Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/27/2026 7:56:11 PM PDT by Rummyfan
Christopher Nolan cited Emily Wilson’s 2017 translation of “The Odyssey” as an influence on his own interpretation of Homer’s epic poem while on the press tour for his latest blockbuster. Wilson is not returning the favor. In a negative review of Nolan’s “The Odyssey” for the London Review of Books (via The Guardian), Wilson criticized Nolan’s adaptation for lacking “psychological, emotional, political and ethical depth.” The author, who is also a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania, added that Nolan’s “The Odyssey” has “nothing convincing to say.”
“I had hoped that Nolan’s affinity with these Homeric themes might push him to new creative heights, and enable him to conjure more believable characters. But ‘The Odyssey’ features his usual combination of grandiosity and superficiality … the film’s vision is too confused, its characters too underdeveloped, to deliver what it half-promises in terms of big ideas – although it is very good at conveying big bangs and big giants,” Wilson’s scathing review reads.
She adds: “Nolan’s ‘Odyssey’ lacks many of the elements that make the poem great. It has nothing convincing to say about time, memory, history, war, or about the relationship between one warrior’s glorious return and the lives of his family, adversaries, comrades, friends and neighbors. It lacks psychological, emotional, political and ethical depth. Its narrative structure is gimmicky. The writing is abysmal. None of the characters has convincing motivation for their actions or words. There are no sex scenes, and all the food looks horrible.”
(Excerpt) Read more at variety.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
LOL. This is perfect. The feminist academic who reinterpreted the Odyssey just s__t all over Nolan's movie. So he takes flak from the Right for trying to adhere to Wilso's translation and now she says its horrible. You just knew this was going to happen. And I have to say that she is right - to me, the casting of Lupita Nyong'o and Elliot Paige were just distractions. Neither were central to anything in the story. But the movie turned the Odyssey into a modern movie in the worst sense of the phrase - not a Woke reinterpretation (although there is some of that) but breaking the tale up into a series of modern set pieces - the scenes with the cyclops and Circe simply become horror movie scenes. Other parts simply become action movie scenes. As Wilson said, no psychological, emotional, political or ethical depth.
The Iliad ends with the burial of Hector. The sack of Troy isn’t depicted in that poem. The story of the Trojan horse is mentioned in The Odyssey, but is told in more detail in later works.
Way bap inda day teacha seb dis wub breb n sirkuses.
Nowadaze it be sess n blow.
Not when you’re laughing all the way to the bank.
They absolutely did. All the great old stories would be tweaked constantly. It’s one of the reasons they’ve stuck around so long. Tweaking them kept them appealing to “modern” audiences. This worship of “the original” as some immutable thing that must never be altered is a pretty modern concept, and goes very much against the Western tradition.
You must have not ever read the Odyssey. The narrator always directed what was to be thought about each event, what was done right and what was done wrong.
“This worship of “the original” as some immutable thing that must never be altered is a pretty modern concept...”
Worship??? against Western tradition???
Your worship thing is stupid. Western tradition has always been to get closer to the original as possible and you don’t trifle with the original and claim the change is the original.
I have read it. And yes THAT version, that we now pretend is the original but really wasn’t, does that. But that doesn’t mean it originally did that, or that the “lessons” hadn’t changed over the centuries.
The Western tradition is to constantly change these stories. That’s a FACT. Sorry you find it inconvenient, but you’re proving my point. No Western tradition has NOT been to get closer to the original, it’s the exact opposite. Western tradition is to say “that’s a neat story, how should I tell it now to a different audience”. You absolutely trifle with the original. They don’t claim their versions are the original, everybody used to understand it wasn’t. Everybody used to understand the true originals had largely been lost to history because they were passed down orally. Anybody who ever played the telephone game (whatever that might have been called in ages past) knows passing things orally always involves change.
Heck even the basic concept of Homer, if there was such a person, if so who was he, when was he, and what did do, was a constantly evolving story that grew and changed alongside the stories he (if there was a he) told. Once you understand the Homeric Question and how far back THAT goes and how it’s evolved over the millennia you’ll begin to understand the whole concept of immutable ancient is laughable.
This hack corrupted Homer’s story in order to push FemNazi bullshitte. Just listen to her speeches. Nolan, another hack, grabbed it ‘cause it gave him an excuse to use DEI in the movie’s production — which is absolutely essential to get an Oscar.
“I have read it. And yes THAT version, that we now pretend is the original but really wasn’t, does that.”
You need to climb down off your high horse.
I am not an expert on Homer’s writings.
But I can read, and I have read what the actual experts say.
Homer was a real person, he set down in writing stories using his poetic techniques and congealed them for the ages.
And, no, there are no constantly evolving meanings. That is laughable.
If you find reality to be a high horse, that’s a you problem.
Apparently you’ve only read what SOME of the experts say. And there’s at least that many that say he probably wasn’t a real person. And another at least that many that say he was a real person but probably not who we think. And absolutely NONE of them say he set the stories down in writing, you made that up. Oh look, you just showed exactly how these stories change constantly.
And yes the meanings constantly evolve. Because people are usually trying to apply them as some sort of insight to the world they’re living in. And that world changes, and the insights people crave change.
“And absolutely NONE of them say he set the stories down in writing...”
Well, yes, some do.
The “Father of History” Herodotus wrote that Homer lived and wrote four hundred years before his (Herodotus’) time.”
Now, am I supposed to believe him or you???
Now, I don’t really care who wrote the works, except just one man wrote what we have today, and those are the ones the Greeks read and applied to their culture.
Nobody that understand that the stories were around longer than the Greek alphabet they’re written in.
Most historians, taking their queue from his contemporaries, consider Herodotus to be... problematic at best. A lot of his stuff is pretty out there. Keep in mind the written form of the Odyssey predate Herodotus by 200 years, so how does he really know?
Actually even the one man part is up for grabs. A lot of the historians don’t think The Iliad and The Odyssey were composed by the same person, and it’s an open question if either of them was Homer. Of course again you have the issue that they existed for centuries BEFORE they were written, so changes in the style could be simply because of who actually them down.
The history of this stuff is actually really really interesting. In a lot of ways more interesting than the stories themselves. You really should open your mind and do some studying. It’s cool stuff.
“You really should open your mind and do some studying. It’s cool stuff.”
Now why would you think I have studied it less than you? I could find a scholar who would refute everything you say and you could me.
Since I have read the works, it is obvious to me that it was the work of one man. Shakespeare borrowed plots and turned them into masterpieces, just like Homer.
Because you’ve told me you’ve studied it less. By saying that you’ve only read from people that said there definitely was a Homer and he definitely wrote the stories, and by saying you believe Herodotus was absolutely right YOU clearly stated you haven’t studied this. Because if you had you wouldn’t be making this bold declarative statements that have literally been in question since Herodotus was alive.
Since I have read the discussions of the highly fascinating history of these stories it is obvious to me that anybody that thinks the origins of the stories is obvious hasn’t studied their fascinating history. And it’s equally clear you won’t.
So we’re done. Have fun.
that would be a good guess.
Cost: $250 million
Box Office (12 days plus Premier) - $666.7 million
Break Even (Estimate) - $500 million
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.