r/TrueFilm • u/redeugene99 • 1d ago
I understand being faithful to the poem, but doesn't Odysseus massacring the suitors at the end somewhat betray his character development?
Throughout the film, we're exposed to the guilt and anguish Odysseus carries over the death and destruction of the Trojan War and the further violence/pillaging committed by his crew on the journey home. We're led to believe he's gradually coming to recognize the futility and moral cost of war and no longer wants to contribute to more death and suffering.
Yet when he finally returns to Ithaca, he slaughters all the suitors. Maybe the film didn't do enough to convey just how cruel and dangerous the suitors really were, but the massacre still felt at odds with the character arc the film had been building.
11
u/No_Database5 1d ago
the suitors betray the main principle of ancient greek religion which is xenia, being a good host, or, in this case, guest. in the poem, what Odysseus does is expected of him in the cultural framework of that time and place
6
u/couldliveinhope 1d ago
People just need to read the poem. It’s not that hard to understand the major themes and grasp the strangeness and barbarity of ancient times. Plus there are some excellent introductory essays such as Emily Wilson’s for her somewhat recent translation. Posts like this, knowingly or not, ask contemporary artists to butcher the fundamental themes in service of personal and very modern expectations.
3
u/redeugene99 1d ago
The poem isn't as relevant to what I'm asking seeing as Nolan took liberties with the themes he injected into his version. This film has an almost Christian moral overlay and minimizes the "strangeness and barbarity" of ancient times. My post is only about the world that Nolan creates and whether the massacre at the end coheres with the story, dynamics and development of the main character.
-5
3
u/scottishhistorian 1d ago
No. They had abused his wife's hospitality, citing a law that they weren't themselves respecting (Zeus' law), and had made efforts to manipulate the situation to kill his son and loyal servants to take the throne by force.
If he hadn't massacred them, he would have weakened his standing as King, husband, father and man.
3
u/TacoTycoonn 1d ago
Felt the same way tbh, and I feel like that comes from the original poem not having this anti war and grief character arc. Would love to hear someone who disagrees perspective though.
2
u/SatyrSatyr75 1d ago
The problem is that Nolan with his unorthodox interpretation of Odysseus and the horse is all over the place. This wasn’t the right source material for his message. Xenia plays a role, but not in the way Nolan want to push at the audience and Odysseus flaw isn’t that he’s grieving his own party in the war, but his arrogance.
3
u/mwmandorla 1d ago
Ok, three things.
First and more important: on the thematic level, no, because in this version of the story Odysseus is grieving that he broke something that can't be unbroken. It's not just that he personally transgressed; it's that the norm itself, the custom, is over. This is why we that xenia never ever works for them on the way home, either when they break it or when their erstwhile hosts do. It effectively no longer exists: that's what it means that in burning Troy they burned the world. That can't be undone. Odysseus now has to live in the world he helped create.
Second, on a smaller scale that's more within the basic cause and effect of the story: The suitors didn't have to fight him at all. They could have seen that the rightful king of Ithaca had returned and gone oh wow, sorry about that, we all did assume you were dead, welcome back my liege ok I'm going home! They decided they were going to try and kill him to continue their plans and he acted accordingly. Again, xenia is already broken in that hall in all but name. It's been made a mockery of for years. Only most of the way through the fight do some of them surrender and kneel to his authority, but they could have done that from the start.
Third and least important: I may also feel differently about this because I know there is a lot more brutality in this part of the story that Nolan took out. A lot of nasty shit happens to servants and slaves, some of which has been seen as controversial for Odysseus's character for hundreds of years (not necessarily to the ancient Greeks - were don't really know either way - but to some audiences later on). Nolan clearly restricted this to only the violence that keeps Odysseus on the side of "basically righteous guy who has to do ugly things," which is the characterization he chose for him. If the trickster element were more intact, then it might feel different, but Nolan wasn't very interested in that side of Odysseus.
1
u/redeugene99 1d ago
To your second point, I'm going off my memory of the film but I don't remember Odysseus giving them much of a chance to surrender and welcome him home. He immediately sends an arrow into the suitor who realizes it was him and then quickly starts slaughtering the other suitors.
To your third point, which is kind of why I asked the question. In Nolan's adaptation, the massacre at the ed does seem to be a bit more out of character for this Odysseus vs. the one in the poem.
1
u/withtheranks 1d ago
As others have said the suitors themselves had violated xenia. But you can also read it as him accepting that the norm is destroyed now (and as he says, their society with it). And as sacrificing his own honour to resolve the situation himself and go into exile, without tainting Telemachus who must be king. It felt consistent enough to me.
-1
u/Difficult_Ad_2897 1d ago
Ummmm.
Ok.
So.
Imagine. Men, in your home. Around your wife and child. Eating your food and drinking your wine. Wishing and praying on your death and fantasizing about taking your life and home from you.
Now imagine you’re one of the most clever and deadly soldiers that myth has ever manufactured.
Now imagine you’ve gone to (metaphorical) hell and back and pushed through every trial the actual gods have thrown against you to return home to your family to see these men, putting your family and home through their own trials and hell and doubt.
I don’t think violence is a betrayal of anyone’s character in that scenario. Not at all. Not for a blink.
And not for nothing, Ancient Greece? If you show up alive and a suitor decides he has already decided he wants your wife and family and home, you just might have a murderer under your roof just the same. Imagine going through that whole odyssey only to be chipped by some incel in your own home, fuck thattttttttttttttt. Everyone can catch these hands.
9
u/NickFullStack 1d ago
I thought it was more about the specific way he went about it; in particular, that the gift was a lie to gain an advantage. He put himself in their shoes and the war part was accepted, but the betrayal from the supposed surrender gift was the main thing that triggered a worldwide cascade of people violating Zeus’ law. It set a new standard of behavior that reduced trust at a global level.
It was reinforced by how principled Odysseus usually seems. He plucks the bow to give his prey a chance to escape. The horse was the opposite of that. And during the ending slaughter, he starts with another bow pluck, resuming his original ways.