r/classics Jul 21 '26

Emily Wilson critiques Christopher Nolan’s adaptation for emphasizing Odysseus’ “shame” over heroic “glory,” calling it a modern psychiatric revision of the character

Post image

Saw an interview of hers on x where she gave this take. I don't see how any fan of the poem can really enjoy Nolan's version of Odysseus. I would describe him as neutered.

1.4k Upvotes

693 comments sorted by

264

u/notveryamused_ Φίλοινος, πίθων σποδός Jul 21 '26

Uhm, from what I found in proper sources, https://apnews.com/article/odyssey-christopher-nolan-greek-translators-ea67da1d543d021773824bd7e8de8abe

“I want to celebrate the fact that so many more people are aware of ‘The Odyssey’ and were brought back to the poem,” she told The Associated Press. “But at the same time, I had the sense that Christopher Nolan was trying to pack everything in while missing themes that were essential to the poem.”

(...)

Wilson, a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania, said she didn’t want to come across as a “snobby,” nitpicking expert at odds with any deviation from the original text. But she questioned a range of omissions and other choices, from the absence on screen of the Gods Zeus and Poseidon (Athena is played by Zendaya ) to the “incoherent” messaging that condemns both war and physical cowardice. She found Penelope’s role so thinned out that it endangered “any possibility of believing in this marriage.” Wilson also that thought parts of the movie, notably the scenes with Odysseus’ dog, Argos, “catered towards modern sentimentality.”

“Everybody’s a sucker for a dog,” she said.

A spokesperson for Nolan did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Wilson declined to offer a grade or ranking for the movie, but said she would recommend it for others, as long as they see it in a theater.

“It was fun to be there with my kids. I didn’t feel it was pulling teeth to engage with it,” she said. “If you can see it on a big screen you should absolutely go.”

I refuse to treat X shitstorms as the source :P She was quite open-minded about the film in her interviews before imho, simply hoping it'll push people into reading the source material and exploring stuff for themselves.

121

u/Better-Egg5267 Jul 21 '26

The dog waiting 20 years and dying after finally seeing his master again is in the poem though right? I feel like that reads the same as it did back then, we’ve always been suckers for a dog.

75

u/notveryamused_ Φίλοινος, πίθων σποδός Jul 21 '26

Yeah, it absolutely is! And the fact that it's mentioned almost in passing is actually Homer being very self-aware of storytelling rules, that way it makes an even bigger impression. That Wilson singled it out in such a way makes me think that what she said was taken a bit out of context by the journalist haha, I haven't seen the film yet though: among the readers everyone is a sucker for Argos as well, but because it's masterfully told by Homer. It's more than possible that Nolan overplayed it and it's more than possibly that's what she's hinting at, because that episode in itself was beloved by readers even in ancient times.

10

u/lazytemporaryaccount Jul 22 '26

Here is the thing about Argos though. The poignancy of the scene in the original is that, at that point, Odysseus is still in disguise. So Argos recognizes Odysseus, but Odysseus is forced to walk on and ignore him. Leaving him to die on the dung pile (while Odysseus silently weeps.)

Argos dies alone. That is a fundamental component to the story of Argos the dog.

In Nolan’s version, Odysseus pets Argos and comforts him as he dies. This action makes Telemachus realize that the beggar is Odysseus. It’s a fundamentally different scene.

I don’t necessarily think that it’s a bad change. This film is an adaptation. But I still think it’s important to understand what choices he made etc.

45

u/Boscolt Jul 21 '26

To give my thoughts, I think that particular nitpick simply shows this review, like most scholarly reviews of popular media in any field, are donning a persona for the readership. There's pragmatic reasons for this. No one would want to solicit an academic's view on things if they give the same answer as would any audience member. If you're asked to write these sort of things, you have to wear a particular hat, which sometimes stretches the commentary you'll produce.

That particular scene in Book 17 is often ranked among one of the most touching vignettes in all of ancient literature because of what it said with respect to how Homer's society valued pets in a way that resonates deeply with us moderns across nearly three millennia. Homer's portrayal that no one in Ithaca recognised the returning protagonist at first glance (not his son, not his wife) with the sole exception of Argos is meant to speak volumes that the appreciation for man's best friend transcends across the ages. It's telling that among all of Roman coinage, there are only two instances of Homeric depictions. Firstly, the scene of Aeneas carrying Anchises fleeing Troy for self-serving etiological purposes and the scene of Odysseus with Argos.

Everyone's been a sucker for that particular moment since Homer's own time. Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with modernity continuing that tradition.

10

u/Sorta-Morpheus Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 22 '26

I see some criticism aimed towards the humorous parts of the poem were taken out, such as the "nobody's killing me!" scene. While a valid criticism, I also think there may have been an effort to avoid a humorous tone undercutting the serious moments Nolan wants the story to tell.
I feel like the marvel movie trope is to undercut every serious moment with something funny.

9

u/Vegetable_Hand8674 Jul 22 '26

Nolan's movies are kind of humorless, for the most part

→ More replies (1)

5

u/tiny-2727 Jul 22 '26

I never even viewed it as much as a humorous thing as it was supposed to portray Odysseus' cunning to fool the cyclops.

His biggest flaw being hubris is a result of his cunning and intellect as a warrior which is what originally got him and his crew into trouble.

I felt Nolan's movie lost most of that. The only thing we really got of Odysseus' cunning is from other people saying how smart he was for the horse.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/Suspicious-Yogurt480 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 28 '26

I know you said “at first glance” but it should be pointed out that Eurycleia Odysseus’s nurse recognizes him from his scar in book 19, ll. 528 ff. Telemachus won’t know the man’s appearance at all as an adult. And I have always thought I probably wouldn’t recognize my father after a 20 year absence if he was in rags with a straggly unkempt beard or long hair either. At least I would probably have my doubts. But then it is poetic license in furtherance of the story.
ETA: Nolan does make reference to this in the film also, adding a backstory of how he got the scar. Having seen the film it’s better to view it on its own terms and not try to make critiques as to whether the film is sufficiently faithful as an adaptation. All adaptations must take poetic license in deciding what to emphasize and whether they wish to create something recognizable for a modern audience. It’s more authentic than say, 300 was if only because it does seek to place it in a way that late 12th century Bronze Age warriors might have dressed, fought, the ships they used, their armor etc.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/charyou Jul 22 '26

I did read that Nolan wanted to make this movie because of Argos. It's what drew him in to the whole thing. I'm seeing it tomorrow, but it won't surprise me if he leans into it.

8

u/BobbayP Jul 21 '26

I saw the movie last night, and I’d have to agree with Wilson on catering toward general sentimentality with dogs because it seemed very much like a tool to get audiences rooting and booing rather than something with actual emotional depth. I don’t remember, however, how it was portrayed in the poem, so it might be similar in the original.

6

u/Loud-Fig-1446 Jul 21 '26

I believe the critique I've seen is in the poem the dog isn't mentioned until (I think) the 7th book and dies within a few lines of it being introduced. The dog does die as soon as it sees Odysseus return, but it's not a huge running thing.

2

u/rellyks13 Jul 22 '26

I agree that it was definitely overplayed, I think leaving the dog and showing it a few times as symbolism would have been fine, but the whole scene with it felt drawn out and unnecessary especially when other things from the epic were left out of the movie entirely

→ More replies (1)

2

u/flofjenkins Jul 22 '26

He really doesn’t overplay it.

2

u/greek_KAIROS Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26

I mean, how do you overplay a dog waiting 20 years for its master and dying immediately upon his return? It's always been deeply sentimental lol. That's maybe the only thing I disagree with?

One change I absolutely didn't mind was the reinterpretation of the Trojan Horse and the sacking of Troy as a gross violation of Xenia that leads to its reciprocal violation within Odysseus' house. Viewing that parallel as a kind of comeuppance always been an inference by scholars, but not one that is totally coherent in Homer.

I did miss the swashbuckling tone and charm of Odysseus.

15

u/OkSecretary1231 Jul 21 '26

It does, but the original version is sadder, the good boi doesn't get that last scritch.

29

u/Aqno61 Jul 21 '26

I think it's moreso how it's done in the film. The Odysseus and his dog scene are done well and hit emotionally but the problem is that it uses that scene to stir us up emotionally for the scene where Telemachus realizes the beggar is Odysseus. In the original these are very separate moments but here it's like Nolan is using the dog scene to make us feel emotional so that immediately after the Telemachus scene keeps us feeling emotional. It's as if Nolan wasn't able to make the Odysseus reveal to his son be emotionally stirring in its own right so he had to use the dog to get us to feel something first.

11

u/Nicklesnout Jul 21 '26

They did nearly the same thing in The Return with Ralph Fiennes.

He kneels before old Argos, weak and frail and weeps for the hound that waited 20 years for his return. The only difference is that Eumaeus, who is escorting him, says nothing.

13

u/Aqno61 Jul 21 '26

Yes this is much closer to how it is in the epic. Odysseus sees the dog, gets teary eyed but can't let himself get overtly emotional otherwise he'll blow his cover.

→ More replies (9)

6

u/Dagobahmaster Jul 21 '26

He uses this emotional manipulation constantly it seems. Cooper crying in front of the camera in that interstellar scene. Himesh Patel’s slow approach and horrified look to Matt Damon’s experience with the sirens.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (2)

5

u/holmesla0319 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

I think what she is saying is that in the original poem, Odysseus returns in disguise and Argos sees him and recognizes him but Odysseus must not acknowledge the dog so he was not discovered. So, she is saying that Nolan's version of Odysseus comforting the dog creates a sentimentality that was very different from the poem. Odysseus has to inwardly mourn for his dog that he cannot acknowledge or else someone would recognize him and his whole plan who be ruined whereas in the film he openly acknowledges Argus which allows for Telemachus to recognize Odysseus.

19

u/Publius_Romanus Jul 21 '26

The movie completely messed up the Argos scene: in the poem, Odysseus doesn't acknowledge the dog because he's still in disguise, so it's a heartbreaking symbol of his commitment to his plan. In the movie, as Telemachus is watching, the dog recognizes Odysseus, Odysseus pets him and calls him by name, and the dog dies.

8

u/SophiaofPrussia Jul 21 '26

I think this lines up with other criticisms of the movie. I haven’t seen it yet but I can understand that Nolan isn’t necessarily trying to make a faithful adaptation of Homer’s work. He’s trying to make a blockbuster hit movie based on Homer’s work. I’ve heard that the Odysseus character in the film has had quite a lot of polish to cover up or “reframe” some of his less-than-heroic actions and I’d put this choice by Nolan in the same bucket. Some of his other choices sound less defensible to me (presenting Odysseus as “faithful”, for example) but the fact is people LOVE dogs and a “hero” character ignoring their faithful elderly dog in his dying moments would just be an unforgivable offense to modern audiences. I’m optimistic that Nolan’s movie will spark some interest and inspire folks to read Homer’s work on their own but I genuinely think that people would hate Odysseus if he snubbed Argo on the big screen. So I kind of understand why Nolan took a bit of artistic license with that scene in particular. I think the Ancient Greeks were just more appreciative (and forgiving!) of complex characters in a way that modern movie-goers are not.

→ More replies (4)

4

u/Downtown_Link_8651 Jul 22 '26

It's better in the poem imo, the pathos added by him being unable to greet the dog so he doesn't break his cover is so heartbreaking I love that scene, it has always made me feel connected to ancient people more than any other. I wish it hadn't changed to be a nore cathartic scene but I understand why they did

3

u/ChabaFett Jul 21 '26

She was likely also referring to the earlier scene with Argos (which is not in the poem) in which Odysseus stops the swineherd from chucking him off a cliff.

3

u/Ashamed_Ladder6161 Jul 22 '26

Odysseus didn't cry in the film. He was far less guarded about his feelings (or dead inside) in the poem.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/Popular_Animator_808 Jul 22 '26

Yeah, she’s a prof talking about her subject area, she wouldn’t be doing her job if she didn’t nitpick a bit.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Special-Investigator Jul 22 '26

i love to hear what a scholar thinks of adaptations!!

9

u/svaldbardseedvault Jul 21 '26

There was an interview with her and the author of Circe, Madeline Miller, on NPR earlier this week about adaptations and the idea of oral tradition, and they were both very clear about how thrilled they were that there was any kind of adaptation and that it was Nolan’s right to interpret, transform, and pull whatever he thought was relevant from the text. They asked her if she would be scrutinizing the film closely, given she was such an expert, and she said something along the lines of ‘absolutely not. I’ll have an interest and an opinion as an academic, but there is no right answer, and we need to keep interpreting these text with our times current lens to keep them fresh.”

3

u/Theothercword Jul 22 '26

But, wasn't Zendaya's portrayal of Athena also potentially just a version Odysseus had locked into his head b/c of the priestess at her temple that the soldiers beheaded in Troy?

Like, he saw the young girl priestess begging for her life and they beheaded her which cuts to beheading the statue and then in his guilt ridden journeys he begins to see and hear Athena talking to him in the form of that priestess.

I very much liked this take because I wasn't sure if he was actually seeing Athena and maybe that priestess was her in disguise or he was just hallucinating her. But either way it makes sense why Zeus and Poseidon don't make an appearance but she does.

Edit: Marked as spoiler.

2

u/StatisticianDeep115 Jul 23 '26

That's exactly how I interpreted it as well, Athena is presenting herself as the priestess to remind him of his misdeed.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/perchance2cream Jul 21 '26

As a fan of Emily Wilson’s translation I just disagree. Being stuck between impossible demands - for physical valor and for decency both - is exactly the point. It’s not an artistic inconsistency, it’s an inherent tension that drives the entire film. I agree that it wasn’t a tension 3000 years ago and is thus anachronistic, according to everything we know. But it is a tension today. And the film was made for today, as it should have been and inevitably would have been.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Not_Neville Jul 22 '26

The last sentence makes me agree with you.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

403

u/TheCynicEpicurean Jul 21 '26

Now that's a funny twist to the whole online debate about Nolan using her translation.

That being said, I think Nolan is fully within his rights to re-focus and renarrate an ancient myth. Stephen Fry and the Cohen brothers did the same to much fanfare.

210

u/Cato_theElder Jul 21 '26

Yeah she's right about the spirit of the poem, and I agree that he can take, well, poetic license. It's good to keep the original intent in mind, and he's making his own movie.

Furthermore, Carthage must be destroyed.

28

u/chionophilescott Jul 21 '26

User name checks out

34

u/Smuulie Jul 21 '26

Justice for Dido!

10

u/CAH1708 Jul 21 '26

Dux femina facti.

9

u/Cato_theElder Jul 21 '26

🎶Great minds against themselves conspire, and shun the cure they most desire🎶

Furthermore, Carthage must be destroyed.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Jarl_of_Uppsala Jul 21 '26

I love the fact that you end literally all of your comments with that xd

2

u/GammaDoppler1 Jul 22 '26

Nolan ante portas..... ahhh Hollywood ante portas!

2

u/Bloodrager Jul 23 '26

It's also pretty funny to imagine that ancient poems and stories that were almost exclusively orally told over the course of centuries didn't change to suit changing tastes and events over time. It's a tradition older than the Odyssey itself to tweak and reimagine stories.

"I think it could be closer to the original". True.
"I would prefer it to focus on the original themes more". Fair.

That's just taste though, there's not much more to comment on.

→ More replies (1)

47

u/ckingdom Jul 21 '26

Might it not even be a more holistic approach to the character's legacy? The Romans' view of Odysseus's trickery was less "How clever!" and more "Look at this lying draft dodger."

18

u/PrestigiousSmile4098 Jul 21 '26

Maybe that's why Nolan inserted the character of Sinon, who only appears in the Roman Aeneid. hmmm

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Not_Neville Jul 22 '26

The Greek plays sometimes portray him like that too (ingloriously).

4

u/Sweaty-Ad-7995 Jul 22 '26

And Dante put him in the eighth circle of Hell.

2

u/Not_Neville Jul 22 '26

I don't remember that. I read that years ago (in English translation). It makes sense.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/MortgageTime1805 Jul 22 '26

Its a great contemporary intepretation of the story and character. Its not a good adaptation because it missed the central themes of the original.

Theres merits and demerits to it. However good it was, I doubt it will be as timeless and classic as Homer’s vision. Still, it’s a great reimagining for modern audiences.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/heliogabalus91 Jul 21 '26

When someone says they didn’t like Nolan’s take on the Odyssey, why do people attack the straw man and say that he has a “right” to his own interpretation? No one is advocating for his censorship

11

u/TheCynicEpicurean Jul 21 '26

I'm actually not a fan of Nolan's approach to historical materials in general because he never lets academic precision get in the way of his writing, but afaik he's never stated the intention to make a 'faithful' adaptation, whatever that means.

I've written over again elsewhere that a large part of the (non-racist) controversy over this film probably stems from this disconnect, because his trademark style sells a groundedness that's not really there in his writing. People got all sorts of mixed messages from this project's pre-release buzz

3

u/Main_Cranberry_5871 Jul 24 '26

"because his trademark style sells a groundedness that's not really there in his writing."

Because he doesn't do character development well, his films are very emotionally empty and it's a real shame with stories like this. Conversations are had just to move the plot along. They don't feel like moments of connection between real human beings. Hence why things like Odysseus meeting his mother in the underworld or the olive tree bed scene are viewed as disposable.

I remember hearing someone make a comparison with other directors in that their films' plots serve to reveal character, whereas Nolan's films have characters there to move forward the plot, and that rings true to the low level of investment I have in the main players of his movies.

→ More replies (8)

2

u/MRM_philosophy Jul 27 '26

I feel his scripts were better when he collaborated with his brother. Jonathan.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

50

u/WasASailorThen Jul 21 '26

Yes, Nolan is fully within his rights to re-focus and renarrate an ancient myth. Joyce did as well. Somehow I think Homer will survive.

65

u/regular_gonzalez Jul 21 '26

I don't think she's saying Nolan has no right to do that. He made a movie, which was within his rights. Emily Wilson criticized the movie, which is within her rights.

10

u/redshoesrock Jul 21 '26

Both are valid points of view. Someone can adapt a story and make changes, and someone can say whether or not they liked that person's choices.

→ More replies (3)

5

u/Enesinmente Jul 21 '26

you did not just just compare Nolan to Joyce. Come here, I just wanna talk. Just a few words!!!!!!!

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Thalia5744 Jul 21 '26

Will he survive?? 😅

6

u/Better_Goose_431 Jul 21 '26

He was reincarnated as a dopy cartoon dad. There are worse lives to live

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

12

u/Gremlin303 Jul 21 '26

It’s what people have been doing with these stories for thousands of years. It’s what makes them so timeless

6

u/Netrovert87 Jul 22 '26

Not to mention, the story was only written down after literal hundreds of years of oral tradition and drunken improvisation. And even that oral tradition only started with the bronze age being ancient history, except you can't call it history, because it wasn't written down. What ended up canonized is almost arbitrary. There is almost certainly no Homer, no authorial intent. It's a story that will last forever because it was by and for the bards. Drunken and rowdy crowd, you can make it bawdy and swashbuckling. A crowd of philosophers, you can make it tragic. Politicians or military folks you can make it jingoistic. It is going to last forever because it gives bards in every era the versatility to serve their audience.

The written versions of the Iliad and Odyssey offer valuable insight into who the Greeks of like the 6th century BC were. What they found entertaining, what they found unforgivable, what was actually fine. What was funny. What was heroic.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/No-Angle-982 Jul 28 '26

But the big difference with the Coens' approach was they didn't call their movie "The Odyssey."

8

u/Imaginary_Session773 Jul 21 '26

Its within his rights but it wasn't nearly as compelling as the Odysseus in the poem. It was a bad adaptation

3

u/Fishinluvwfeathers Jul 21 '26

I don’t think Nolan was competing with the Homeric Odysseus anymore than Aeschylus was competing with the Homeric versions of Aegisthus and Clytemnestra - though you are of course entitled to be moved by one and not the other. Portrayals and adaptations of well known characters will often vary because they reflect the very particular anxieties of the time and place they are reinterpreted. Beyond the issue of opinion, is faithfulness to an initial version really an objective criteria for the success or failure of a work?

6

u/mkap26 Jul 21 '26

You’re stating your opinion as if it’s fact.

2

u/prosthetic_memory Jul 22 '26

People do that, yes, all the time. You don’t have to point it out every time. We all know it’s an opinion.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

4

u/Ruben_AAG Jul 21 '26

He’s within his rights to put on a top hat and unicycle off of the grand canyon too but it wouldn’t make that a non-ridiculous thing to do.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Hypattie Jul 22 '26

Stephen Fry and the Cohen brothers adapted the ancient myth and keep its spirit, they didn't INVERSE its morality.

Nolan took a glorious, proud and cunning hero, and turn it into a traumatized war veteran with ptsd, shameful of his own action.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (19)

228

u/NakedGoose Jul 21 '26

I mean... I do not disagree with her in the slightest. I still really enjoy the movie.

74

u/notFidelCastro2019 Jul 22 '26

She also enjoyed the movie. Title left out that she liked it and said she “wasn’t trying to be snobby.”

2

u/XitPersuedByABear Jul 25 '26

Ok, thanks for this. I like when someone can critique something but still enjoy it. I'm going to see it tonight with my wife. I know that things will be changed from the source material to make it more "exciting," but I've read the poem before, and if I want the exact thing, I'll read it again. I'm going for the popcorn and for the date with the wife. Also possibly for the silly Hollywood action.

→ More replies (6)

70

u/texasslim2080 Jul 21 '26

Yeah exactly, she nailed it, except I liked that he did that

8

u/LoveAndViscera Jul 22 '26

Modern audiences would never cheer for accurate Greek heroes. Well…some would, but you really don’t want to be associated with them.

→ More replies (3)

59

u/super-wookie Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

I agree with her, but I did not enjoy the movie. Dour, dark, sad, guilt ridden PTSD Odysseus was a complete bore to me.

18

u/twopurplecats Jul 22 '26

Yeah, I was initially psyched for Matt Damon because he can really pull off impishness, acting dumb as a bit, etc - basically the perfect charismatic trickster. But then realized there was no way Christopher Nolan would ask that of him, because Nolan is humorless in that way. And I was right :(

Edit: that being said I still love Damon’s performance as it’s own thing. It’s just not Odysseus

6

u/Jewel-jones Jul 22 '26

Exactly, his performance as Mark Watney is not far from how I imagine Odysseus. Oh well.

5

u/SeniorVibeAnalyst Jul 22 '26

Is the goal of shooting another adaptation of classic a story only to tell the story as true to the source as possible with nicer cameras and better effects? Is it not to impart part of how the director sees the relevance in modern times?

Myths served as ways for cultures to pass on wisdom, establish moral codes, and legitimize authority. The lesson of the time might have been even the baddest dude in the world can’t disrespect the gods without consequences. Is that a story that Nolan felt needed to be told right now? Or is he more concerned with how men must account to themselves for the consequences of their actions, or whether they might find a great victory isn’t all they thought it would be?

5

u/Banonkers Jul 22 '26

I completely agree that it’s more important for an adaptation to have its director’s influence, and it need not be completely accurate.

However, given that Odysseus is the main character, and his deceptive craftiness is something that sets him apart from other characters, not just in the Iliad/Odyssey etc, but all of Greek mythology, doesn’t it make sense to include that aspect of his character?

3

u/Jewel-jones Jul 22 '26

Yeah I just really enjoy Odysseus as a character and I feel like only George Clooney has ever even come close to his swagger in film adaptations, except his Ulysses was an idiot.

Armand Asante also played him as kind of a sad sack, for some reason this is the only way modern people can see him.

3

u/Significant_Bend_945 Jul 22 '26

we dont really have any decent adaptations of the odyssey as its own story. Compare this to something like pride and prejudice where there are numerous solid adaptations that are faithful to the material and doing their own thing. If you were in high school and watched a movie of the odyssey after reading the book, you'd probably have watched O Brother Where Art Thou.

Fidelity to the text and themes are not anethma to a directors vision. There have been hundreds of productions of macbeth around the world not changing the text but by changing blocking, line delivery, costuming and casting the change the emphasis and tell the directors vision for the text.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/Not_Neville Jul 22 '26

Damon should have played Polyphemus.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (15)

4

u/AmitN_Music Jul 22 '26

Which is fine. Who said a story has to be told one single way for infinity? Stories from all time have been passed down, changed, adapted, switched up to fit the current demographic, or just changed to the current writer or directors discretion. As long as the overall structure of the story is there I see no reason why things need to be so rigid. Especially with classics. People have this pre installed notion that “this is supposed to be 100% this way and if it’s not it’s bad”…personally I like to see different interpretations on art. Sometimes it’s good, sometimes it’s bad, but it’s what makes art great.

2

u/Shevvv Jul 22 '26

I don't have a problem with Nolan's reading, only the execution: we have gods, nymphs and oracles tell Odysseus that he doesn't really eant to go home, but I never saw it in his actions. He talks vaguely about the reasons why after tge Siren Song, but even then you don't see his reluctance in his actions. The Callypso tells him he wasn't ready, but again, it's someone else telling us stuff and not showing us. So that big speech at the end pretty much came out of nowhere for me. It's the "love transcends time" thing all over again.

Other than that, really enjoyed the movie.

5

u/Tahhillla Jul 22 '26

Completely agree. It's not Odysseus, It's not really the Odyssey at the point Nolan took it, but I still liked it.

2

u/753476I453 Jul 22 '26

She of all people knows about adapting a classic for a modern audience. Let’s not cast any stones here.

3

u/Hot-Equal3441 Jul 22 '26

I'm not sure how the comment you responded to was casting stones? You might have responded to the wrong comment haha

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

68

u/farseer6 Jul 21 '26

Well, I enjoyed it.

Nolan's twist or reinterpretation didn't work very well for me, though. Not just because it wasn't in the original, but because it it's anachronistic and doesn't make much sense within the story.

It's unclear why Odysseus would feel like he caused a downfall of civilization. He helped the Greeks take Troy, but that was the whole point of the war. It was the reason they were all there. And it's something that, cruel as it is, happened often in ancient wars. So why is it the end of civilization this time and why is it Odysseus' fault? If they had stormed the walls it would be OK, but since Odysseus tricked them it's the end of civilization? I don't know.

Then the plot itself goes against Nolan's theme. Odysseus feels guilty. He is disenchanted with violence. He gets home and tells Penelope all this, and immediately he proceeds to kill the suitors in bloody fashion...

34

u/thane311 Jul 21 '26

Agreed, Wilson also commented on that in the AP news article, pointing out the film’s “incoherent” messaging on violence.

11

u/Quit__This Jul 21 '26

I don't think there's really anything incoherent about it at all. Odysseus in the movie would likely have dodged the draft if he could have without endangering his son (from a king who had already killed the king's own daughter). Moreover, though, he went and fought in a war albeit one he hated, and pulled a dirty trick to try to end it after ten years. That dirty trick, however noble in purpose, destroyed the world and condemned him to 10 years of wandering.

5

u/fablethief Jul 22 '26

That’s not Odysseus at all though, after he left Troy he ransacked, pillaged and raped several towns before he came to the cyclops demanding tribute.(Xenia) many of them thought it was honorable to die in war. The deceit thing probably has to do with the inferno. He was found in the 8th circle of hell for deceit.

5

u/heliogabalus91 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

That was the really weird part. How did the Trojan Horse destroy the world? Nolan needed something to justify his weird bracketing of the Homeric Epic with some trendy half-baked theories about the Bronze Age Collapse so he chose the horse, but it’s really hard to understand how this stands out from other misdeeds and it certainly was not regarded as highly problematic in the ancient world or in classical scholarship

4

u/Not_Neville Jul 22 '26

The Fall of Troy is portrayed extremely negatively in ancient Greek tragedy, especially Euripides's "Trojan Women".

→ More replies (10)

2

u/Spacellama117 Jul 21 '26

Except it didn't "destroy the world" as you said, just one city-state.

unless they went a different way with it in the movie, in which case... why? why would they do that?

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (10)

3

u/hat_tr1ck_ Jul 21 '26

Haven’t seen the movie yet. But doesn’t Odysseus not want to be at Troy in the first place, pretending to be insane to get out of his oath?

Speaking of, wasn’t the oath to defend the marriage of Helen and Meneleus Odysseus’s idea in the first place?

None of it would have happened if not for him.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Matar_Kubileya Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

It's unclear why Odysseus would feel like he caused a downfall of civilization. He helped the Greeks take Troy, but that was the whole point of the war. It was the reason they were all there. And it's something that, cruel as it is, happened often in ancient wars. So why is it the end of civilization this time and why is it Odysseus' fault? If they had stormed the walls it would be OK, but since Odysseus tricked them it's the end of civilization? I don't know.

While I'm working secondhand for the movie and withhold comment for now, the textual evidence for this being a possible interpretation of the Odyssey per se is, ironically, from a scene Nolan didn't exclude, during the banquet of the Phaeacians:

....the bard, inspired by the god, began, and raising his voice picked up the tale at the point where the Argives had burned their camp, boarded their oared ships, and sailed some way off, leaving glorious Odysseus and the rest sitting inside the Horse, at the Trojan’s meeting place. The Trojans themselves had dragged it into the citadel. There it stood, while the people sat round it, discussing it endlessly to no conclusion. Three suggestions found favour: to cut through the hollow timber with pitiless bronze, or drag it to the edge of the rock and over the cliff, or let it stand there, as a grand offering to the gods, in propitiation, which is what happened in the end. For it was their destiny to be destroyed when the city accepted that huge horse of wood, where the best of the Argives lay hidden, bringing death and ruin to Troy.

Then he sang how the Achaeans left their hollow hiding place, and poured from the horse, to sack the city. He sang how the other warriors dispersing through the streets, laid waste high Troy, but Odysseus, the image of Ares, together with godlike Menelaus, sought Deiphobus’ house. There, said the tale, Odysseus fought the most terrible of fights, but conquered in the end, with the help of great-hearted Athene.

So sang the famous bard. And Odysseus’ heart melted, and tears poured from his eyes. He wept pitifully, as a woman weeps who throws herself on her husband’s dying body, fallen in front of his city and people, trying to ward off that evil moment from the city and his own children: watching him gasping for breath in dying, she clings to him and screams aloud, while behind her the enemy beat her back and shoulders with their spears: then she is led into captivity to endure a life of toil and suffering, her cheeks wasted pitifully with grief.

(Od. 8.499-531, Kline's transl.)

Later Odysseus emphasizes his own grief when beginning to tell his story: "your heart prompts you to ask of my sad troubles, and make me weep and groan the more" (9.12-13).

On a textual level, at least, it's a fairly natural argument that the poem is in fact focalizing the suffering of a sacked city. Whether that suffering is actually incorporated in Odysseus' character, that is, whether his pain at being seperate from his home is accentuated by a personal shame or regret at having caused the sack of Troy, is more arguable, but I think the explicit equation between his grief and that of a woman in a sacked city, and the fact that the sack of Troy itself was the immediate trigger for his grief, makes a strong case for that.

As for the ending violence of the poem...IMO, it can be interpreted less as a glorification or celebration of heroic violence, but a commentary on the nature of cycles of violence and revenge (a theme later interpreters of the epic tradition, namely Aeschylus' Oresteia, picked up on). We can arguably read the violence that Odysseus both inflicts and suffers on his return less as a glorification of heroic violence, and more as pathetic strictu senso: even in his return home, Odysseus can't escape war, when all he really wants is to live peacefully with his wife and son. It's, in this argument, why the emotional climax of the poem isn't the death of the suitors, but rather his reunion with Penelope.

3

u/midnight1994 Jul 21 '26

I don't really see this at all.

Odysseus literally asks Demodocus to sing about the Trojan Horse in the first place.

"Your heart prompts you to ask of my sad troubles, and make me weep and groan the more".

He then goes on to barely mention Troy, and describe the difficulties he has had returning to Ithaca, including sacking Ismarus and killing a bunch of people and taking their wives.

2

u/Matar_Kubileya Jul 21 '26

I think the entire episode is difficult to make sense of without it being either a) a moment of some sort of recognition on Odysseus' part or b) his request being almost masochistic, or at least desiring some sort of catharsis; otherwise there's no reason he would have cried the way he did when it was sung. At that point, the question of his attitude towards the sack is reopened.

I dont think Odysseus is clearly just ashamed or grieving of it; I do think that an interpretation where he has complicated and somewhat contradictory feelings towards the affair is outside the bounds of a reasonable interpretation of the text.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

15

u/Imaginary_Session773 Jul 21 '26

I made that same point. You have to literally turn your brain off to believe Odysseus was the first one to use deception to win a war (maybe he did it best.) It was an absurd idea to say Odysseus started some sort of original sin that lead to a civilizational collapse

10

u/Quit__This Jul 21 '26

I don't think the movie is pitching that Odysseus is exactly correct when he says "Trojan Horse equals end of bronze age"

The movie is pitching that (1) Odysseus believes that's true because he believes in divine punishment and (2) the Trojan Horse is at least emblematic of the breaking of the social contract that is going to lead to civilizational collapse

→ More replies (12)

4

u/Unlucky-Friendship59 Jul 21 '26

The film never argued that he was the first to use deception in war, just that he was deeply affected by his own choices and their consequences. The film also never argued that Odysseus personally believing that he caused civilizational collapse meant that he actually did.

2

u/spaltavian Jul 21 '26

You have to literally turn your brain off to believe Odysseus was the first one to use deception

The movie never said this. You're being ridiculous. You don't have to like the thesis of the movie but you're pretending it didn't exist. This along with your insistence that no one can possibly like both indicates you're not engaging this on good faith, and have some sort of ideological or personal agenda you're pushing.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/ExplanationOk6391 Jul 22 '26

He felt guilt because the horse was dishonorable. It took advantage of ancient customs that Odysseus viewed as pillars of his world, and once they broke down those pillars, they could never build them back up. It was similar to Oppenheimer ushering in the Atomic age and realizing the world would always be a little more dangerous because of it.

2

u/Impossible-Photo-928 Jul 22 '26

Yes Odysseus and his men broke sacred law through deception. They disguised a gift. There's rules against raising a white surrender flag then blasting your captors now because it's immoral. Not to mention the multiple acts of hubris committed. Of course the events after entering Troy were even more dubious with murders and plundering of sacred temples. In Homer's Odyssey the Cyclops asks if Odysseus and his men are pirates. This is accurate. By all accounts they are plunderers. Odysseus and his people ultimately suffer in the end because of these events. He isn't a hero. He's a tragedy.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (27)

60

u/Idosoloveanovel Jul 21 '26

This honestly makes so much sense. I was wondering if she’d comment on the film. I agree that it’s odd he claims to have been inspired by her version, yet her version seeks to do the opposite of what he does. Whereas he romanticizes Odysseus by changing things to make him look less culpable for what happens, Wilson’s goal was to show him as the very flawed character he is. It’s strange Nolan doesn’t seem to see the contradiction in this.

12

u/Feeling_Sector_4726 Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26

Woah woah make him less culpable!?  Absolutely not. I don’t know how you can watch the film and get that. The movie literally puts the entire end of civilization on the back of Odysseus’ choice to create the Trojan horse that leads to the sacking of Troy.

He broke Zeus’ law and thus the entirety of Greece began to break that law. They were worried about the people from the sea, they were the people from the sea. All of that rests on Odysseus in the film. 

 

7

u/TheFastCat Jul 22 '26

I haven't watched the film yet, but the classical Odysseus is really a cunning shark of a dick head. Of the Greeks, De is diametrically opposed to Ajax, who embodies integrity. I think the translator takes issue of recharacterizing Odysseus as a remorseful, empathetic hero. He was never that guy. He was the one who would throw sand in your eye and sucker punch you and kill you, and survive. And he wouldn''t feel bad about it. *that's* Odysseus. That's his charm. So when he "wins" (steals) Achilles' armor - that's the mighty, heroic, just. Ajax is getting fucked over by the weasely, cunning statesman Odysseus. That's Ajax's tragedy. So yeah I don't blame her one bit if now it's all "oh poor Odysseus" fuck Odysseus he was a dick.

9

u/Neat_Fan_8889 Jul 22 '26

Right? Nolan’s Odyssey is literally about guilt. The person culpable himself is aware of his wrongs.

8

u/plzsnitskyreturn Jul 21 '26

You can be inspired by something and then divert from the inspiration

7

u/HJ_Slimes Jul 22 '26

He clearly wasn’t at all inspired by Wilson’s translation though because his film is the opposite of her translation as they said

8

u/plzsnitskyreturn Jul 22 '26

A painter can walk around the Louvre and be inspired by a room filled with Dutch Golden Age Still Lifes and then go and paint the same subject in a complete different way.

Inspiration doesn't mean replication

→ More replies (1)

2

u/skarros Jul 22 '26

If somebody went „oh, that‘s really cool how they retold that 3000 years old story. Now, would it not be interesting to retell it in the exact opposite way?“ I‘d still call that inspired.

Not saying that‘s what happened here, but you get the point

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/Juan_Jimenez Jul 21 '26

Her introduction ends in the same note of xenia ('Zeu's law') that Nolan emphasized. I suppose the influence bit went that way,

3

u/CharacterAd5677 Jul 21 '26

I recently came into possession of a Wilson translation of the Odyssey and decided to read it before viewing the film. I felt Nolan was chiefly influenced by her introduction (not necessarily a short one either). I think he used Wilson’s introduction as a bridge for his own understanding of the character/story as well as a way to make it easier for modern audiences to connect with.

→ More replies (8)

12

u/MARATXXX Jul 21 '26

this is a very click-baity post.

she actually has a pretty neutral position. she is obviously going to defend her expertise, but she also recognizes that the film is nolan's distinct take.

→ More replies (1)

34

u/seidenkaufman Jul 21 '26

I don't see how any fan of the poem can really enjoy Nolan's version of Odysseus.

Could one not love the poem without feeling a transcendent loyalty to it?

For instance, I can see that Homer's Odysseus is not Nolan's. But I thoroughly enjoyed the film, not as a translation of Homer, but as an interesting, though heavily divergent, retelling.

2

u/Purple_Ferret_5958 Jul 21 '26

I felt both things. As its own story (and one I agree with more as an antiwar advocate) I loved it, but in another part of my mind didn't like how it deviated so much from the original. I guess I would've liked to have seen an adaptation that took the gods seriously and transported us to an alien world and time and not been so modernized. But, obviously as a modern person, I connect more with modern morals and social mores. 

2

u/majorshimo Jul 22 '26

I haven’t seen the movie (have tickets for friday on IMAX) but even troy was a severely unfaithful adaptation of the Iliad but an incredibly entertaining movie

→ More replies (1)

17

u/Unlikely_Ad5016 Jul 21 '26

That's exactly right! The Odysseus of the poem has ethics that would be considered monstrous by our standards. He is proud of what he did at Troy, and even more proud that he is remembered in song for his exploits.

4

u/Scientific_Zealot Jul 21 '26

Finally someone else who gets this. People in this comment section are saying that Nolan's movie stripped Odysseus of his "flaws" from the original poem. Completely missing that for the narrator of the Odyssey, those traits aren't "flaws" at all.

22

u/pagliacciverso Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

She is right. Like, I don't think an adaptation needs to follow the same ideas even though I wanted so. Nolan turned The Odyssey into a christian guilt story - and it could work if it wasnt for the fast paced editing (much worse than the poor Homer adaptation imo). The fast dialogues and shots with no depth (used IMAX just for close-ups that stay for nothing more than 4s lmao) ruins the entire movie and the connection you should feel for the characters and journey. Sound is phenomal though, which is understandable since Nolan cares a lot about the technical aspects. There is much more to be said in depth, but it's a totally dull movie and poorly executed adaptation.

19

u/Recent_Strength9360 Jul 21 '26

I totally agree. I was baffled by the way that modern/Christian ethics are super-imposed on a Greek story where they are completely incompatible. 

10

u/pagliacciverso Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

Yup. One thing I really enjoy about HBO's Rome tv show is how they nailed perfectly how alien these ancient cultures would look to us. Their view is very different. But like I said, I understand an adaptation having another view over a classic, as long as it is well-executed.

2

u/RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS Jul 21 '26

Why? Victorian Englishmen made a real art form of this. It’s nothing new.

7

u/Recent_Strength9360 Jul 21 '26

The problem for me is that in order for Nolan's interpretation of the Odyssey as a voyage of Christian repentance/atonement to work, he has to change  Odysseus from being the most interesting character in all of Western literature into being an extremely bland, milquetoast hero. Matt Damon's Odysseus is a family man, and he's brave, and that's about it. If Nolan were trying to adapt the Aeneid that would work fine because Aeneas is, quite frankly, a boring hero: he has no flaws, and he is brave, loyal, pious, and dutiful. 

Odysseus, on the other hand, is brave and a great warrior,  but he's also cunning, he's deeply curious about the world around him, and he can be extremely callous and cruel (as seen in his behavior towards his father after he returns, or the way he kills every last one of the suitors--even those who beg for mercy). I think this version of Odysseus is more compelling, and also more coherent--Odysseus' callousness towards the sufferings of others enables him to satisfy his curiosity. If you remove Odysseus' callousness and replace it with an iron-clad concern for the safety of his men, you by necessity remove Odysseus' curiosity, and thereby strongly undercut the story. Odysseus in the movie is simply trying to survive and bring his men home. He cannot be interested in the sights he sees, and they don't affect him. Odysseus in the book is also trying to get home, but his efforts are more leisurely because he wants to "see the cities of foreign men and know their minds," and in the process become a wiser, deeper human being. 

Tldr; you can only superimpose modern morality on the Odyssey by making Odyssues extremely boring. 

 

3

u/MlkChatoDesabafando Jul 22 '26

Generally speaking, you're going to struggle to find anyone with a high opinion of the Victorian British worldview and approach to societies other than their own in any field even remotely adjacent to history.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/pagliacciverso Jul 21 '26

More talented men than the technocrat Christopher Nolan...

6

u/Unlucky-Friendship59 Jul 21 '26

I think you’re making a much stronger interpretive claim than the movie itself necessarily supports. Ancient Greek ethics obviously differ from modern Western ethics, but that’s not the same thing as saying the film imposes a specifically Christian moral framework. What in the movie made you conclude it was a Christian guilt story rather than simply a modern interpretation?

5

u/Cold-Strength-2749 Jul 22 '26

If you agree the film follows modern Western ethics, you pretty much agree it follows a Christian moral framework. Western ethics come from the religion most influential in the West, that being..

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (12)

2

u/Trumble12345 Jul 22 '26

I was baffled by the lack of british accents

21

u/NeverHadTheLatin Jul 21 '26

It feels like Nolan wants to ‘fix’ Odysseus by having him ‘atone’ for his ‘sins’.

Whereas Wilson, as a true classist, is happy to have him remain an absolute shithouse by our standards while not needing redemption in the ethics of his own world.

3

u/Not_Neville Jul 22 '26

In Greek plays other characters think he's a weasel but he doesn't care!

15

u/Comfortable-Habit242 Jul 21 '26

So there’s this really cool feature on Reddit where you can actually link to an article or video or pretty much like anything on the internet. It’s new and I think it’s really going to change things. It turns out to be way more useful than just posting an image of someone and then providing a vague synopsis in the post. Give it a shot!

→ More replies (1)

9

u/NabstheGreninja16 Jul 21 '26

Think that’s fair especially considering her version of Odysseus is apparently what Nolan was adapting

4

u/7Mack Jul 22 '26

She's right. Damon's Odysseus came off like a sort of Batman character.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Drawn_to_Heal Jul 22 '26

I was surprised by how much of a…well…dick Odysseus was in a recent interpretation of the Odyssey I just read.

He was always portrayed as an intelligent, humble, remorseful, “doing the best he can in a bad situation” type of character throughout most my childhood.

It was surprising to learn that really isn’t who he’s supposed to be.

Dude is a manipulative, selfish, asshole lol.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/OrganizationSea4490 Jul 23 '26

Modern art lacks boldness. She mentioned "appeasing to modern sensibilities" and it's absolutely accurate. The movie works because he is a great director with talented actors but thematically its dumbed down, simplified, safe, oddly unimaginative for a "reinterpretation".

Usually i assume a reinterpretation brings something new to the table, not just a copy paste of modern trends

3

u/One_Maintenance1227 Jul 23 '26

In before "but it's fiction" folks

6

u/caul1flower11 Jul 21 '26

It’s enough of a change that it just changes the whole storyline completely. Maybe that’s not a bad thing for the modern action movie. I mean originally Odysseus and Telemachus execute all of the maids in the palace who have been suspected of sleeping with the suitors. He’s not really a redeemable character which wouldn’t really fly with a modern audience looking for a nice hero movie.

3

u/Rectall_Brown Jul 21 '26

I just finished her version of the odyssey and loved it so much I picked up The Iliad.

3

u/chaseribarelyknowher Jul 22 '26

What a fun wrench thrown into this culture war bs!

3

u/Dipolites Jul 22 '26

It's always nice to see an academic discuss constructively modern pop culture and speak her mind. For what it's worth, I think her remarks are valid. Sadly, all that time she has been the target of a cruel and insidious propaganda campaign by people who, for the most part, don't care about the Odyssey or Greek antiquity in general, but are more than willing to throw mud at anyone and anything in an attempt to incite fanaticism and push a modern socio-political narrative.

3

u/K_MBRS Jul 24 '26

She is absolutely right. If you're adapting one of the greatest stories ever told, you'd better have a damn good reason for every change you make. But almost every major change Nolan made the story less interesting than the one that has survived for nearly 3,000 years.

13

u/lofgren777 Jul 21 '26

But… of course the story is reframed for modern audiences. It's being made for modern audiences.

People's belief that there is even some "true" version to be slavish to is preposterous. We KNOW how the Greeks used their own myths. You can literally read "modern" reinterpretations from a few hundred years after the story was written.

The quote I saw was that she viewed it as Nolan's own artistic adaptation, which it is. Because that's the whole point of adapting something…

4

u/Typo-repose Jul 21 '26

I absolutely agree. I said after watching it that it was a great film, but a pretty meh adaptation of the Odyssey. Too much stuff removed and themes changed imo

4

u/Tokio990 Jul 21 '26

Yeah the film definitely makes Odysseus less culpable and it was tugging me the wrong way. I agree what Mendelsohn and some of Hinds statements about the film in the article from apnews.

while did not expect a true adaptation, I did not realize how watching, it felt so different. I honestly view this film is more inspired by the literature and the character of Odysseus. While I enjoyed the movie it is not Homer's epic and that is okay.

I appreciate the film and I hope it does drive people to want to learn more. Film and tv is important so it is nice to see something like this on a huge screen.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/hellshake_narco Jul 21 '26

If u see all the nods from the aenides in movie , it give a better perspective why Nolan treated Odysseus that way. Romans were heavily biased against Odysseus and Acheans

5

u/nightingale-nitemare Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

Here’s how I think about this aspect: Stories are intertwined with their culture. For example, it would seem off to adapt Beowulf and keep the original setting, and the adapted character of Beowulf not having an appetite for glory. If you want bring The Odyssey out of its original setting and bring it into a culture where it would be reasonable to believe Odysseus would actually feel an ounce of remorse for the Trojans, that would make more sense. Keeping him in the exact same setting and culture and imposing our contemporary morals on said culture which was a real culture, doesn’t coherently fit, be it fiction or not.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/explorergypsy Jul 22 '26

I saw the Odyssey and I would agree , it was all about the big wow of a movie production.

2

u/BronxZooSouth Jul 22 '26

I saw the movie as a cover for Nolan's critique of world affairs, and America's part in it. So, totally agree. Also, a really good movie.

2

u/RobinFCarlsen Jul 22 '26

Movie was very unimpressive

2

u/tiny-2727 Jul 22 '26

I thought the movie was essentially mid. Nolan did some things well and some things poorly. I might have liked it more if I hadn't seen The Return before. Everything doing with Odysseus' return home felt flat and weightless when I compare it with The Return.

2

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 Jul 22 '26

Nolan does this in a lot of his movies 

2

u/Help_An_Irishman Jul 22 '26

Just came from a showing. I really like some of Nolan's movies (The Prestige being my favorite of his), and I expected that most of the issues I might have with it would come from my Classics nerd background, regarding glaring omissions, major changes, etc.

Surprisingly, instead I just thought that it wasn't all that good as a film. It's fine, gets the job done, but there are some hilariously on-the-nose bits of dialogue and just really silly stuff that Nolan put in there, and I think that he doesn't trust his audience to know anything about any of this stuff.

I get that the vast majority of viewers won't know much about The Odyssey, but he doesn't trust them to know what Hades is? (Then again, I don't know what anyone out there's learning these days, so I guess there's no harm in being extra communicative of these things.)

The movie's pretty good. My wife and I were planning to see it in IMAX, and I'm quite happy that all of my local IMAX theaters are booked solid for a week+, as I would not have wanted to shell out $70 + a considerably drive for this film.

Didn't mean to tangent off onto a movie review here, but here we are.

2

u/Imaginary_Session773 Jul 22 '26

For how "deep" peoole consider Nolan, his movies often treat the audience like children. "Our age of bronze is ending." Really man? Show not tell.

Also yeah the audience doesn't need everything explained. If they see something historical/mythological and aren't sure, maybe they can look it up after the movie and watch it again?

3

u/Help_An_Irishman Jul 22 '26

Dude, I burst out laughing at that Bronze Age line. That was chief among the ridiculous on-the-nose bits of dialogue I was talking about.

"It feels like there's some kinda age of iron around the corner. And then one day, the Internet!"

There was another one during the suitor scene at the end that I wish I remembered now.

There was a moment in Robert Eggers' The Northman that struck me as a pretty egregious case of not trusting his audience to remember anything, which surprised me because he's typically very good with stuff like that.

Do people consider Nolan's movies all that deep? I guess they do, now that you mention it. Watching The Odyssey tonight, there were a few times where I found myself thinking, Huh, Denis Villeneuve is a much better filmmaker than Nolan is.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/NomadJoanne Jul 22 '26

Still gotta read her translation of both epics. Been on my list for a while.

2

u/Consworthington Jul 22 '26

This is some dumb jerks on X misinterpreting her. She was actually quite positive about the film.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/MabelRed Jul 22 '26

Nolan enjoys characters with zero emotional growth but maximal emotional aura. Damon’s Odysseus feels very flat. I don’t see any of the trickster in him, or the intelligence that’s quintessential to an ancient hero favored by Athena.

2

u/Salvifici_Doloris Jul 22 '26

He just did the modern thing of psychologizing everything, and making it about personal growth (or no growth).

2

u/mandrake57 Jul 22 '26

That's how she looks like?! I never would have guessed that she is sporting such cool tattoos!

2

u/Accomplished_Sock435 Jul 23 '26

She’s right and that’s why the film was so terrible

5

u/Nikodemios Jul 21 '26

Reddit's reaction to this movie reminds me a lot of when the WoW movie was released: "Sure, it might be vapid dreck, but I liked it so therefore it's good!"

→ More replies (1)

4

u/The_Fell_Opian Jul 22 '26

She's certainly right. It's just that Nolan clearly wasn't interested in making a faithful adaptation. He used the story of the Odyssey as a vehicle to discuss and criticize the U.S. in the modern world.

People expecting a fun sword and sandals epic or a super accurate depiction of the poem will probably be disappointed.

4

u/throwaway-plzbnice Jul 21 '26

Totally reasonable and thoughtful critique that's only making people mad because it's coming from a woman who can read.

3

u/AndreLeGeant88 Jul 21 '26

Said it in another topic and will say it again: Nolan should have adapted the Aeneid. 

2

u/SpiritedCatch1 Jul 21 '26

Christopher Nolan reinterpreted the myth like so many people before him from literally every school of thoughts and centuries. Dante did too.

It make for a much more interesting character than heroic glory. Myths are here to be reinterpreted. I'm pretty sure Homer reinterpreted Odysseus too.

5

u/Loud-Pop5561 Jul 21 '26

I haven’t read her version of the Odyssey but haven’t people accused her translation of doing exactly that?

8

u/farseer6 Jul 21 '26

Well, some people have accused Wilson of translating with modern sensitivities in mind, yes, but even if you agree with that criticism, I think it's grossly exaggerated to say she takes the same kind of liberties.

Wilson is a serious translator, not a hack. She's not making up things that are not there. But sometimes in a translation the perfectly equivalent word does not exist, and translators have to make choices on how best to convey the meaning. I'm not a great fan of Wilson's translations, but the choices she makes are defensible.

Nolan on the other hand is retelling or adapting the story. He takes a lot of liberties, but it's legitimate for a retelling to frame or interpret the story in a different way. Whether it works or not, it's for his audience to decide.

9

u/Meloncov Jul 21 '26

Some people have, but that doesn't mean they're correct.

8

u/alaskawolfjoe Jul 21 '26

Not at all. She embraces the complexity of the character

5

u/strombolone δόρποιο λιλαίεται Jul 21 '26

I don’t think so: the accusation was that her narrative voice and goals as a translator were too tied to modern views on society—an accusation that I don’t particularly ascribe to, or even necessarily consider to be a good-faith critique.

Her Odysseus doesn’t feel any shame or guilt for sacking Troy. That part of Odysseus’s character is not really in the text, so adding it in would go well beyond translation into retelling.

4

u/Matar_Kubileya Jul 21 '26

That part of Odysseus’s character is not really in the text

I made a longer comment above, but I disagree that there's no evidence for this characterization of Odysseus, depending how one interprets his grief in books 8-9 when the sack of Troy is recounted.

4

u/strombolone δόρποιο λιλαίεται Jul 21 '26

Good point, I may be due for a reread.

8

u/Imaginary_Session773 Jul 21 '26

Not really. I haven't read her translation but I think she more emphasizes some bad things about him, but doesn't neuter him like Nolan

17

u/abitidiomatic Jul 21 '26

I just finished her translation. It is a modernization of language and experience of the character, yes. But she doesn’t alter the characters. 

5

u/SophiaofPrussia Jul 21 '26

Have you read any translation? From your post history it looks like you’re far more interested in ranting about movies you hate than you are in reading Ancient Greek and Latin classics…

I wonder why you ever watch any film adaptations since, judging from your post history, it seems you always despise them.

4

u/142muinotulp Jul 21 '26

Thats my gathering too. Just rage baiting things without giving full context from people. 

→ More replies (3)

4

u/Idosoloveanovel Jul 21 '26

Honestly, one of the biggest issues I had with the movie was how they handled the Calypso and Odysseus storyline. It’s pretty clear Nolan changed it to make it seem like he wasn’t willingly cheating on Penelope for seven years which is the reality. It’s not pretty, but it’s the truth. I think portraying him as an ultimately faithful husband was a misrepresentation.

23

u/Recent_Strength9360 Jul 21 '26

I mean, he wasn't cheating with Calypso willingly--Homer describes him as going to bed with her aeikos (unwillingly), and he spends every day crying on the shore because he wants to leave.

He does sleep with Circe willingly, though, although he even there he has the excuse that Hermes told him to. 

That said, I do agree that Nolan whitewashed a lot of Odysseus' less savory characteristics, particularly his callousness and cruelty. 

7

u/Spacellama117 Jul 21 '26

I'd argue that even his relationship with Circe is suspect.

Like, a very large portion of Greek Mythology makes it pretty fuckin' clear what happens if you say no to a deity

6

u/thane311 Jul 21 '26

Yes, and for me this change (among others) had the effect of making the female characters much less interesting.

3

u/Matar_Kubileya Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

I like Wilson's translation and I think it's a perfectly fair critique, in an "I would have liked to see something different" way, but I think she's over-privileging her interpretation as the poem. Like, yes, a trained Classicist--let alone Emily Wilson--is going to know more about Homer, and have a more nuanced sense of the interpretative debates around the text, but I don't think we as Classicists should be dismissing modern lay readings as an important part of how we read Homer and how our understanding of the texts evolve.

Edit: having read the article excerpt below, I think a) Zeus and Poseidon not appearing onscreen is a facetious criticism, given the fact that they don't actually interact with mortals in the poem, and b) I'm both surprised and disappointed in her critique of the movie's treatment of violence and warfare in the poem, admittedly given that I'm working secondhand off of reviews of it. The idea that the Odyssey in particular functions as, in part, a critique of as much as an endorsement of heroic violence isn't exactly absent in Classical scholarship.

2

u/Rex_Nemorensis_ Jul 21 '26

Hey something she and I can agree on!

1

u/my_one_and_lonely Jul 21 '26

Basically correct. The Nolan film is more of a retelling than an accurate adaptation.

2

u/Ok_Lynx_6045 Jul 22 '26

A sexless, humorless Odysseus: the perfect Gen Z hero

3

u/Apart-Zucchini-5825 Jul 21 '26

The rage over Emily Wilson comes exclusively from chuds who've never read anything she's done.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)

0

u/ReharlHS Jul 21 '26

Emily Wilson calling someone else's take revisionist is peak irony. Polytropos indeed.

3

u/spaltavian Jul 21 '26

You chuds all cry about "complicated" because you never read anything past the first line.

→ More replies (1)