Wednesday, July 15, 2026

Review: THE ODYSSEY

 by Rob DiCristino

“Tell me about a complicated man. Muse, tell me how he wandered and was lost.”

It should come as no surprise that Christopher Nolan would choose to follow his Best Picture-winning Oppenheimer — the purest, most ideal synthesis of his lofty thematic sensibilities and blockbuster storytelling instincts — with a retelling of Homer’s epic poem, The Odyssey. It’s almost too perfect, really: The storyteller of storytellers presents the story of stories, the classical text widely considered by scholars to be the foundation of all literature ever recorded by mankind. Who else but Christopher Nolan — the Thinking Man’s Studio Director, now at the height of his power — could do it justice? Nolan is our last remaining above-the-title auteur, after all, the only filmmaker whose mere involvement in a project all but guarantees both critical and commercial success. An opus like The Odyssey deserves such pomp and circumstance. It deserves to be brought to life by a master craftsman like Nolan, who’s intelligent enough to appreciate its momentous influence on the modern world and articulate enough to effectively stage it for a mainstream audience.
For my friends who have forgotten their school days (or who never bothered to read it in the first place): The Odyssey begins in the banquet hall of Ithaca's king, Odysseus (Matt Damon), now gone twenty years since Agamemnon (Benny Safdie) called his commanders to the Trojan War. In Odysseus’ long absence, his wife, Penelope (Anne Hathaway), has been besieged by a host of wealthy suitors, each one scheming to marry the would-be widow and seize the throne before Odysseus’ rightful heir, Telemachus (Tom Holland) comes of age. The most prominent among them is the pompous Antonious (Robert Pattinson), who, though he admired Odysseus in his youth, has come to resent the great king and plots with Penelope’s handmaiden Melantho (Mia Goth) to win the queen’s reluctant hand. Frustrated by his powerlessness to stop these evil machinations — and dreaming to one day reunite with a father he never knew — good-hearted Telemachus sets sail to Sparta, where he hopes to find incontrovertible proof that a forgotten hero will soon make his way home.

Meanwhile, an amnesiac Odysseus lays on a faraway shore, held an unknowing captive by the nymph, Calypso (Charlize Theron). Though their lives are peaceful, Odysseus is plagued by an emptiness that Calypso finally lifts by restoring his memories of the war: These memories include his forces’ sack of Troy, their battle with the fearsome Cyclops, their encounter with the alluring Sirens, their confrontation with the transmogrifying witch, Circe (Samantha Morton), and their descent into Hades, where they communed with dead comrades — including Sinon (Elliot Page)— whom Odysseus, in his lust for glory, failed to honor with proper burial. In Sparta, King Menelaus (Jon Bernthal) and his wife, Helen (Lupita Nyong’o) regale Telemachus with stories of his father’s exploits but offer no news of his fate. When Odysseus and Telemachus finally do return to Ithaca, they’ll rely on the bravery of stalwarts like blind herdsman Eumaeus (John Leguizamo) and the guidance of gods like Athena (Zendaya) to defeat the suitors and return their kingdom to glory.
If this is sounding like yet another sprawling Christopher Nolan film, it should. In fact, it’s remarkable just how comfortably The Odyssey’s non-linear structure suits Nolan’s signature talent for elliptical storytelling and, frankly, how willing the director is to trust his audience to track how each segment influences the others. True to Homer’s original text, much of The Odyssey is told in episodic flashbacks, with many of its dramatic revelations — most of all, Odysseus’ moral awakening after the Sack of Troy — coming in the final movements of each story thread. While The Odyssey lacks the character complexity of Oppenheimer or the sci-fi intricacy of Inception, Nolan’s ability to keep us invested in a variety of sequences often separated by time, place, and, in this particular case, planes of existence, remains his most significant contribution to blockbuster filmmaking. It’s almost funny to consider that a man once accused of pretension for writing labyrinthine screenplays like Memento and The Prestige was — perhaps unintentionally — actually using some of the oldest tricks of all.
Craftswise, The Odyssey is predictably spellbinding, with lush IMAX cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema and a guttural, understated score by Ludwig Göransson. Nolan shoots on location, of course, at the summits of ancient islands, in the depths of gigantic caves, and aboard massive warships replicating the designs once used by Achaean armies. While it’s completely inappropriate for me to dismiss such profound, exhausting work with just two sentences, Nolan and his team have unfortunately cultivated such a reputation for this sort of excellence that it’s become de rigueur; you’d be more surprised to hear that The Odyssey wasn’t an immaculate exercise in filmmaking prowess — an accomplishment that even the 70mm IMAX screen on which the film played in front of me could barely contain — than you would be to hear just how blown away I was by its depth and precision. However, like Oppenheimer before it, The Odyssey is also an epic of faces, with just as much time spent on the internal battles — tonally, think Bergman, not Harryhausen — as on the external ones.

The cast is uniformly excellent, with Nolan once again keeping his audience oriented throughout the story using recognizable faces who embody each theme, idea, and emotion he needs to communicate without relying on leaden exposition: Lupita Nyong’o, for example, as a face worth going to war for (no shit), Robert Pattinson as a slimy opportunist, Jon Bernthal as a cocksure ruffian with soul, and Zendaya as the ephemeral personification of wisdom. Matt Damon gives Odysseus a jolt of mischief (in the first act) and pathos (in the last). Anne Hathaway and her gigantic eyes play the tension boiling below Penelope’s regality. It might be young Tom Holland, though, who impresses the most: Iterating on adolescence in a much different mode than his spastic Peter Parker, Holland leans on Telemachus’ sense of duty; what seems like timidity is actually product of his breeding, a respect for the weight of each individual action he takes (or doesn’t take). It’s nice to see Holland not overcrank it for once. His path away from the MCU is starting to take shape.

For all the film’s virtues, though, some audiences will certainly grate against The Odyssey’s three-hour running time, and I’ll admit that there’s a clunkiness to some of the movements — mostly due to their episodic nature, which precludes sufficient momentum from building to a powerful ending — that may lead to some watch-checking even amongst Nolan’s most faithful. Worse, by singling out non-negotiable chapters from Homer’s text to include — the Trojan Horse, the Sirens’ song, etc. — Nolan also removes a few formative episodes that would have made his hero’s ultimate catharsis feel as stirring as it did in, say, Oppenheimer — which remains his masterpiece — and given us enough time to really chew on his myriad concerns about gods, men, and the future of civilization. Odysseus is clearly a great warrior, but the time and energy it takes for Nolan to depict those great wars leaves less time for his conversion from brash hero to penitent acolyte than Homer was able to give us. That’s a small quibble, though, and one that will almost definitely diminish with multiple viewings.
And honestly, that may just be me wanting more existential direction than a $250 million summer blockbuster featuring a one-eyed, man-eating giant is able to give me. But like Oppenheimer — I promise to only invoke Oppenheimer one more time, okay? — The Odyssey is concerned with the righteous and unrighteous behavior of human beings. It’s concerned with the empathy we extend to our neighbors and the mercy we extract from the gods and goddesses above. Just as Robert Oppenheimer wonders if his invention really had turned him into the destroyer of worlds, Odysseus wonders if humanity will ever be forgiven for the sins that he and his warriors committed against those who had been foolish enough to trust them. He laments that his song will be sung, not written, because he has damned civilization beyond the written word. That may be true — I don’t know about you, but current events don’t exactly instill me with a ton of confidence to the contrary — but as long as masters like Christopher Nolan are playing his tune, I think we stand a fighting chance.

The Odyssey hits U.S. theaters on Friday, July 17th.

16 comments:

  1. Finally, the embargo lifted. I still come up short understanding a few things. 1) what was all the hinting about modernity alluding to? Sounds like a fairly straightforward telling of the epic. and a related 2) is it an allegory? like a commentary on a social issue as told using the framework of Greek myth? In the lead up to the release, it felt to me they were holding something back that would explain choices made or the lack of a mesmerizing trailer scenes. But it sounds like there just wasn't anything to explain. that doesn't seem right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can’t say I’m familiar with whatever marketing you’re referring to, but the press notes said that Nolan relied heavily on Emily Wilson’s 2017 translation of The Odyssey, (which I quoted from in my heading), which is considered the most “modern” and prosaic version of the text.

      It could also be the way Nolan approaches the presence of the gods in a more grounded way. I cut a paragraph from my review about this because it felt too spoilery, but Nolan is definitely Dark Knighting it when it comes to the supernatural elements.

      Delete
    2. Got ya. The cast interviews from various press junkets and the original wave of critic reactions after the UK screenings kept mentioning creative liberties and modern revisions to the source material, as if there were steampunk elements or something (jk). I don't get what the uproar is about them speaking English is, i think that might be coming from grad students that studied the classics. But doesn't sound like what was controversial about Wilson's translation is showing up in anything I'm reading either. I just read Amy Nicholson's review after yours. She mentions some possible themes that Nolan could be making, like Agamemnon fighting the war to disrupt trade routes, but not clear if Nolan is envisioning a retelling of the Phantom Menace. In my head i'm trying to think of what kind of Shakespeare movie is this-- one that performs a work of Shakespeare, or one that tells an original story built on the framework of a Shakespeare play. Is it Henry V, or is more like 10 Things I Hate About You. So much of the non-rage baiting discourse was spent on selling this as an IMAX commercial that I assumed there was going to be a big "a-ha!" moment, but maybe its just what it says it is on the IMAX tin.

      Delete
    3. Well, as a former grad student who studied the classics, I’ll tell you that you’re in for a straightforward retelling of The Odyssey. Nolan adds a few bits of connective tissue to make some of the themes clearer to mainstream audiences, but there isn’t anything dramatically different than what you’d read on the page.

      Delete
    4. and another thing, in terms of the casting. did watching the movie make clear what he was going for with his choices? Amy mentions that giving Helen a twin sister counters the point of Helen being a singular beauty. Was there a reason for that choice. The character that Elliot Page played was imported from Virgil-- did it feel like the story needed that character, or they needed a character for that actor. I'm not a Chalamet fan, but I'm a convert to him being a top star, and so it feels like with what Nolan was going for with assembling big stars-- he whiffed on not being able to get him in the movie. but that assumes his motivations for the cast was star power, unless you came away with a different takeaway.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. Helen and her sister Clytemnestra are both present in Homer’s text. Elliot Page plays a small but important role. His character is one of those bits of “thematic connective tissue” I mentioned earlier.

      Delete
    7. not implying Nolan invented the character, but you aren't doing a full text literal translation to the screen, so what makes the cut has a purpose especially when they are only in the movie briefly. one of the early critic reactions referred to her character as disfigured that doesn't make sense without further contextualization. did you like the movie? (where does it rank in his filmography for you) if its Oscary-worthy, what does it do that makes it worthy of that award. My hesitation to buying tickets is that if I'm going to shell out for 70mm IMAX with all the bells & whistles, i don't want it to be for Yet Another Trauma Movie. But if its fun and a spectacle, i can get behind that.

      Delete
    8. I would recommend you see the movie and make your own judgments. I liked it quite a bit!

      Delete
    9. I'll wait for it to hit home video. Reviews are overwhelmingly positive and I've watched and read dozens of them, and none of them can articulate why. Just using the same four thesaurus words. My personal hangups on this movie are Matt Damon as the lead, I'm checked out as him in historical roles, he sticks out in a bad way. I've seen The Last Duel and Great Wall and its jarring. Leguizamo is the only one that looks like he's in an epic. And Pattinsons character looks interesting. The trailer doesn't have anything that sells what people are describing. The fake CGI whirlpool, the weird terminator robots, Agamemnons weird helmet, it all looks underwhelming. And I get people are saying otherwise, but they can't articulate it. A reviewer "The Oscar Expert" said them hoisting a sail looked epic. If the viking row boat is the best set piece, then the trailers are honest. But hopefully now that its out, they'll cut a better trailer to highlight the movie's strengths.

      Delete
    10. OK, my cognitive dissonance over the reviews for this movie and the trailer drove me to see this movie just so I could have peace of mind. This is not a spoiler review nor a negative review. i now have beef with all 9000 film critic reviews that had nothing to say about this movie other than it was epic, it was perfect, it was the biggest cinematic achievement of all time and it was on imax. I was right that nobody can articulate why they liked the movie. I now know that they also had nothing to say about the actual movie they saw. This film as a final product is nothing if not a series of choices, many of them baffling. To make no reference to even one of them is critical malpractice. The high level story of the suitors is great. The rest of the movie feels like a 2 hour montage with breakneck haphazard editing. The narrative weaving in and out of that main suitor timeline to pad out the runtime and delay the return until you have filled in that back story is very Nolanesque and works great. I don't really know the source material to know what changed, but its known that the Sinon thread is one of the creative liberties. I liked it. It's a conceit lifted from 300 and it works and it requires a runt character and Elliot fills it and the payoff is big and satisfying. I wish he would have made more of them because it was a net positive to the story. The movie runs long enough and ends satisfyingly enough that you start to forget the earlier confounding choices like a distant memory that maybe didn't happen. Will you want to rewatch it? That's an interesting question. Probably. Some day.

      Delete
    11. So now the choices. The score. There is one scene where the score is genuinely beautiful late in the movie in the last recall of the battle in Troy. There's great soundwork around the Sirens but that's less score and more design as it is used as a special effect to a plot point. It's not outright trash, it comes down to certain instruments that are good and others that should have been changed within a scene. Some scenes call for tension and dread and it works fine. but the standard horror movie ominous stings work well also. Action scenes have a drum beat to act as a pulse and in the climax of the movie I wanted to borrow the wax in the ears trick from earlier in the movie to stop having to hear it. It's a net negatve on the movie, though at times you'd be forgiven for thinking there might have been a synth borrowed from Tangerine Dream that sounds great but is used quite sparingly. The flutes were often good in moderation, needs more harp. The costumes really don't look great. The armor invokes chuckles, and could have easily been fixed (and not by making it more period accurate). The vignette flashbacks waste no time and feel like it could have breathed more but they must have needed to be economical with time. There's a scene where the Punisher actor must have been asked to deliver his lines as fast as possible. Matt Damon was much better than I expected, and so thankful for that because his crew was not sympathetic and whiny. Tom Holland was blah until he was paired with Damon and he got a lift. The bard thing...i don't get why they bothered. Its not a Travis Scott problem, its that he isn't the narrator, he doesn't sing, or rap, or even do beat poetry. he just bangs a stick and shouts single words. He came off as a village crazy person that the scummy suitors kept around for laughs. The story was easily understood, but not because they spoke plain english. The language thing didn't work for me. It wasn't consistent across characters in that some people acted and others just talked. The crew of soldiers sound and look like blue collar guys from New Jersey. That didn't elevate the movie. The entire scene at the island with the giants in silver armor should have been cut or reworked from scratch. It could be made good, but the vision committed to film was a baffling choice. The Calypso character and story line didn't work well. She's great as Calypso, the plot is necessary, but it also was too on the nose as a therapist/opiate addiction analog and those aspects didn't elevate the story.

      Delete
    12. Touching on themes, the Amy Nicholson review I read listed a dozen themes she said were worked into the movie, but I think she was searching for them. There's some, but many of them don't really matter or pay off in the end. One or two themes do, but the movie doesn't feel like its telling a modern allegory. It comes close to one toward the end but you have to tell that story yourself if moves on before trying to make a modern day connection. The way that everyone invokes Zeus's Law by name was weird. But its central to the plot, but it doesn't feel at all like that's the message Nolan is trying to impart, rather than its the movie's macguffin. It's fine though, but Circe doesn't seem bound by it which I'm sure has a reason in the source material. And on that note, I didn't understand all the guilt tripping they put on Matt Damon. Maybe Odysseus had some baggage but Matt Damon's character is never portrayed as less than noble. You're a soldier you signed up to die in war. That's not Matt Damon's fault, he can't save everyone. The praise about the horror elements seem oversold, they were fine. Kind of corny in parts. It wasn't clear what Zendaya's purpose was other than the personification of the gods but it does make sense at the end, just early on you assume she's his conscience in the white angel on the shoulder sense. Many odd choices feel like things that could have easily been improved, and without more discussion from Nolan about what he was trying for they feel more like they didn't care to invest the time to refine it. I wouldn't be surprised if you told me there was 9 hours of footage and they had to chop it up into a 3 hour cut. Maybe he was going for a drop into the middle of a serial gimmick like the Star Wars episode crawl. So in conclusion, it's good. It is a literal journey, but not the way the reviews suggest. This movie begs for making-of analysis and interpretive essays. Its a cinematic Ship of Theseus, where you wonder what parts could have been cut or changed in it and it would have still been Nolan's Oddysey.

      Delete
    13. oh, and unless i missed it the shot of the whirlpool that is in the trailer is not in the movie, which is a positive. the scenes are lower to the surface and don't show it from the blimp cam view of the trailer which made it look silly. the film version i remember was much better. but again, why is the trailer not better than it is.

      Delete
  2. Took the day off to go watch it with a couple of friends, tomorrow afternoon. I'm a Nolan apologist, so i'm obviously psyched about it

    ReplyDelete
  3. There's a ton of adaption of this story, but I have to recommend the comic book adaptation Age of Bronze. Unfortunately it was never completed, but I still have hope the creator will continue it at some point

    ReplyDelete