisoner of

war. While the question of whether Petersen was right to make these adjustments to the plot and

characterizations exists, I believe the changes were honestly appreciated and for the better

(Petersen 2004).

Beyond plot inaccuracies, several major historical inaccuracies are also evidence in Troy.

For instance, the warfare styles used in this movie - as well as in the original epic - do not reflect

the tactics utilized in the Bronze Age, the period of Greek history being discussed in the context

of the 13th century Trojan War. In both artistic pieces, the phalanx style of fighting appears to be

the main type of defensive warfare. In the Iliad, there are references to soldiers lining up and

packing themselves together like a wall (13.15) with their shields, helmets, and bodies nearly

overlapping. At one point during the battle against the Trojans in Troy, Odysseus screams at the

men to get back into lines, for otherwise they will fail in pushing back the enemy (Petersen,
2004). However, the Iliad also has evidence that tight, dense lines of men are initially utilized to

go into battle, but then the formation breaks apart to partake in more one-on-one fighting (Van

Wees 1994: 4). In reality, the phalanx style of warfare did not come about in Greece until the 8th

century BCE, aka approximately during the time of Homer (Van Wees 1994: 3). Therefore, both

the poem and the movie are historically incorrect in their representations.

The weapons utilized in the cinematic reinterpretation of this epic are also not

realistically indicative of the Bronze Age period. As the name of this time period suggests,

bronze was the most popular and widespread type of metal used to make weapons, jewelry, etc.

Therefore, most of the weapons in the film should have been made of bronze. But, steel (or

another material similar to steel) swords and spearheads were primarily evident in Troy. Much

more bronze should have been present if this had actually be a valiant attempt to recreate an

accurate visual of Bronze Age Troy.

Some major architectural errors are also shown in the film, including the lack of a

defensive ditch around the city and the height of the imposing fortification walls. Based on

archaeological evidence, specifically Manfred Korfmanns research about Troys lower city,

large, defensive ditches surrounded the outskirts of Troy and were included to protect the city

from invading chariots (Korfman 2003: 32). Likewise, the walls of Troy VI, the Troy most likely

associated with the Trojan War based on the remains of large walls, were probably, at maximum,

twenty-seven feet tall and twelve feet thick. In the movie, the walls appear to be approximately

twice the height of the actual ancient walls, which is a rather dramatic increase. Obviously, this

height increase and ignorance of archaeological evidence was done to make the city of Troy

seem even more majestic and impregnable (Rose, B 2004: 2).

 Another historical discrepancy evident in Troy is the use of coins, particularly

surrounding funerals and commemoration of the dead. When someone died, coins were placed

over the deceased persons eyes while they burned on the pyre. This gave the illusion of the body

still possessing life by broadly modeling the eyes of a specific deceased person. However, coins

were not invented until the 7th century or afterwards, let alone included in funerary rites. This

movie makes viewers believe that using coins, specifically in this cultural practice, was a normal

Greek custom by this point, but it was not (Rose 2004: 1).

Furthermore, the statues of deities in Petersens Troy are hideously different from

Mycenaean-age sculpture. In the film, huge, imposing statues of koros/kore and gods were

strewn throughout the city of Troy. Archaeologically speaking, no large statues are evident from

the Bronze Age; rather, small clay figurines were often used as votive offerings, not large metal,

stone, or gold statues, like the statue of Apollo outside the temple in Troy. Also, it was unlikely

that a god could be clearly recognizable from these statues at this period. Most did not have

faces, or faces that could identify a specific deity for certain (Fitton 2007: 104).

Finally, a major defining aspect of Petersens Troy and Homers Iliad is the apparent

pro-Trojan stance in the movie. In Troy, the Trojans are presented as a very refined people who

were pious to the gods, respectful of their women, and faithful to their country. On the other

hand, the Greeks acted quite like barbarians for much of the film, which is extremely ironic since

this culture considered all non-Greek peoples to be barbaric. For instance, in the beginning of the

film Menelaos is shown openly cheating on his wife with the dancing girls at his feast - where

Hector and Paris happen to be present. Agamemnon also steals Briseis from Achilles, like she is

a material object, and essentially brags that he is going to assault her later that night. Meanwhile,
Hector is portrayed as a noble and diplomatic character throughout the film. He does not act on

rash decision, nor does he ever make any actions that insult the gods, unlike Achilles who at one

point beheads the statue of Apollo outside a Trojan temple. Hector even allows the Greeks to

collect their dead from the battlefield, though the Greeks likely would not have done the same. It

is with the utmost disgrace that Achilles treats Hector the way he does when he slays him;

dragging his body through the dirt by chariot as Hectors family watches from the walls horrified

the Trojans, who always tried to treat the Greeks respectfully and as equals (Petersen, 2004).

Ultimately, Petersens Troy is an epic action-adventure film loosely inspired by Homers

Iliad. It is not a strict retelling of the original epic poem, but rather a creative piece of cinema

that examines the Trojan War story from Petersens unique artistic perspective (Solomon 2007:

483). This film is not meant to appease classicists and archaeologists; it is not a documentary,

nor a history lesson. Rather, it is a modern, American war movie whose goal is to entertain

modern audiences through romance, bloodshed, loss, and valor. Petersen needed to change the

plot and chronology - and even purpose - of the film to give viewers a better understanding of the

events described and to give this archaic story a modern edge. Audiences today enjoy tales of

epic war and adventure because many of us are so distanced from that reality. It is a magical

hearkening back to the golden ages of the past that also explores fundamental themes of human

nature: glory, mortality, love, morality, debauchery, chivalry, honor, etc. Overall, Petersens

Troy is a fantastic action film, but you must ignore the historical and archaeological inaccuracies

in order to get the best cinematic experience (Scott 2004: 1).

Bibliography:

Homer. Translated by Richmond Lattimore. 1951. Iliad. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Korfmann, M. 2003. Troia in Light of New Research. Trier: Universitt Trier. 3-68.

Petersen, W. 2004. Troy.

Rose, B. 2004. Assessing the Evidence for the Trojan Wars. Archaeological Institute of America.
1-3.

Rose, M. 2004. Troys Fallen. Archaeology. 1.

Scott, A. O. May 14, 2004. Greeks Bearing Immortality. The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/14/movies/film-review-greeks-bearing-immortality.html?_r=0

Solomon, J. 2007. The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization & Classicization,
Variation & Codification. International Journal of the Classical Tradition 14: 482-534.

Tunzelmann, A. V. August 28, 2008. Troy, starring Brad Pitt, is a historical travesty. The
Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/aug/28/bradpitt.troy

Virgil (D. Ferry, Trans.) 2017. The Aeneid. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Van Wees, H. 1994. The Homeric Way of War: The 'Iliad' and the Hoplite Phalanx. Greece &
Rome, 41: 1-18.

Winkler, M. 2007. Troy and the Role of the Historical Advisor. In J. Fitton. Pp. 100 - 102 in
Troy: From Homer's Iliad to Hollywood Epic. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.