The Fury of Achilles (1962)

for many reasons, Gordon Mitchell was not the most inspired option for the role of Achilles. but this choice becomes a small detail across the film. because , "Fury of Achilles" has a first virtue - it is different by the Italian movies , inspired by the mythology/history of Old Greek / Rome. motifs - Iliad is not a pretext for fight scenes and love stories but source for an adaptation who use accuracy as one of its virtues. the second motif, the acting who could not be reduced at good intentions. and the beautiful cinematography. so, "The Fury of Achilles".

The 10th year of the Trojan war. Achilles and Agamemnon have tensions building between them. The men divide and take sides, a new battle is at hand. Mighty Jove gives Achilles strength. Pick your side Achilles or Agamemnon? This one kept me interested throughout the film. It's definitely an above average 1960s peplum. The story is deep and surprisingly interesting, it's not just a film that one only watches for the action and cool costumes. It's a darn good story.If I were going to recommend a 60s peplum I would have to mention this one. It is worthy enough for a good, clean copy for distribution. My copy is pretty good already. I found it in the Mill Creek Warriors 50-pack.7/10

I saw Achilles (1962) listed on my satellite TV programme guide and decided to see if it was better than the typical dubbed Italian muscle-man movie. Fear not, it is really good. It is one of the better films of the genre I have seen. It is a surprisingly moving film, very watchable and giving no impression of card-board background. Throughout the film, the well-paced and convincing battle-scenes are interspersed with many instances of well-written dialogue from the main characters, conveying the deeply humanistic motives running throughout the Iliad. There are no crass scenes: heroes show fear or nobility whilst kings betray their obligations or come to their senses and do the right thing. All the main characters emerge as real humans with all the flaws and virtues that characterise humanity. The scriptwriters get it just right many times. As for the casting, Gordon Mitchell is just right as Achilles and gives a fine performance. This film is highly recommended.

This is one of the earliest films I recall watching on Italian TV along with a couple of Maciste efforts; all have not turned up since then, so I was glad to catch ACHILLES again even if in an English-dubbed version (and a rather muddy print at that)! Incidentally, the copy I acquired ran for a hefty 115 minutes (some missing-frames issues probably explaining the 118-minute duration listed on IMDb) – yet, on the "Film.It.Tv" website, its length is given as just 92?! Interestingly, the film makes for a variation on/companion piece to the superior THE Trojan HORSE from the previous year (though that one actually had an official sequel, albeit emerging a much-inferior product, in THE LAST GLORY OF TROY, also from 1962!). Although Achilles also appeared in the first of those titles, he was given his own 'vehicle' here; curiously enough, since this was helmed by Girolami, it is worth mentioning that his more famous director son – Enzo G. Castellari – would make his own modern-day rendition of The Trojan War with the entertaining HECTOR THE MIGHTY (1972)! Anyway, muscle-man Gordon Mitchell is Achilles (demonstrating his essential lack of education by bursting into "Hi-yah!" yells when commanding his troops into battle rather than the more formal "Forward!" uttered by his peers Patrocles, Ulysses – played by "Euro-Cult" stalwart Piero Lulli and depicted as a greedy fellow – and Aegamemnon!). The titular rage, then, is certainly present in the hero's characteristics given his frequent outbursts but, obviously, it is a specific reference to the legendary 'unbeatable' warrior's revenge over buddy Patrocles' death when he surreptitiously dons Achilles' armor to face the enemy champion Hector; ironically, though much is made of the protagonist's own death occurring soon after that of Hector's, the film cuts abruptly following the latter's demise! The film is certainly above-average for the genre but, as I said, still some way behind THE Trojan HORSE (for the record, this had starred Mitchell's rival in the field Steve Reeves) which, by largely eschewing the essentially low-brow nature of this one, had proved among the more literate peplums out there...