Troll Kingdom
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Troy
- Thread starter Conchaga
- Start date
MessengerX
New member
I preferred it to Alexander. What's even sadder than that film is the fact that Oliver Stone couldn't understand why it wasn't the best film in the universe.
MessengerX
New member
He could have been a necrophiliac for all I care. The way the music changed from being uplifting to dismal in such a short frame of time made absolutely no sense and reflected poorly the tone of whatever situation was taking place. It also gave the movie a very weak pulse; no ups and no downs. Total monotony.Conchaga said:
In one scene, he's giving a Braveheartesque speech to his soldiers while an upbeat tune plays. The scene immediately after is a brutal fight. This is comparable to the scene where he was in India giving a speech to his soldiers to fight on with more happy feel-good music playing.
And then they mutiny.
Oliver Stone would have done better by mixing in the sound of a vinyl record scratching.
Dark Link
Morituri te salutant
Conchaga said:
But Alexander was bisexual. There's documented evidence that he had not only female partners, but male as well. People just dont read history books anymore. If they did, they would understand so much more.
Back to Troy... God it was a horrible movie. Historically inacurate and lame.
eloisel
Forever Empress E
In Alexander's time, homosexuality or bisexuality would not have been an issue.
Troy wasn't a bad film. It wasn't a great film. One could argue that the history was wrong but there is no guarantee that what we think is the history is accurate as it was an oral history handed down long before it was written down. The bales of hay rolling through the lit arrows to catch fire and explode on the ships was pretty interesting. The defending army was impressive. The sight of a 1000 ships sailing toward one harbour, 50 warriors aboard each ship ... then landing on the beach was pretty impressive. Achilles dispatching that raw-meat eating monster near the beginning was pretty good. Mostly, it was Pitt in a skirt.
Troy wasn't a bad film. It wasn't a great film. One could argue that the history was wrong but there is no guarantee that what we think is the history is accurate as it was an oral history handed down long before it was written down. The bales of hay rolling through the lit arrows to catch fire and explode on the ships was pretty interesting. The defending army was impressive. The sight of a 1000 ships sailing toward one harbour, 50 warriors aboard each ship ... then landing on the beach was pretty impressive. Achilles dispatching that raw-meat eating monster near the beginning was pretty good. Mostly, it was Pitt in a skirt.
Conchaga
Let's fuck some shit up
eloisel said:
Ah, but it was. Many of the Greeks of that time didn't believe that homosexuality was right. They saw it as a feminie trait. Note the one point in the film where one of Alexander's generals bemoans the fact that the army is a "pretty army."
It followed Homer's Illiad well enough.
The bales of hay and the defense of the city were correct as far as military history are concerned.
Why did the balls burst into flame? This link should clear things up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_fire
eloisel
Forever Empress E
That is an interesting statement on the Greeks of that time period, Conchaga. I haven't seen the film Alexander yet so I'm not sure how the subject is handled. However, it was my understanding that the relationship between prominent men and the boys that came into their service was fairly acceptable. It assured the young men's financial and political futures plus provided security for the mature men in their older years - a sort of apprenticship and social security program rolled into one.
The main thing I remember differing between Homer's Troy and the movie Troy was the length of the siege. I believe it was a 10 year siege in the oral history but seemed like a very short time - weeks at the most - in the movie.
The main thing I remember differing between Homer's Troy and the movie Troy was the length of the siege. I believe it was a 10 year siege in the oral history but seemed like a very short time - weeks at the most - in the movie.
Conchaga
Let's fuck some shit up
10 years is an exaggeration. Most sieges of that time wouldn't have lasted more than a few months. Plague, dysentery, and famine would ruin a city like that in only a few months.
Plague coming from the enemy launching dead cows and humans over the walls. Dysentery from the lack of hygeinic water into the city. Famine... well, if they didn't ration their food well enough would cause that quickly. Not to mention, their knowledge of preservatives other than salt wasn't that great.
Plague coming from the enemy launching dead cows and humans over the walls. Dysentery from the lack of hygeinic water into the city. Famine... well, if they didn't ration their food well enough would cause that quickly. Not to mention, their knowledge of preservatives other than salt wasn't that great.
eloisel
Forever Empress E
Conchaga said:
I seem to recall a portion of Homer's account about how they would slip out at night and get water plus there would be rain. They could have grown some food inside the walls but it probably wouldn't be enough to feed a very large population. I doubt the siege Homer recounts was 10 years, but the movie should have made the siege appear longer.