One random thought strikes me: there is a difference between "true" and "believable". I think that this movie would be better received by both parts (the historians and the lovers of fantasy) if it claimed to be "believable". As in: "we don't know the real story, we probably never will, but given what we do know of history, tradition etc. of the period, this is a reasonable supposition." This humilty would make historians more disposed to accept the inevitable mistakes with a light heart, I think.

As for fantasy, I'm beginning to think modern film-makers don't know how to do fantasy anymore. I'm thinking once again of Troy, once again unfairly because I haven't seen it either, but I know that there are no gods in it. It could be that Troy attempts to give the "gritty" version - "you stupid people, of course there are no gods, it's all about Agamemnon's imperialistic dreams" etc. Well, it could be that a modern audience would not buy Homer's gods; but here is where I say that modern script-writers lack subtlety. Wasn't there a way to keep a "mysterious" angle without ending up with Disneyan gods but also without disposing entirely of them? It was a great challenge, and it seems they didn't even try.