Excelently written, bravo. It once again shows that the real exciting discussions and interesting observations are only found within the dissident right culture beyond mainstream slop. Especially in topics about idendity and oneselfness - thanks to guys like you - we are the gold standard.
The Mediterranean itself is a character, the intense sun, aquamarine sea, and bleached cliffs, beautiful yet hiding danger. How could you tell a colorful Greek myth without getting the setting right?
For Nolan to reduce the Med to a Gotham grey palette is reason enough for me to hate it.
What makes this critique stand out is that you didn't just stop at the surface-level casting complaints; you grounded the critique in what Ithaca actually meant to an ancient Greek. Bringing Fustel de Coulanges' The Ancient City into the mix perfectly illustrates what Hollywood misses: that exile wasn't just 'missing your family,' but a disruption of spiritual and civic order. Excellent use of historical framework to expose the hollow worldview of the film.
For being such an expensive production, I thought it was strange how bare and minimal many scenes looked. It was almost like a theatre production. When compared to something like LOTR, which feels lived in, and has so many details that give credibility to the word it’s set in, it’s like something is always missing in Odyssey. Couldn’t really immerse myself in such an empty world.
And all the forced diversity is just such a huge distraction, is it really that important to get a few more Oscars?
I appreciate your analysis of the original epic, along with the aesthetic shortcomings of the film itself. But I don’t think it’s particularly unusual or unacceptable for contemporary artists to retell and retool previous narratives for their audience’s sensibilities. The medievals did this incessantly. Even classical works like the Aeneid and the Oresteia absolutely mangle the themes and characters of the “original” myths they draw on.
Your objection, at least at the thematic level, really only holds water if your readers agree that it is undesirable to criticize the ethos of the glory / militarism / the heroic age in general. Which I don’t think is right. Homer himself is critiquing the age of heroes and our reception of it, after all. His “argument” is admittedly warranted using pagan reasoning, rather than our post-Christian sensibilities, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad to use post-Christian sensibilities to criticize the heroic age. I honestly prefer our Christian sensibilities, even the more castrated secular version of them, to those of the Achaean pagans (apart from the “wife-guy” nonsense you aptly call out, that stuff is indefensible.)
Theatrical and cinematic adaptations of source materials often explore wildly different morals. It’s fine if Nolan wanted to do the same.
Don’t let this distract from my enjoyment of your essay, though. Good stuff, even if I disagree with its core.
Although I think it would be incredible to see a big budget adaptation that sticks to the source material and honors Greek heritage, I think it’s fine to do different kinds of retellings of classic myths.
It seems to me that he is very aware of the trend of post modern deconstruction and demythologizing of stories that Hollywood has embraced. He enters into that conversation, and pushes back without being reactionary. (He’s goal seems to be the approach Telemachus learns in the movie— not attacking too hastily and losing your opportunity to strike effectively- opening your belly to your enemy- an Odyssean trick.)
I’m surprised you didn’t notice in the scene with Circe that she makes her case justifying turning the men into pigs, and Odysseus challenges her, making her admit it is not justified to punish the men before they have committed any crime. He overpowers her, but then shows mercy to her, too. He rescues the men, gets the information he needs, rebukes the witch yet leaves with her respect and admiration.
Boo-hoo there was no sex and moral ambiguity in that scene, as if we haven’t had enough of that in the visual media over the past decades, breaking down morality and morale. The one thing Hollywood is getting right lately is not pornifying every movie. It’s a bit different in a written format I think- but that’s a different conversation. The moral complexities of old stories can be fruitful and fascinating to explore, but in this case I think Nolan made the right choice for the wide audience he’s aiming for.
With Penelope and her shrill criticism of her son, he brings the same gentle rebuke when Odysseus, when he returns, affirms his son as a stark contrast.
The story is not devoid of magic and the gods, it is left more ambiguous and understated to to reflect how we as modern people see the world, but Circe worked magic and the giant Cyclops was taken for granted; the conversations between Odysseus and his men on the topic of gods was interesting... I could go on.
As for the race swapping- as much as I’m opposed to mass immigration/open borders and the attack on people of European heritage, the United States is already a multi-racial country, and there is the problem of how to best deal with the situation we are already in. Nolan chooses to invite everyone to the classic story, to see themselves in it and hopefully be ennobled by it. He’s not wrong to make the connection that rap is an oral way of passing on history and tradition set to music- if any African American artist are inspired to elevate their craft because they see the potential of oral poetry- then Nolan will have succeeded. But there were no tasteless and inappropriate raps in the film.
Not everyone needs to take this sober, reconciliatory approach, but I think it has its place. I agree it is Christianized, presenting a strong, masculine, heroic figure who grapples with his own shortcomings and role in tragedy and seeks to lead in a way that heals those around him.
I will say I didn’t think the ending 100% landed, myself. (I agree with some of your points there.) And i don’t think this movie has much rewatch value.
I have heard that it’s being received very well by veterans. Dr. Patitsas mentioned in his excellent book The Ethics of Beauty- the Iliad did serve as a form of therapy to help the war vets of its day understand and come to terms with their experiences and reintegrate into society.
Good thing about these globo-slop films is that nobody remembers anything about them, the dialogue is always generic, unmemorable, and humorless, it has no cultural penetration. dialogue designed for translation because the majority of Hollywood's revenue comes from international markets.
Excelently written, bravo. It once again shows that the real exciting discussions and interesting observations are only found within the dissident right culture beyond mainstream slop. Especially in topics about idendity and oneselfness - thanks to guys like you - we are the gold standard.
Thank you, much appreciated
The Mediterranean itself is a character, the intense sun, aquamarine sea, and bleached cliffs, beautiful yet hiding danger. How could you tell a colorful Greek myth without getting the setting right?
For Nolan to reduce the Med to a Gotham grey palette is reason enough for me to hate it.
Matt Damon’s performance in The Martian is probably closer to what he should have been going for as Odysseus.
Excellent post. Now I am sure I am not gonna spend my money on this film
cool pfp
Manul Gang
Nolan seems to have strived to replace the archaic/classical Greek tension between areté and hubris with PTSD and pragmatism
What makes this critique stand out is that you didn't just stop at the surface-level casting complaints; you grounded the critique in what Ithaca actually meant to an ancient Greek. Bringing Fustel de Coulanges' The Ancient City into the mix perfectly illustrates what Hollywood misses: that exile wasn't just 'missing your family,' but a disruption of spiritual and civic order. Excellent use of historical framework to expose the hollow worldview of the film.
The Odyssey is good, actually
I'd hate to see bad then.
For being such an expensive production, I thought it was strange how bare and minimal many scenes looked. It was almost like a theatre production. When compared to something like LOTR, which feels lived in, and has so many details that give credibility to the word it’s set in, it’s like something is always missing in Odyssey. Couldn’t really immerse myself in such an empty world.
And all the forced diversity is just such a huge distraction, is it really that important to get a few more Oscars?
Right. I was wondering what all the budget was spent on considering the scenery was so limited
Thank you
Perfect!
Excellent write up Keith.
This was the most compelling and insightful commentary I’ve read about this film. I hope you do more reviews of the kind in the future.
Very impressively written. Thank you for the intelligent breakdown. It will make watching it more meaningful for me. Cheers!
I appreciate your analysis of the original epic, along with the aesthetic shortcomings of the film itself. But I don’t think it’s particularly unusual or unacceptable for contemporary artists to retell and retool previous narratives for their audience’s sensibilities. The medievals did this incessantly. Even classical works like the Aeneid and the Oresteia absolutely mangle the themes and characters of the “original” myths they draw on.
Your objection, at least at the thematic level, really only holds water if your readers agree that it is undesirable to criticize the ethos of the glory / militarism / the heroic age in general. Which I don’t think is right. Homer himself is critiquing the age of heroes and our reception of it, after all. His “argument” is admittedly warranted using pagan reasoning, rather than our post-Christian sensibilities, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad to use post-Christian sensibilities to criticize the heroic age. I honestly prefer our Christian sensibilities, even the more castrated secular version of them, to those of the Achaean pagans (apart from the “wife-guy” nonsense you aptly call out, that stuff is indefensible.)
Theatrical and cinematic adaptations of source materials often explore wildly different morals. It’s fine if Nolan wanted to do the same.
Don’t let this distract from my enjoyment of your essay, though. Good stuff, even if I disagree with its core.
Although I think it would be incredible to see a big budget adaptation that sticks to the source material and honors Greek heritage, I think it’s fine to do different kinds of retellings of classic myths.
It seems to me that he is very aware of the trend of post modern deconstruction and demythologizing of stories that Hollywood has embraced. He enters into that conversation, and pushes back without being reactionary. (He’s goal seems to be the approach Telemachus learns in the movie— not attacking too hastily and losing your opportunity to strike effectively- opening your belly to your enemy- an Odyssean trick.)
I’m surprised you didn’t notice in the scene with Circe that she makes her case justifying turning the men into pigs, and Odysseus challenges her, making her admit it is not justified to punish the men before they have committed any crime. He overpowers her, but then shows mercy to her, too. He rescues the men, gets the information he needs, rebukes the witch yet leaves with her respect and admiration.
Boo-hoo there was no sex and moral ambiguity in that scene, as if we haven’t had enough of that in the visual media over the past decades, breaking down morality and morale. The one thing Hollywood is getting right lately is not pornifying every movie. It’s a bit different in a written format I think- but that’s a different conversation. The moral complexities of old stories can be fruitful and fascinating to explore, but in this case I think Nolan made the right choice for the wide audience he’s aiming for.
With Penelope and her shrill criticism of her son, he brings the same gentle rebuke when Odysseus, when he returns, affirms his son as a stark contrast.
The story is not devoid of magic and the gods, it is left more ambiguous and understated to to reflect how we as modern people see the world, but Circe worked magic and the giant Cyclops was taken for granted; the conversations between Odysseus and his men on the topic of gods was interesting... I could go on.
As for the race swapping- as much as I’m opposed to mass immigration/open borders and the attack on people of European heritage, the United States is already a multi-racial country, and there is the problem of how to best deal with the situation we are already in. Nolan chooses to invite everyone to the classic story, to see themselves in it and hopefully be ennobled by it. He’s not wrong to make the connection that rap is an oral way of passing on history and tradition set to music- if any African American artist are inspired to elevate their craft because they see the potential of oral poetry- then Nolan will have succeeded. But there were no tasteless and inappropriate raps in the film.
Not everyone needs to take this sober, reconciliatory approach, but I think it has its place. I agree it is Christianized, presenting a strong, masculine, heroic figure who grapples with his own shortcomings and role in tragedy and seeks to lead in a way that heals those around him.
I will say I didn’t think the ending 100% landed, myself. (I agree with some of your points there.) And i don’t think this movie has much rewatch value.
I have heard that it’s being received very well by veterans. Dr. Patitsas mentioned in his excellent book The Ethics of Beauty- the Iliad did serve as a form of therapy to help the war vets of its day understand and come to terms with their experiences and reintegrate into society.
Excellent riposte.
Good thing about these globo-slop films is that nobody remembers anything about them, the dialogue is always generic, unmemorable, and humorless, it has no cultural penetration. dialogue designed for translation because the majority of Hollywood's revenue comes from international markets.
People cheered after the showing I was at. Maybe because it was finally over who knows haha