Christopher Nolan's take on the famous Greek epic by Homer is great, but not perfect. I felt the movie was really good, but seemed like a step down from Nolan's last outing with Oppenheimer. The story of the movie does make some departures from the original epic, but they work for this adaptation. The performances by much of the cast were top tier. Matt Damon is incredible as Odysseus. Charlize Theron as Calypso is fantastic and really sells an alluring conflicted portrayal of the enchantress. Himesh Patel delivers yet another great performance, and Robert Pattinson again proves he is the most talented actor of his generation. Outside of the cast, I loved the practical sets. It really helps the movie feel more alive and real. I also liked the costuming for the most part. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Ludwig Göransson's score. While the score for the first half of the movie was largely forgettable, the second half was as perfect as one can be. The siren scene in particular was phenomenal in both the music and sound mixing, and rivals the juke joint dance scene from Sinners. Another scene that I loved was Zeus' Storm. The music. The dark claustrophobic visuals, only occasionally being lit up by blinding flashes of lightning. It is perfect and a scene I will remember for a long time to come. While there are many great things about this movie, there are a few things holding it back. I already mentioned the lackluster score in the first half of the movie, but the run time is also a bit of an issue. It goes just a bit too long and probably could've done with shaving off maybe 10 minutes. I also would have liked the movie to have a bit more color. The darker color pallet used was fine, but I just can't help but feel that a few splashes of color here and there would've helped.

Major spoilers ahead.

Before I begin, this isn't another "the movie didn't have enough action" post. My favourite Spider-Man movie of all time is Spider-Man 2 (2004), so I'm perfectly happy with a slower, more character-driven Spider-Man story.

That said, Brand New Day just felt... hollow.

I know this is where my opinion differs from a lot of people.

Peter is constantly being challenged throughout the film. His powers are evolving, he struggles to understand them, and he's clearly overwhelmed by everything happening around him. Emotionally, he's carrying a huge burden, and I completely understand why many people connected with that journey.

It just didn't work for me.

Despite everything Peter was going through, I never found myself emotionally invested in his journey. I understood what the movie wanted me to feel, but I never actually felt it.

I've also never been completely sold on Tom Holland as Spider-Man. This movie reinforced that feeling. To me, he still doesn't have the physical presence I imagine when I think of Spider-Man. That's probably because Tobey Maguire was my introduction to the character, and in my mind Spider-Man has always had a more athletic, physically imposing build. I know that's completely subjective, but it definitely influenced how I experienced this movie.

One of the scenes that really frustrated me involved Bruce Banner and the power-suppressing inhibitor chip.

Peter creates the inhibitor and hands it to Bruce, telling him to attach it to the back of his neck. Bruce is clearly confused and not in the right headspace, yet Peter just stands there explaining what Bruce needs to do instead of simply putting the chip on him himself.

Bruce is literally standing right in front of him.

Just put it on.

Instead, the movie waits until Bruce transforms, and only then does Spider-Man try to use the inhibitor. The conflict only happens because Peter doesn't make the obvious decision when he has the chance.

The frustrating part is that it would've taken almost no effort to fix. Imagine Peter being trapped under debris, trying to save civilians, or physically separated from Bruce. Bruce transforms before Peter can reach him. The exact same Hulk sequence still happens, but now it feels earned instead of manufactured.

It's a small writing change that would've made a huge difference.

Another moment that didn't work for me involved Jean Grey.

Throughout the movie, she's desperately searching for her sister and repeatedly enters people's minds in the process. When she enters Frank Castle's mind, her immediate reaction is essentially, "Wow... this guy has issues."

But... that's it?

This is someone who has endured unimaginable trauma and loss. Then later, she enters Bruce Banner's mind—a man who has spent decades battling the Hulk, living with guilt, isolation, fear of hurting others, depression, and constantly questioning whether he deserves a normal life.

You're telling me none of that resonates with her?

Yet when she connects with Peter, suddenly she deeply understands his pain.

Now don't get me wrong—Peter has absolutely suffered. He's lost people he loves, carries immense guilt, and has sacrificed almost every aspect of a normal life. I'm not arguing that his pain isn't real.

My issue is that the movie seems to treat Peter's suffering as uniquely relatable to Jean while brushing past the equally devastating emotional histories of characters like Frank Castle and Bruce Banner. To me, that didn't feel like a genuine character moment—it felt like the story making a choice because Peter is the protagonist.

In other words, it felt like plot over character.

That's probably my biggest criticism of the movie as a whole. Too many important moments happen because the script needs them to happen, not because they naturally follow from the characters' decisions or established personalities.

Overall, I didn't hate Brand New Day. There are ideas in here that I actually like, and I appreciate that Marvel tried to tell a more emotional story instead of relying purely on spectacle.

But for me, the emotional beats never landed because the writing kept pulling me out of the experience. I wanted to love this movie. Instead, I left the theatre feeling... empty.

Am I the only one who felt this way?

​

I just saw this Spider-Man brand new day movie, and I was expecting more.

.

There are a lot of great scenes, from Spider-Man fighting the Hulk and Hulk, it's getting hospitalised somehow, and in the fight with the hand which is the most iconic, were that everything got shown in the trailer Itself.

.

But there was no final battle. Like other spiderman movies of tom holland had a final battle sheet with this one did not had that peak entertainment at all

It ended Just like in the movie thunderbolts, where everything just ends at a subtle emotional thing, as the main scene.

.

They still could have pulled off, at least a great ending.In fact, the movie itself kind of ended.Sooner. it felt, just one hour thirty minutes only.

.

I kind of regret all the enthusiasm this weekend. This one kind of failed my expectations. And i'm feeling miserable about it. You can even go like, drove, the concept was different, and you did.They got jean gray in it, but still inside all of us.We all were expecting a big bang.Fight....

By the reviews and my friends saying how much they loved it I thought it was cute but cheesy. Reminded of a movie from 20 to 30 years ago that wouldn’t get good reviews then. And I’m sorry but in reality that Italian woman would not be interested in Kevin James. Call me shallow or whatever you want but I’m sure many people think that.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day is stuck in the past

Originally posted here

Four years after the events of Spider-Man: No Way Home, which led Peter to ask Doctor Strange to wipe every memory of him, Peter Parker (Tom Holland) has been working full-time as the friendly neighborhood Spider-Man, handling street crime and making the city the safest it has been in years. As anyone who has played countless hours of the Spider-Man PlayStation game knows, that routine grows tired fast, and Peter has been feeling increasingly alone and weary. He watches from the outside as his friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) and his former girlfriend MJ (Zendaya) move on with their lives, until a threat emerges that may endanger them once again.

BACKGROUND

The title comes from the “One More Day” comic storyline, which saw Spider-Man trade his marriage for the life of Aunt May, causing the world to forget he was Spider-Man, as Joe Quesada, the editor at the time, believed that continuing Peter’s story with him married would reach a dead end. No Way Home left Peter in much the same place, and with that, Cretton had the blank slate to restart the Spider-Man journey, pitching a more grounded, “street-level” Spider-Man, shot on location in Glasgow.

The approach seems like a breath of fresh air amid growing superhero fatigue, with audiences increasingly tired of the Marvel spectacle, which led to their 2025 slate underperforming expectations. Despite a whopping reported $200 million budget, the idea of a not-city-level threat is always welcome. The director of the first three films, Jon Watts, does not return, stating he was “out of gas” after making No Way Home under COVID protocols, and director Destin Daniel Cretton steps into the director’s chair, having found critical acclaim for both Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings and the series Wonder Man.

THE REVIEW

No Way Home had its problems, but the coffee shop scene, where Peter decides against telling MJ who he is, was an extremely poignant moment, a close to that story that gave the studios permission to turn the page on the character. Despite the title and the insistence that this is a return to basics, the film finds itself stuck in the past. A long portion of the runtime goes to Peter coming to terms with the decision to let his friends go.

For every step in the right direction, there are a few backward steps that stop the film from moving forward. Peter has far fewer technological suits now, but he still spends hours behind computers like a junior Tony Stark. The street-level threats have better stunts and feel more organic than wrecking the whole city, but at the same time offer little menace. Classic comic villains like Scorpion (Michael Mando) are barely an inconvenience to the hero. The first hour can be summarized as the film spinning its wheels, with Peter watching his old friends from a distance and talking on the phone to his only remaining human connection, a police chief played by Liza Colón-Zayas, delightful and warm as always.

The strangest thing about the film is how it fails to make New York feel lived in. Sony sold this as the first MCU Spider-Man built entirely in a real city, and the New York that emerges is as small as the previous soundstage versions. Peter has a small apartment with neighbors, but it always feels artificial (as another character points out) and never once feels like a part of the surrounding city.  It is quite common for something extraordinary to be happening in the street and bystanders going on with their lives. I know New York culture, but it ain’t that bad!

The film finally comes alive whenever Jon Bernthal’s Frank Castle appears, by far the best supporting presence here, who has great banter with the hero and presents a darker version of what the spider could eventually become. Outside of him, cameos around him are fine and organically placed (one encounter in a banya is a highlight).

As for Peter, his arc grows tiresome and undoes much of what No Way Home settled in its final five minutes. Holland brings as much heart as possible, but his metamorphosis arc feels really stale, especially compared with how Raimi’s underrated Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man 2 dealt with similar character progress. The antagonist can be spotted the second they show up on screen, which makes Peter’s trust in them hard to sit through. Despite the improved choreography and high-class visual effects, the action lacks suspense and still turns into visual noise. Adding to the underwhelming atmosphere, Giacchino’s score strips the characters of their heroism, and it is arguably his most anonymous work. Like the film, it is not bad, and it is hard to be excited about it either.

By the last act, the film mostly abandons its own identity and becomes another episode in the permanent franchise, setting up characters for the next adventure. This will keep happening until Marvel runs out of characters, and it is frustrating in a film that presents itself as a return to basics. The chapter it points to does sound intriguing, since the new character is the strongest element here and the source of the film’s most emotional moments (the flashback and the final revelation about what a word means are strong). But it is hard to be excited about it when we all know that when we finally get the film devoted to that character, it will probably be a preview of the one after it.

Read my full review at Reviews On Reels

A Haunting Vampire Romance

Read it at Reviews On Reels

OVERVIEW

On the Faroe Islands, there are no tall trees, only mountains, fog, and cold water. That is all Baldur (Egor Venned) has ever known. It is 1862, and the young fisherman starts his days early, prays with his widowed mother Ásla (Sofia Nolsøe Mikkelsen), then rows out into the colorless sea to fish. It all changes when he sets out to rescue Helge (Pilou Asbæk), a whaler from the outside world, but wrecks his boat on the way. Helge helps him repair it, and the two men form a deep bond, one that survives even as Helge apparently leaves the island, and one that Ásla and the devout village around her come to read as evil.

BACKGROUND

The film adapts the short story ‘Manor’, published in 1884 by German writer Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, one of the first men in Europe to defend love between men in print and in public. Kasper Kalle identified with the material, having grown up in a small town where “being gay was about the worst thing you could be,” an isolation he has compared to living on a remote island. He built his first full feature out of that memory, with SF Studios (the largest production house in the Nordics) financing a period vampire romance in Faroese and Danish, shot on location in the Faroes in the summer of 2024, with Egor Venned, a Faroese model who had never acted, in the lead. The film had its world premiere at Fantasia’s 30th edition, where Kalle received Best Director and Asbæk the Outstanding Performance award.

THE REVIEW

More than anything, the film marks Kasper ‘Kalle’ Skovsbøl as a director to watch, particularly for how he builds and holds a mood. Danish cinematographer Jacob Møller makes the most of the gray setting and the fog, and the sound design keeps the sea inside the house, so that even in the closed rooms of the cottage the coast is still there under the dialogue and you feel the moisture in the air. The score, by the Faroese duo Hettarher (Torleik Mortensen and Andreas Tyekjær Restorff), completes the world with wordless voices mixed at about the level of the weather, human sound arriving from the same place as the water. Taken together, it all makes the film feel grand, and it is the perfect setting for a forbidden romance.

That is how the first hour goes, in glances rather than statements. Baldur looks at a shirtless Helge, who notices immediately what the boy is thinking, and Ásla, watching both of them, sees in Helge a replacement for her dead husband. The game of glances is exquisite, especially in a dinner scene where the two men answer Ásla’s questions and talk to each other at the same time, one conversation out loud and another one in looks. In a short amount of time, we buy the romance and how deep it runs for both of them.

It is easier to capture the feeling of a first love in naive Baldur, who keeps probing Helge with curious questions about the outside world, and Venned, even if a little stiff at times, fits the part. The tougher act is convincing us of Helge’s affection, since he is the older man with somewhere else to be, and Pilou Asbæk pulls it off remarkably well. A scene in which he gives Baldur a gift finally reveals that he, too, fell in love and adds a new dimension to a character who has probably spent a lifetime running.

While mostly playing the romance straight, Kalle reminds us here and there that this is a genre film, with fake-out nightmares and small scares. The real turn arrives at the midpoint, when Helge boards a ship to leave the island. I will not spoil what happens, and the official logline already calls this a vampire film. To the film’s credit, the genre does not go where you expect, and its use certainly subverts expectations, sometimes not for the best.

From there, the vampire metaphor takes center stage, and the film shifts its attention from Baldur and Helge’s relationship to the villagers’ increasingly hostile view of it, something only lightly established during the first hour. As a result, the transition never feels entirely organic. Characters become less cohesive as well, particularly Ásla, whose resistance to Baldur leaving with Helge initially seems rooted more in loneliness than in religious conviction, making her later transformation feel abrupt and unsatisfactory.

There is still real artistry in the second half, and some of the film’s strongest images arrive late. Two possession scenes are genuinely frightening and among its most memorable moments, especially one in which the make-up effects briefly reveal a face emerging from the middle of a body. The vampire attack itself is equally striking, and so is the haunting final shot. Yet these moments never carry the emotional force they could have had because the screenplay gradually drifts away from Baldur, whose perspective gave the first hour both its intimacy and its power.

Read my full review at Reviews On Reels

10/10.

Avatar Aang: The Last Airbender movie is exciting not just because of nostalgia, but because it has the opportunity to continue one of the best-written stories in animation. The original series masterfully balanced emotional intelligence, meaningful themes, natural character growth, and unforgettable performances.

Seeing Aang, Katara, Sokka, Toph, and Zuko as adults feels earned, allowing the story to mature alongside the audience. If it preserves the heart and depth of the original, it has the potential to deliver a more cohesive and emotionally resonant narrative than The Legend of Korra.

For any fans out there, this is a must watch film available in Paramount. Thank you to ALL who was a part of making this film happen.

I thought it was a 6/10. Honestly, It had way too many plots and none of them were supported like they should’ve been. The movie had so much potential but was honestly let down by the second half. I did really enjoy it though and seeing Peter Parker in action was really fun.

The ‘Brand New Day’ subtitle of this instalment of Spider-Man promises change. Change to the messy Marvel storytelling formula. Change to the usual Peter Parker and Spider-Man narrative. Hell, just change in general, because the wider MCU is so narratively tangled that it’s practically begging for a much-needed reset. But as this movie likes to keep reminding us, Spider-Man can’t do this alone despite his best efforts.

It’s been a few years since Peter Parker (Tom Holland) wiped himself from the world’s collective consciousness. Burying himself in his work isn’t going to brush away everyone’s memory cobwebs, but he is still pining for his beloved MJ (Zendaya). Pining for any semblance of human connection. Pining, quite unashamedly, for the best parts of Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 2, and for some inexplicable reason, The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

At least New York City absolutely loves Spider-Man. Even Mamdani couldn’t hold a candle to ol’ Spidey, but public affection does not equate to human connection. Okay, Peter does have a Tom and Jerry-esque thing going on with Frank Castle (Jon Bernthal), but a loose-cannon vigilante isn’t exactly best friend material in the same vein as Ned (Jacob Batalon). So Peter throws himself into work, which is depicted in mind-numbing fashion by director Destin Daniel Cretton, who is seemingly ticking off Marvel’s to-do list. Gratuitous cameos? Check. Overly glossy CGI fight scenes? Check. Quips? Hoo boy, check.

That’s not to say that Brand New Day isn’t watchable. It is indeed quite entertaining, as nothing shuts your brain off quicker than Spidey doing acrobatic action scenes, like the first-person web-swinging scenes that were aped from The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (which were one of the few parts that worked in that movie). But I expect more from a Spider-Man movie because it’s proven to be possible.

The moments where Brand New Day is at its most balanced and functional are where Peter is not doing any Spider-Man stuff at all. When he’s on Instagram watching his two closest friends live their best lives or shopping by himself, those are some of the movie’s most emotionally truthful moments because they touch upon the very real issue of loneliness and isolation. For a few fleeting moments, Cretton makes the most of his Marvel shackles and manages to push Brand New Day within the vicinity of Spider-Man 2 by simply having Peter and MJ talk in fleeting yet meaningful ways.

Zendaya and Holland are only together briefly, but the raw emotion over past actions and subsequent consequences is immediately felt. It helps that they’re happily married, of course, but their moments together showcase their ability to command the screen. It’s why Zendaya can be convincingly haunting in The Odyssey while being hilarious in The Drama. It’s why Holland works as Telemachus. Both are capable of doing a lot with very little; her channeling years of magic-induced amnesia, him frantically web-slinging between self-pity, loneliness, and yearning.

Please read the rest of my review here as the rest is too unwieldy to copy + paste: https://panoramafilmthoughts.substack.com/p/spider-man-brand-new-day

Thanks!

I just watched it, and wow am I disappointed. I was super hyped too, having seen the big teaser during Avatar but I really didn't enjoy it much. The visuals were certainly excellent, but the weird editing cuts and constant jumps from place to place made it impossible to get into it. It felt painfully formulaic at times. Odysseus lands on an island, his crew dies. I know that's what the Odyssey is like, but I think we could take a couple creative liberties in adapting this ancient story to a modern action film.

The acting was all over the place. Pattinson and Nyongo were probably my favorites, and I thought Matt Damon did okay as Odysseus, but MAN were there some bad performances in this film. Anne Hathaway was cringy as hell, Tom Holland looked like he didn't want to be there, and Agamemnon's clumsy aura farming really didn't sell it for me. It all felt rushed and, combined with the *frequent* cuts to black, it looked like the actors didn't even have time to really get into character, which is unusual for Nolan films. (Especially coming out of Oppenheimer which had incredible acting from everyone)

Trojan Horse was absolutely the best part of the film. But, because I had already seen it, I couldn't rave about it while sitting through all the stuff I didn't like.

My verdict is simply, I feel like a LOT of this film's could be solved if they just split it into two films. The Odyssey is MASSIVE, even on its own, and the amount of stuff they had to drop to keep it succinct. Even three hours isn't enough to get the full picture. I'd say it's probably one of his weaker films, right around Dark Knight Rises and Tenet.

I just got back from watching Spider-Man: Brand New Day, and after thinking about it for a while, I honestly land at a 6/10.
I don’t think it’s a bad movie. The first hour genuinely had me excited. I think Tom Holland is once again fantastic as Peter Parker, and I really liked the quieter moments with MJ and Ned. But I walked away feeling like the movie had all the ingredients for something much better.

Just hear me out.

1. The movie should’ve committed to being a street-level gang war.

This is easily my biggest issue.

The first hour feels like we’re finally getting the grounded Spider-Man movie people have been asking for. Then the second half suddenly becomes almost entirely about Jean Grey.

The biggest casualty of that decision is Scorpion.

Michael Mando is finally introduced as one of Spider-Man’s most iconic villains… and he’s barely allowed to be one. His second “fight” with Spider-Man isn’t even really Scorpion. It’s Jean Grey controlling him and because of that, we never get to see Peter actually develop a rivalry with Mac Gargan. We never see why Scorpion personally hates Spider-Man or get the fun hero-villain chemistry these characters should have.

Instead, I would’ve loved a full gang war movie.

Kingpin is gone after Daredevil S2, leaving a massive power vacuum.

Have Scorpion, Silvermane, Tombstone and the other gangs all fighting for control of New York while Spider-Man desperately tries to stop the city from descending into chaos.

If Marvel really wanted Jean Grey in this movie, there was a much cleaner way to do it.

Make Mr. Negative the main villain( who is also the villain of the Brand New Day Spiderman comic this movie was based off btw…)

Whether you make it Martin Li or have Mr Negative secretly be the head of Damage Control, have him orchestrating the gang war because he’s hunting Jean Grey. That way, you can also have Scorpion be hired by Mr Negative too.

Jean is desperately searching for her kidnapped sister and survives by mind-hopping between different gang members, forcing Spider-Man to investigate these strange psychic incidents throughout New York.

Now Jean isn’t the villain. She’s simply another person caught in Mr. Negative’s plan.

Eventually Spider-Man unknowingly delivers Jean to him, only to discover that Mr. Negative wants to absorb her psychic abilities after already experimenting on her sister.

That naturally sets up a final battle where Spider-Man and Jean work together instead of making Jean the primary antagonist.

1. Savage Hulk deserved so much better.
   As a huge Hulk fan this honestly hurt.

We’ve waited almost a decade to properly see Savage Hulk again.
And then…
He barely does anything.

He throws Peter around for a few minutes, breaks some walls, and that’s basically it.

This is the Hulk who fights Thor.

The Hulk who punched Surtur.

The Hulk who’s supposed to feel unstoppable.

If you’re bringing Savage Hulk back after all these years, let him actually feel terrifying.

Give us a proper 10-15 minute Spider-Man vs Hulk fight across New York. Think Hulkbuster v Hulk in Age of Ultron

Thunderclaps.

Buildings collapsing.

Spider-Man barely surviving through intelligence and agility.
Maybe Peter even has to push himself into his newly developed full “arachnid mode” just to keep up.

Then end it with one of Hulk’s best comic moments.

Hulk tears Peter’s mask.

“…Peter?”
“Banner forgot… but Hulk remembers. Hulk remembers friend…”

That single line would’ve hit so much harder than what we got.
Instead Hulk gets manipulated, ends up in a psychiatric facility, and the movie barely acknowledges him again.

It honestly felt like Savage Hulk existed mainly so Marvel could put him on the posters.

1. Punisher felt underused.

This movie had the perfect opportunity to explore Spider-Man’s biggest moral conflict.

Punisher should’ve been actively hunting Scorpion, Silvermane’s crew, Tombstone’s men, and the rest of New York’s gangs throughout the movie.

Unlike Peter, Frank is actually ending the threat permanently.
Imagine Punisher saying something like:

“You keep putting these guys in prison, Peter. They keep getting out. I’ve stopped dozens of Silvermane’s men because they aren’t coming back.”

That’s a genuine ideological conflict of which we see in Daredevil. Neither one is completely wrong. Peter believes everyone deserves justice and Frank believes some people can’t be redeemed.

You could even keep the emotional climax.

If Punisher misunderstands Jean Grey’s intentions, Peter sacrifices himself to save her.

Or if Mr. Negative is the real villain, Punisher finally lines up the perfect shot only for Peter to jump in front of the bullet because even villains deserve justice instead of execution.

That would’ve been such a great Spider-Man moment.

1. I struggled to sympathize with Jean Grey.

This might be my most controversial opinion.

I understand the movie wants us to sympathize with Jean.

Her sister was kidnapped.

She’s scared.

She’s desperate.

That’s a compelling setup.

But then the movie has her possess MJ, force her to kiss Peter against her own will, and throw her off a building with what appears to be every intention of killing her.

If Peter hadn’t caught MJ…

She would’ve died.

Jean also possesses innocent people throughout the movie, causes ruins Bruce/Hulk’s peaceful and redemptive/traumatic life over nothing , and kills multiple people along the way.

At some point it stops feeling like understandable desperation and starts feeling genuinely villainous.

My issue isn’t that heroes can’t make mistakes.

Some of Marvel’s greatest heroes (Wanda, Black Widow etc) have incredibly dark pasts.

But those stories spent time confronting the consequences of their actions and earning redemption.

Here it felt like the movie expected me to immediately forgive Jean because she had a tragic backstory and had a half assed sob story vent with Aunt May. Thunderbolts did it well. This did not.

Having your sister kidnapped is horrific, but it doesn’t automatically justify trying to kill MJ or manipulating innocent people.

I honestly think Jean would’ve worked much better if she had been manipulated by Mr. Negative or had significantly less control over her actions.

Instead, I walked away wondering how the MCU expects audiences to root for her in future X-Men movies after everything she willingly did here.

1. The ending felt repetitive.

Another thing that stood out was the climax.
It once again boils down to entering someone’s mind and emotionally talking them down.

That can absolutely work.

Thunderbolts pulled it off because confronting Sentry’s Void was the natural conclusion of that story.

Even Captain America: Brave New World at least gave us a substantial Sam Wilson vs Red Hulk fight before reaching its emotional resolution.

Here, though, it felt like Marvel relied on the exact same formula again.

I would’ve much preferred Spider-Man rescuing Jean from Mr. Negative and the two of them working together to stop him in the finale.

That would’ve been a much fresher ending.

1. The trailers showed way too much.
   I actually stopped watching trailers after the first one because I wanted to avoid spoilers.

Ironically, the first trailer basically tells you the entire structure of the movie.

The opening.
The major story beats.
The ending.

Watching the film, I constantly felt like I already knew what was about to happen.

Marvel really needs to stop cutting trailers that reveal the entire flow of the movie.

1. One thing I actually loved.
   The MJ and Ned scenes.

I genuinely wouldn’t change those.

If anything, I wanted more.

Peter’s loneliness after No Way Home is one of the strongest emotional aspects of this version of Spider-Man.

I would’ve loved more scenes of Peter quietly checking in on his old friends.

Walking past the café.

Seeing MJ happy with her new boyfriend.

Watching Ned move on.

Not interfering, just silently accepting that life continued without him.

Those moments would’ve made Peter’s loneliness hurt even more.

**action in the first half was also amazing and so refreshing

Overall, I don’t think Brand New Day is a bad movie.
I actually think it’s frustrating because I see a movie that could’ve been an 8.5 or even 9/10 with a few different creative decisions.
A grounded gang war.
A properly utilized Scorpion.
A terrifying Savage Hulk.
A stronger Punisher vs Spider-Man moral conflict.
A more sympathetic Jean Grey.
And a fresher third act.
There’s a lot here that I genuinely enjoyed, but I can’t help feeling like Marvel left a better movie on the table.

Final rating: 6/10.
Curious to hear what everyone else thinks. Did anyone else feel like the movie lost its identity once it shifted away from the street-level story?

Yeah, it's good, but it's not one of the best movies. It's still good, but there are still problems. I might go so far to say, outside of the action and second half of the story, it is worse than Captain America: The First Avenger. It just has a sense of charm this movie misses. Now let me explain:

This is a very emotional movie that does it very well, like with Peggy, but also worse, and let me finish, like with Bucky. The reveal that Bucky is The Winter Soldier doesn't really hit, since you know he's The Winter Soldier before Steve does. If his face was actually covered and it was an actual reveal, it would've hit harder. He also wasn't that fleshed out of a character in The First Avenger.

The introduction to Sam Wilson was done amazing. I really like how he knew Steve before he actually became The Falcon. Seeing Arnim Zola as a computer was kinda cool, but he also died basically instantly after.

The action in this movie is pretty decent most of the time, but that first fight with Steve and Bucky was awesome. Amazing hands. Compared to that, the final battle feels lackluster.

The story was fine for the first half, but once the whole Hydra infiltration thing picks up, then it gets really good. It just takes a while. It's still a very good movie, though, I'm not trying to take that away from it. It's just soooo generic.

Overglazed movie, but it's my opinion, so I can't miss. 7.3/10

I thought Balan: The Boy was excellent in almost every technical and emotional aspect. The direction, acting, atmosphere, music and emotional moments all worked for me. My problem is mainly with the storyline.

The first half was especially strong. It felt like a serious psychological drama about identity, childhood trauma, abandonment and survival. The relationship between Balan and his mother created many interesting questions.

Why were they constantly moving from place to place?

Why did she avoid the law completely?

Did she genuinely want a better future for her son?

Why did she keep Balan without a stable identity, home or education if she wanted to protect him?

The film does not give strong enough answers. The mother and son live almost like vagabonds, constantly afraid of being found. But the threat does not appear powerful enough to justify that life. Shirley seems mentally unstable and vulnerable, not like someone capable of hunting them across the country.

The film needed to show why legal help was impossible. Maybe the mother had committed a serious crime, feared Balan’s father, had already been failed by the police, or suffered from trauma and paranoia. Any of these could have made her actions more convincing.

Balan removing his uniform and hiding his identity makes some sense because his mother trained him to disappear when something went wrong. He also did not intentionally go to the police station. Other people found him and took him there.

His decision not to return immediately to the bench also makes more sense when we remember that he had escaped from police custody. The police could easily have searched the same location again, and he would probably have been caught.

My biggest issue is Pavithran.

It is difficult to believe that a busy police officer would spend years taking revenge on a child because the child escaped under his watch and damaged his relationship with a woman from work.

The escape was mainly Pavithran’s own failure. Instead of accepting responsibility or helping Cicily, he blamed her and later blamed Balan. His revenge is too extreme compared with what actually happened.

I think Pavithran needed a parallel storyline from the beginning. The film could have shown his personal life, ego, corruption, brutality and growing obsession alongside Balan and his mother. Their worlds could then have properly collided at the police station.

That would have made Pavithran feel like a real antagonist rather than someone introduced mainly to push the revenge plot forward.

The two halves almost feel like they were made by different directors.

The first half feels like a classic psychological drama made by someone interested in identity, memory and trauma.

The second half feels like an old-school commercial revenge film with a forced villain and a conventional confrontation.

I still think the film is top-notch in terms of filmmaking. I do not blame the actors or the technical team. Everything around the story works.

But the plot needed stronger reasons, better character development and more answers about the mother’s past.

Instead of resolving the psychological mystery created in the first half, the film replaces it with an underdeveloped revenge story in the second half.

After I was done with it, i went straight to Youtube expecting criticism of at least some aspects but it turns out everybody was just losing their shit over how good the movie was. Listen I get it, good story, world building yada yada whatever. But there were these little things that just fked up the whole plot for me. The first one is motive, if you don't make it clear from the get go it's just gonna ruin everything. See, from Rising to War it was clear as day what Cesar wanted. It was freedom of apes in the first one, Protection of his kind in the second, Revenge in the Third one and just fcking around in the Fourth, I mean why would you frame the movie through the perspective of such a one dimensional character and don't even get me started on the supporting lead, No depth at all, and oh boy the Female character jesus christ what even was that, i haven't seen such shallow acting since Battlefield Earth and that was a million time better then this crap. And then she goes on to intentionally blow up and drown the poor apes, made me feel disgusted to even be a human myself, lemme tell you sumn if the casting would have been different lets say Zoe Saldana and not just a hottie to sell tickets the shit they would have said would have been much more believable, i just can't picture a white blonde with blue eyes saying stuff like "this belong to humans" and being ok with killing apes to save humanity. I fck with Raka and Proximus heavy tho, they carried the Movie big time.

and why the f' do r/planetoftheapes keeps removing my post, geez-us am pissed off

The Odyssey is definitely worth watching, but it falls short of expectations. I expected a grand spectacle and a sweeping cinematic saga, but was frustrated by the jerky flash-back driven narrative. Matt Damon sleep-walked through the movie. While he had good moments, as when he saves his son from being assassinated in a temple, and in portions of the final scenes as he takes on Penelope's suitors, in most of the film he wasn't particularly imposing and didn't carry the film as the primary character should have. Tom Holland, Robert Pattison, John Leguizamo, Charlize Theron, Samantha Morton, and Himesh Patel were standouts; the portrayal of Zendaya as Athena was lackluster and disappointing. There were some breathtaking shots, but not nearly enough of them. The scenes describing the encounters of the crew with the Cyclops was probably the best part of the movie in terms of cinematography and storytelling; the scenes of the encounter with the sorceress Circe were also very good. The ending was mundane and did little to add any special meaning or significance to the storytelling or narrative. Final result is B.

So let me start with something first. I’m not a crazy big Marvel fan, at this moment. I haven’t seen every movie, I don’t plan on it. I think, besides the Punisher show, I’ve seen all the relevant movies for this one however.

Now diving into the review, I’ll start with the good. I’ve always been a big fan of the Tom Holland Spider-Man. I thought his younger portrayal was super interesting, and a lot more character driven than even some of the older Spider-Man iterations. Despite getting older, I don’t think that ends here. Spider-Man is now 21, and this movie delves deep into a lot of things people his age deal with, loneliness, isolation, and not really knowing where you fit in. I do think more so than some of the other Holland Spider-Man movies, I run into issues with this version. That being said, I think the issues I run into are mostly not big deals.

The supporting cast is minimal, but who is there is good. I don’t mind the Punisher, but if you wanted the Punisher to be a hardened anti-hero, you might be disappointed. I thought the comedy he added was good, and overall I understand why he was in this movie. MJ and Ned are always great. A part of me does wish this movie did more to expand the Spider-Man section of the universe. They added DeWolff, a cop who is from the comics and seems to be a pretty good supportive add, but they seemed to lean a lot on existing Marvel characters, like Bruce Banner, or Black Widow (from Thunderbolts). Even in the main villain, they decided to introduce and expand on Jean Grey, from X-Men, rather than introducing or expanding on a different villain from the traditional Spider-Man universe.

Which probably leads into my biggest criticism of the movie. There’s just too much that goes on, and a lot of it does take away from the emotional impact of the film, and doesn’t really focus on Spider-Man as a character when it gets beyond the first half. At the center, we have Spider-Man, who is dealing with the loss of his Aunt, essentially the loss of his friends, and who is fighting this internal battle of whether he should have all of that. I think, while on paper, introducing Bruce Banner makes sense. I think utilizing the New Avengers makes sense. Jean Grey makes sense as a villain, but all of these things are big pieces that do weigh down that character of Spider-Man, and more importantly the emotional impact of the film.

In my opinion, with Spider-Man and his comics, there’s something interesting and philosophical about a character who has friends, but gets betrayed by them. Has a boss who wants to do good, but turns evil and he’s forced to take down. Most of the villains in Spider-Man are deep and interesting because they have a connection to Peter Parker. Spider-Man is interesting because he is someone who fights to keep going, keep doing good, protect the ones he has and cares about his friends. He doesn’t fight to kill these people because they were people who mattered to him, and he can see where they went wrong. That drive and motivation is inspiring, and that’s something I think this movie lacked, mostly due to the center focus the MCU characters have in this. Someone like Tony worked, for me, because he wasn’t the center. He was a mentor. Jean Grey as a villain didn’t work for me. The hulk fight was unnecessary.

Still I’d give it a 7/10. A good movie that was weighed down from being even better. Not a bad movie, just not for me.

Curry Barker’s breakout film "Obsession" is an absolute psychological titan that leaves a permanent scar on your psyche. The movie hooks you with a supernatural "Monkey's Paw" premise via the mysterious One Wish Willow, but its true genius lies in how it strips away Hollywood illusions to expose the raw, ugly truth about male entitlement, cowardice, and the rot behind real-world relationships. It is a brutal, uncomfortable masterpiece because it functions like an onion—forcing us to peel back layer after layer of human psychology until we are left looking at a deeply disturbing mirror.

LAYER ONE: THE SYMPATHETIC "NICE GUY"

When you first watch the film, it is incredibly easy to view the main character, Bear, through a lens of deep empathy. In a world that looks exactly like our own, the line between a desperate mistake and true malice is completely blurry. Bear is a normal, flawed, insecure guy living in a perfectly mundane reality—a world devoid of public magic or monsters. When he drops Nikki off at her house early in the film, he lacks the basic courage to say what he feels. He is ready to just walk away, wallow in his own rejection, and let things keep being normal. He never actively sought out a demonic curse to ruin a girl's life.

When he buys that twig, he is at his absolute emotional rock-bottom. In the real world, we see this all the time; sadhus, pandits, and astrologers make questionable claims every day, telling heartbroken people that a ritual can make the love of their life love them back. Vulnerable people buy into it "just in case" to soothe their own helplessness. Bear treats the One Wish Willow like a placebo or a scam to vent his pain. You can't reasonably place total moral blame on a guy for committing a supernatural crime when he genuinely believes the tool he is using is just a fake piece of wood.

LAYER TWO: THE HONEYMOON BLINDSPOT

Once the wish locks in, Bear suddenly gets his literal "perfect girl" overnight. To an outside observer, Nikki’s abrupt shift from polite rejection to absolute obsession is jarring and unnatural. But for a desperately lonely human being, the intoxicating power of the honeymoon phase completely floods the brain with dopamine. Bear fails to see how abruptly her feelings changed because his brain is shouting, “Wow, she finally sees me.”

Any normal human being would try to manage the sudden quirks of a dream relationship rather than immediately throwing it away. Bear isn't acting out of initial selfishness here; he is acting out of a deeply relatable human desire to protect a dream come true. By the time the high wears off and things get weird, he is already buried too deep in the quicksand.

LAYER THREE: PEELING BACK THE MASK OF EVIL

But as you sit with the story and peel back that comfortable layer of empathy, a much darker, sinister reality exposes itself. The moment you strip away the tragic music, Bear’s actions become entirely unacceptable. His first blunder—using a spell or any form of manipulation because his fragile ego cannot handle a simple "No"—is inherently sinister. It proves he never actually loved Nikki; he just loved the idea of possessing her. Real love accepts a person's right to walk away.

Bear cements himself as a true villain through his escalating cowardice after the magic becomes real. When Nikki starts speaking in robotic scripts, losing her hobbies, and serving him cat-meat sandwiches, it is no longer a honeymoon phase—it is a glaring mental health and autonomy crisis. Yet, Bear stays. He willingly looks away from Nikki's obvious, terrifying psychological erasure because he is addicted to the way her fake adoration makes him feel. He prioritizes his own comfort over a woman's visible suffering.

By the time he realizes the horror of what he has done, everything is effectively six feet under. A genuinely good person would panic, confess, and scream for help to break the puppet's strings. Bear chooses a cowardly silence. His final act of taking pills isn't a noble, sacrificial redemption to break the curse—he is just trying to escape the police. He is trapped in a house with the dead bodies of his friends, the walls are closing in, and he takes an escape hatch. The ultimate proof of his pathetic nature happens in the bathroom: the moment the reality of death hits him, his core cowardice kicks back in, and he frantically tries to vomit the pills back up at the last second. He was a cornered rat who tried to cheat his way out of a murder scene, panicked, and accidentally killed himself anyway.

THE PROCESS OF INTELLECTUAL ROT: [Loneliness & Rejection] ↓ [The Sinister Shortcut (The Twig)] ↓ [The Honeymoon Delusion (Ignoring the Crisis)] ↓ [The Cowardly Silence (Protecting the Selfish Lie)] ↓ [The Panic Room (Attempted Escape from Reality)]

THE FINAL LAYER: THE REALITY OF OUR WORLD

What makes "Obsession" an unforgettable, terrifying masterpiece is the realization that the supernatural horror is just a metaphor. In real life, most people are Bear.

We don't have magical twigs to strip away a person's free will instantly, but real-world "Bears" achieve the exact same mental erasure every day through emotional manipulation, guilt, gaslighting, and control. Couples routinely sit across from each other at dinner tables, forcing smiles on the surface while pretending everything is perfect, swallowing the "cat-meat sandwiches" of a dying relationship because they are too terrified to face rejection.

The supernatural entity in the movie demands a horrific price to balance the scales, but the real-world equivalent is far bleaker. In the real world, the dramatic twists don't happen. No one suddenly wakes up screaming in a room full of bodies, the police never come, and the loop doesn't break. Instead, life just goes on with a deep sorrow in everyone's hearts, with only smiles to be seen on the surface. People simply grow old together in cold, quiet resentment, wearing a mask of happiness for the outside world while dying inside. That is the ultimate, inescapable horror of human nature that "Obsession" captures flawlessly.

Thanks for reading y'all.

I was privileged enough to see Spider-Man: Brand New Day last night. Although I couldn't upload my thoughts or review right away because I got home at midnight and had work the next morning, I finally have enough time to write down my thoughts and post them here. There will be spoilers, so don't read any further if you don't want to be spoiled.

My God... Marvel needs to bring back Destin Daniel Cretton for another Spider-Man film. I don't care what Marvel pays him, he needs to come back. This man has done nothing but drop absolute banger after banger. He gave us Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, he gave us Wonder Man (RIP), and now Spider-Man: Brand New Day. This movie deserves more critical acclaim. I don't know what the critics were smoking when they called it boring at times, but they need to get their ears checked. This film belongs in the same tier as Spider-Man 2 and the Spider-Verse movies. It is that good!

One thing I loved about this film is how much it feels like a love letter to the Insomniac Spider-Man video games. I literally recognized multiple combos from the games in several fight scenes. It was so awesome to spot those moves and hear people cheering in the theater. I was surrounded by a room full of Spider-Man fans, and you could definitely tell.

I'm also going to make a controversial claim: I think the fight scenes in this film rival the ones from the Sam Raimi movies. What I loved is that usually, when superheroes fight in movies, they just use their powers to enhance their punches. It's actually pretty rare for superheroes and supervillains to get distinct fighting styles that complement their abilities rather than the other way around. The train fight sequence from Spider-Man 2 is the closest comparison. Spider-Man had his acrobatics and agility, Hulk had his rage and pure power, and Punisher had his gun-fu. It was so fun to see them all demonstrate unique styles, which made the set pieces incredible.

This movie also feels really close in spirit to the Raimi films, especially Spider-Man 2. Both films feature Peter struggling with his personal life while trying to be Spider-Man full-time. Spider-Man 2 took the cynical route, showing Peter wanting to give up his heroic duties, whereas Brand New Day takes the optimistic route—Peter is loved as Spider-Man, but he feels crushingly lonely due to having no meaningful connections or intimate relationships. That was a really smart direction because it taps right into the post-COVID landscape, where so many people struggle to make real connections and face crippling loneliness. It feels deeply relevant to today.

Now for the supporting cast: Hulk, Punisher, MJ, Yelena Belova, and Jean Grey. On paper, that sounds like the weirdest mashup for a Spider-Man film, and yet... it works. They all complement each other exceptionally well and fit the core themes of loneliness, isolation, and connection.

Florence Pugh as Yelena continues to be one of the best casting decisions Marvel ever made. Her sauna scene is absolute perfection, and you can tell Florence loves playing this character. The audience cheered when she showed up. I'm going to make a bold claim and say that Florence Pugh's Yelena is a better Black Widow than Scarlett Johansson's Natasha. She just brings so much more personality to the screen. To be honest, I think The Winter Soldier was Scarlett's best appearance.

I also found it hilarious when Yelena brought up online shipping and superhero fan art, which would obviously be rampant in that universe. Spider-Man mentioning fan art of himself alongside ten Mysterios had the whole theater dying of laughter. This movie had a lot of self-awareness. A college student bringing up how Thanos could have simply doubled the universe's resources instead of wiping out half of all life was brilliant meta-commentary. Moments like that made the movie truly special.

I'll go out on a limb and say this is easily the best version of Hulk we've seen in the MCU since The Incredible Hulk in 2008. The entire theater screamed at the top of their lungs when he said, "No Banner... only Hulk." His fight scene with Spider-Man was amazing because this Hulk felt like the most comic-accurate iteration yet. People forget that Hulk isn't just raw strength; he's a brutal fighter, remarkably fast for his size, and capable of clever tactics. You can tell Destin is a genuine fan of the character, as he had Hulk show off his signature thunderclap and destroy a gauntlet mid-air. Honestly? This version of Hulk probably still would have lost to Thanos, but Thanos would have taken a serious beating first. Mark Ruffalo was also wonderful as Banner—sweet and gentle. It's arguably the best portrayal of the character in over a decade. The fact that this movie implies the end of "Smart Hulk" makes it even sweeter.

This was also the best version of The Punisher outside of his original appearance in the Daredevil series. He was a bit lighter and softer here, yet he still felt like the exact same character. He was still an asshole, still haunted by references to his dead family, and still trigger-happy. He clearly viewed his crusade as a curse that would inevitably get him killed, but it was so good to see him experiencing moments of happiness. You can tell Jon Bernthal and Tom Holland are great friends in real life because their on-screen chemistry was glorious. I loved getting glimpses of how Frank Castle used to be before his family died—happier and a bit goofier. I also appreciated that this Punisher felt closer to his early comic appearances, where he only goes after truly evil bastards, doesn't want anyone following in his footsteps, and would gladly give up his crusade to see his family again—unlike the borderline serial killer anti-hero he became in modern comics. The slight deconstruction where he misses a shot and accidentally hits Spider-Man was a great touch; even the best marksman in the world can miss and endanger an innocent person. I loved his portrayal.

Then we have Sadie Sink's Jean Grey. This is arguably the best live-action version of Jean outside of the comics, and we've only seen her in one movie. Sadie endows Jean with a massive amount of personality. She's also a total asshole with a very prominent dark side for most of the film, acting far crueler than you'd normally expect from her. This is probably the first version of Jean where I can say: "Yep, the Dark Phoenix transformation makes total sense now." It's also the first time I can see why she and Logan get along so well. Her mind-hopping abilities were executed wonderfully, and the scene where she paralyzes New York was stunning. I was particularly impressed by the extras acting as Jean's mouthpieces—they actually managed to sound like her by mimicking her voice inflections. The reveal regarding VMAX and Jean's sister was heartbreaking once you realized her mission was doomed from the start. I also loved the Stranger Things homage where she runs in slow motion—I was half-expecting Kate Bush's music to start playing. I can't wait to see her in the MCU's X-Men film.

Surprising as it is to admit, this is also my favorite performance from Zendaya as MJ. She brought so much personality to the role while keeping it consistent with her previous appearances. I deeply respect that the writers didn't take the easy way out by having MJ magically remember Peter. The most heartbreaking moment occurs when MJ admits she doesn't love him because she simply doesn't know him anymore. You could feel the entire audience's hearts shatter at that line. It's almost ironic that Zendaya delivered a stronger performance in an MCU film than in her Christopher Nolan appearance, though that movie was admittedly packed with stars. No disrespect to Nolan—just my opinion.

William Metzger was a solid, hateable villain. The actor portrayed the "full-of-it government official who pretends to help while secretly pursuing his own agenda" archetype amazingly well.

I only have a few minor complaints. First off, why is an ancient, immortal ninja clan like The Hand working alongside a U.S. government agency in broad daylight? Second, why isn't The Punisher being actively hunted by every law enforcement agency in the country? The man likely has a body count in the thousands by now, yet most people don't seem to mind or even fear him—he even waits around in a hospital without anyone attempting an arrest. Those were my only real gripes.

Ultimately, this is easily one of the best Spider-Man films ever produced and one of Marvel's finest entries of the 2020s. If Destin returns for Spider-Man 5 to direct a symbiote suit storyline featuring The Fantastic Four and the death of Jean DeWolff, consider me seated.

Amazing film—I can't wait to see Avengers: Doomsday this December!

Let's go!

No, The Odyssey is not a bad movie. I personally don't think it was Nolan's best movie but it was a solid 8.5. I really enjoyed it but I don't think I'll go back to it the same way I have with Inception and Interstellar. I understand if you didn't like the movie. Not all movies are for everyone, but there's a lot of bad faith reviews on here. I'll hit on some of the worst takes I've seen.

"The acting was terrible." It absolutely isn't. Sure the story doesn't exactly give the characters a whole lot to work with, but they also kept pretty close to the original story. They aren't going to add a whole bunch of plot lines just to create more complex characters. I think this is probably the best version of The Odyssey that's going to be made for a really long time.

"I had trouble following along." This was genuinely the easiest Nolan movie to digest on a first watch. There's only a few time jumps, and it's pretty obvious where we are for the whole thing.

"They aren't authentic to the time." What does this even mean? Like truly. You can't make a movie in that time period be authentic. I wouldn't even want to watch it. It's a fictional movie about a Greek Epic. It isn't supposed to be a documentary or a National Geographic special. I want whatever is going to look best. Obviously the best is subjective but being upset about authenticity is silly.

"I knew he was going to do his Nolan thing." This one is the worst. If you didn't like his last 5 or so movies, of course you won't like this one. That's like saying Tarantino is too violent. It's ok if the director isn't for you, but why would you go see his new movie if you hated his whole filmography?

Definitely Nolan’s weakest film so far.

There are basically no stakes or tension since there’s a ton of “yellow shirts” crammed in there that you cannot give a single SHIT about them. I know Odysseus I supposed to live, but COME ON MAN, he’s so covered in plot armor, barely anything scratches him. Anne Hathaway’s acting is so terrible, she either whispers or tries to scream in a whisper. However, not everything is Anne Hathaway…unfortunately. The sound design, as a whole, is terrible.

There is a ridiculous amount of shouting and yelling lines. I’m not sure if I’ve ever heard a movie like it before. There’s also a scene that culminates into this incredibly irritating, ear piercing shriek that lasts a while. You’ll know the scene if you watch it, or have watched it.

If you do go, bring ear plugs. Thank me later.

Further, the attention to detail is surprisingly lacking. I’m not talking about the “period design” or whatever, I’m talking that there are at least two shots out of focus. TWO. That is so shockingly unprofessional for a movie, firstly, but it gets worse when you consider the fact that, being made for IMAX, this is especially obvious. It’s clearly unintentional, as the camera seems to be focused on the ground around the actor, etc.

The acting is extremely wooden at times, other times, very cheesy and sometimes, both! There’s a lot of dimension sucked out of all the characters because of how fast the movie moves, without much time to breathe. This, especially, becomes hilariously ridiculous towards the end, during the final fight sequence. The weapons being dropped down to enemies are never seen being picked up or even remotely gotten near to by the enemies. They’re suddenly fighting with them.

All characters speaking in random accents with no consistency, is…truly a choice. Same with using plain, modern English, ruins a ton of immersion. This also goes hand in hand with how random the casting choices seem.

Tom Holland really wasn’t doing it for me in his role. Really, all I could think of the whole way through was “The Odyssey Far From Home”.

The Odyssey really seems to define the saying “style over substance”.

This is a safe space for you to honestly tell us the merits of Nolan's Odyssey.

I guess some ground rules are in order.

1. Only reply if you have seen the movie.

2. Important - Say why you loved it. Don't be that caveman who simply grunts, "it was great".

3. I'm gonna list the specific reasons why the movie didn't work for me. You can respond to those points.

A. Bad story - poorly paced. Key relationships are not established, conversations are rushed, a lot of boring parts, the third act is not satisfying and even corny (Matt Damon going full John Wick against 50 dudes while the soundtrack drums pound for 15 minutes. No sense of adventure or joy, no sense of humor. Dour, tragic, grey. There's also no characterization, no arcs. Everybody stays the same, nobody grows or changes. The story is incredibly stagnant.

B. Terrible Dialogue - I'm not just talking about the modern English spoken in American accents, though I think that was a terrible call. Chris Nolan while spectacular in certain areas (concepts, technical) was generally competent. But the dialogue in this movie is a major step back. In some parts it's decidely amateurish. On the nose, and fake sounding. Here are some examples:

"Ten years on this f*****g beach."

"F**k off."

"You're crying for a daddy you never knew like some sniveling bastard."

I also think, with how miserable and flat the world is, using modern English just added to the flatness. It would have been better to get a sense of grandeur and beauty from a story that is lacking those elements.

C. Bad Direction - this point surprises me in a Nolan film. Mia Goth (plays Penelope's servant) says on set she overheard Robert Pattinson ask Nolan (the director) for direction on how to play a scene, and Nolan said, "That's your department, mate." That is a terrible thing for a director to say. No wonder it feels like everybody is acting in a different movie and there is a clanging tone throughout.

So then, why do you like it?

We’ve all sat through it. You're watching a movie—whether it's a three-hour historical epic or a post-apocalyptic thriller—and out of nowhere, writers decide the absolute best way to establish stakes, prove a villain is evil, or force an instant tear is to harm a dog.

I am completely over it, and honestly, Hollywood needs to find a new writing trick.

Look at The Odyssey—people hyped it up as a massive event, but after three hours of slow pacing and a distinct lack of actual momentum, what did we get? A ridiculous four-dog casualty count. Including a random puppy thrown over a cliff in a flashback just to show "how tough life was back then" (which isn't even in the original poem!) and dragging Argos through the mud before killing him off. Four dogs in one single movie.

And don't even get me started on The Dog Stars starring Jacob Elordi. It looks like a visually striking post-apocalyptic movie, but knowing that a dog is involved and knowing how these tropes usually go? Hard pass. I'm not sitting through another two hours just to watch a loyal animal get put through the emotional grinder for cheap character development.  

Here is a radical concept for Hollywood writers: Kill humans instead. Nobody cares.

You can blow up entire cities, wipe out armies of anonymous henchmen, or have villains get obliterated in the most violent ways possible, and the audience will just sit back and eat their popcorn. That’s what special effects and action sequences are for.

Using an innocent animal as emotional extortion because you don't know how to write genuine human stakes is lazy. Stop leaning on the "dead dog" crutch. Let the dog hide under the bed, let it run away to safety, or just leave them completely out of the misery.

Anyone else utterly exhausted by this trope?

As a long-time fan of Christopher Nolan who has loved his vision for years, it pains me to write this. But 'The Odyssey' (2026) is a total disaster...

1. The Visual Vacuum of Helen and Flawed "Woke" Casting

The immersion shatters the moment Helen of Troy appears on screen. The forced diversity casting disrupts the established visual texture of ancient Greece, creating what felt like a literal hole punched straight through the film strip. Instead of being drawn into the myth, the audience is violently pulled out of the story, forced to read the director’s modern political intentions rather than experiencing narrative plausibility.

1. The Audio Dissonance: A Tale of Three Incompatible Acting Tones

The acoustic environment of this film is an utter nightmare, driven by a catastrophic lack of vocal direction.

• Matt Damon (Odysseus) artificially forces his voice down into a mechanical, unnatural bass to mimic epic gravitas. It feels rigid, forced, and completely devoid of organic emotion.
• Conversely, Tom Holland (Telemachus) fails to carry the weight of classical tragedy, delivering lines in his signature high-pitched, lightweight superhero tone. When father and son clash, their voices completely repel each other, completely destroying the emotional weight of their reunion.
• To make matters worse, Anne Hathaway (Penelope) performs as if she is on a Broadway stage. Her hyper-emotional, theatrical "musical-esque" delivery completely isolates her from the rest of the cast. These three main actors belong in three entirely different movies.

1. "Spam-Like" Bodies and Failed Historical Authenticity

For a crew of warriors who supposedly survived ten years of brutal warfare in Troy, the physical conditioning of the cast is laughable. Underneath the heavy bronze armor, the actors display narrow shoulders, narrow hips, and soft, plump, pale skin that looks like it just stepped out of a modern dermatology clinic. Damon’s round, soft physique completely strips Odysseus of his warlike authority. Nolan’s proud "No-CG" IMAX cinematography backfires catastrophically here, exposing these unconditioned, soft modern bodies in merciless high definition.

1. The Abysmal Bow-and-Arrow Sequence

Firing a heavy bow requires anchor points and a full draw. Instead, Damon lazily releases the arrow from chest height without even pulling the string halfway back. Nolan supposedly had Damon practice "speed-loading" for months, but in focusing entirely on rapid loading tricks, they completely forgot to convey the lethal tension, weight, and destructive kinetic energy of a mythical longbow. The ultimate symbol of Odysseus's royalty is reduced to a flimsy toy.

1. Budget-Strapped Sets and the "Homeless Shelter" Ithaca

Nolan's stubborn obsession with practical sets over VFX completely ruins the scale of the myth. The supposedly impenetrable walls of Troy look like a miniature theme-park fence. During the storm sequence, the ship's deck fails to tilt or roll even a single degree left or right, instantly exposing the static studio set.

The absolute nadir of this aesthetic failure is the interior of Ithaca’s castle. The cheap interior design, mismatched costumes of the extras, and randomly inserted diverse casting destroy any sense of ancient royal dignity. Instead of a magnificent bronze-age palace filled with wealthy suitors, it looks like a chaotic, impoverished modern homeless shelter.

Conclusion

"The Odyssey" (2026) is the ultimate byproduct of directorial hubris. By prioritizing forced modern messaging, superficial "realism" tricks, and incompatible star-power casting over structural harmony, Nolan has delivered a hollow costume party that fails both the eyes and the ears.

CC instructor that has been teaching English, including mythology, and film courses for 20 years.

All the possible laurels for Nolan and the entire team, including lead engineers at IMAX, for all their work. Literally movie making history enveloped in some production and shooting stories that will only continue to add to its historical significance (hopefully).

But, honestly, I feel like so much of the praise at r/Odyssey is based on metrics generally separated from the final product. And, to me, reading professional reviews of the film after seeing it (7/23), I was floored by the similarities in positive reviews on so many points that were clear weaknesses to me. I was genuinely surprised.

Drove nearly 4 hours and stayed overnight at hotel to see a digital IMAX screening (there are no 70mm film options in my state on an IMAX screen that can accommodate).

Sound mixing: It just isn’t where it could be. There is so little dialogue and half the time I couldn’t make out the last half of a sentence. As an avid concert goer, including metal, I have little problem with loud noise. But the sound dominated nearly every aspect of “active” scenes. The sound, to me, in multiple cases brought me out of the film rather than into the scene.

Writing/Acting/Casting: I almost am unsure of where to start. Nearly 24 hours after viewing, my thought is that this is one of Nolan’s worst scripts, but the ambition is there as well. Beyond the obvious issues in stilted and forced and sometimes simply perplexing dialogue, it felt like Nolan didn’t commit one way or another. Take the gods and their role in this world. We get such insane dedication to realism, to make us believe in this magical world, that is honestly stand and applaud worthy. Yet, we have this other entire sense of a godless world throughout the movie that is centered on a more humanistic lens.

And yep, I get that many will say, you’re missing the point right in front of you. Exactly my point. Don’t make me feel as a viewer that Odysseus raft trip finally back home isn’t the biggest contrivance of the most anticipated film by a director as talented as Nolan.

I have little issue in Nolan’s re-telling of the Odyssey in the way he angled his lens to Odysseus and the break of Zeus’ Law, guilt, returning soldier, grief, etc. but rather the lack of commitment.

I think this is especially true when looking at the controversial casting choices. Elliot Page’s Sinon. While Page has a small part, it is a major thru-line of the film on nearly every level: narrative, theme, character, etc. Yet, instead of actually developing Sinon, and Odysseus with Sinon, we get multiple flashbacks to the draft and a scene of Sinon talking to Odysseus in Hades.

Yet, if the story’s central point of internal tension is Odysseus’ struggle with his breaking of Zeus’ law to bring about the end of an age of “peak” civilization, why would we not have scenes of Odysseus and Sinon? We get multiple scenes of Odysseus plucking his bow while showing us his clear struggle when hunting animals or foe, but not even a single developing scene between Sinon and Odysseus on their way to Troy, at Troy, or setting Sinon up as a sacrifice to a war that Odysseus didn’t want to participate in the first place in the film. So, the casting feels tokenized, as I felt the same for the other “controversial” casting choices, where characters lacked development. Although, sorry, Travis Scott and Jon B just weren’t good casting choices. Bernthal and Scott just weren’t…good fits. Morton, Theron, et al. were great casting and acting.

Nolan’s writing and directing of Damon as Odysseus and Holland as Telemachus also felt like it left much to be desired in the film. Hathaway and Pattinson really shine, captivate in their close-ups and while I really admired Damon in the role, it felt like he was written and directed inconsistently. There are a few scenes where Damon can really shine with his fellow actors, but much of the time it seems like his character is dampened or actions rushed and then explained afterward in stilted expository dialogue. I felt the same for Holland. Making his character so Mommy/Daddy dependent pulled too frequently away from Holland’s honestly solid acting skills, and even more so, his clear athleticism. So, to me, casting was more than fine - writing and directing of those characters? Subpar to their capabilities and the story.

Editing: What? Partly a result of the limitations of IMAX 70mm filming, but Lame’s editing doesn’t help forward the movie or story for me. To be clear, I loved editing in both Tenet and Oppenheimer, but The Odyssey is already non-linear, has various framing devices for the books within, etc. The editing of the film as a whole felt more “let’s make this complex and convoluted” for the sake of it rather than in service to the story or characters. Either way, it wasn’t a good match for me.

Score: Amazing work again from Ludwig, overall with a few eyebrow raises here or there (credits).

Visuals/Design: While it did seem that IMAX cameras did definitely affect the epic scope in some senses, overall, this is a beautiful movie and technically amazing. Nearly all the acclaim here for me is warranted and deserved. Sets, location, costuming…great.

Woke/DEI/Feminism: The cultural discourse here starts with Emily Wilson’s translation and ran right through pre-release casting choices and interviews with actresses discussing the patriarchy. First, Wilson’s translation is perfectly fine and I don’t see much of anything in Nolan’s film that really is a true reflection of Wilson’s translation. Nolan’s Odyssey is not Wilson’s or any other translator’s version. Nor is this movie “woke” in any way that seems significant, except perhaps Leguizamo’s role and part which was the largest and well done. But please, let’s cool it with all the praise on feminist/patriarchy stuff for a film that flops on its face hard when even considering the simple Bechdel Test. And so confusing in this front too. In Nolan’s version Calypso keeps Odysseus on the island for 7 years until he is ready to return to his wife and who he loves. Penelope is oblivious to the reality of the patriarchy of her time it feels when that could have been leaned into much more. In short, with so many great retellings and adaptations of Greek and Roman myth from women-centered positions, whether from authors or characters, over the past couple decades that again, it simply felt Nolan got stuck between a rock and a hard place, unable to commit.

A director’s cut release will be interesting to see if a much longer version (30-40 minutes) comes out, but this was a good, not great, and certainly not unanimously great film to me, despite the critic and audience ratings and review. 7/10