As I seem to be averaging about one post a year on the blog, I figured I might as well make the first (and possibly only) entry of 2026 be a review of Christopher Nolan's version of the Odyssey. Whatever people have been saying about the movie (from those online who decided it was 'woke' before seeing it to those who just wanted to see a cyclops eat some bearded dudes in armor), the film has definitely made a "splash". As someone who read both the Iliad and the Odyssey this year(the English translations of Emily Wilson and Robert Fagles respectively), I wanted to type some thoughts out comparing Nolan's new film to the source material along with some of the historical connections to the Bronze Age that Nolan mentions in his adaptation.
Before going into specific examples, I do want to say that I did enjoy the movie immensely. It's a great film and while it's certainly not 100% accurate to its material (at least one part of the material Nolan drew on which I'll get to later), I'm not a "purist" when it comes to screen adaptations of written texts. I'm also not aiming to spend a lot of time on the so called "casting controversies" as I'm pretty sure everyone has made up their mind whether the idea of having a black or trans actor in a role for this movie is a deal breaker for them or not. Based on the box office though it seems like most folks felt the same way I did on that particular issue. I'll also give a general spoiler warning for the movie in case you haven't seen it.
So, as I play the composition "Forgotten Gods" from the Youtube channel Athena IV (bonus points if you can guess the connection there), hopefully the muse that Homer calls upon in his own works comes to me and my thoughts flow seamlessly from mind to finger to keyboard to screen.
The Greatest Similarities (Non-Linear Timeline and Zeus' Law)
Like a number of people, I first thought Nolan was a "unique" choice for directing a film adaptation of the Odyssey. On the surface, the material seems very different from most of the other films he's done. Yet as soon as the movie started, I immediately understood why he was actually an ideal person to take a crack at retelling it. If you studied the story of the Odyssey in junior high or high school (as I did) then it's likely the versions, you read were arranged in a standard A to B to C to D structure.A (Trojan Horse)
B (Odysseus gets lost/blocked from coming home)
C (Odysseus comes home)
D (Odysseus kills the suitors and is fully and openly reunited with his wife and son)
However, the original poem has a very different structure from this (one which Nolan's adaptation does a pretty good job of capturing and following albeit it with some changes). Like Nolan's film the story starts off with Telemachus and Penelope coping with the suitors in Ithaca. Odysseus himself does not become a POV character until a Book V of the story. Odysseus' then tells the story of his journey (though who he tells it to is different from the poem to the movie) before he journeys back to Ithaca. This non-linear structure for the poem is the aspect that I feel Nolan adopts the best to his version. He thrives at this kind of storytelling which you only have to look at his previous catalogue of films like Interstellar or Dunkirk to see.
Alongside the timeline, the other aspect of the original poem that comes through the clearest is the emphasis on hospitality and Zeus' Law. The theme of hospitality and how one behaves as both a guest and a host are ideas woven in throughout the entire poem. Whether it's the suitors in Ithaca eating at Odysseus' family out of house and home for years or Odysseus' men entering the Cyclops's' cave, Circe's home, or eating the Sun God's cattle, the story is filled with examples of how bad guests/hosts behave and the consequences that follow from this behavior. While other film versions I've read about or seen have this element present, Nolan puts this aspect of the poem front and center, even directly mentioning the idea behind Zeus' law that treating strangers (particularly the downtrodden or the needy) well is important because they may be gods in disguise. This leads me to the two biggest differences (at least in terms of structure) that I noticed in the film.
The Greatest Differences (Ambiguous Gods, the War, and a Hollywood Ending)
Like any screen adaptation of a written work (especially one as old and as foundational as the Odyssey) differences are going to appear. Some things are dropped, some embellished, some added; even highly praised adaptations like Jackson's LOTR (or the first four to five seasons of GOT) do this. Among the variations in Nolan's Odyssey adaptation the three that stand out the most to me are as follows: the role/nature of the Greek gods in the story, the Trojan War itself, and the story's ending.
In the texts that this movie draws on (the Odyssey, the Iliad, and the Aeneid) the Greek gods are not only very much real they're also active characters in the plot. They directly guide, aid, or hinder Odysseus and other characters in their respective journeys. Telemachus, Odysseus's son and heir, is routinely aided by the Goddess Athena who frequently disguises herself as his companion mentor. In the poem, the ambush laid by the suitors is thwarted by the goddess who warns Telemachus directly about plot. He then simply sails by a different route avoiding the ambush altogether (unlike in the movie). Likewise, Odysseus is directly aided by Athena and other gods along his own journey who appear to him (often in mortal disguise though not always). Poseidon also directly blocks him many times, particularly after his son the Cyclops Polyphemus is injured by him and his men.
Nolan's movie, meanwhile, makes the Greek gods far more distant and ethereal. Many viewers have interpreted Athena's appearances to Odysseus in the movie as being just a pure manifestation of his own psyche. To them, this implies that the gods are simply not real within the context of the film. While I understand this interpretation, I feel as if the other supernatural elements present (the Cyclops, giants, sirens, Circe's magic, the Underworld etc.) don't lend themselves to this. I think it's more likely that the gods are distant but still present though whether the Athena that appears to Odysseus is truly the goddess in disguise or his trauma from the sack of Troy manifested is definitely still up for debate.
In terms of trauma, Nolan's movie also recontextualizes the Trojan War as a whole. Rather than being, a war driven by the personal whims and grievances of the Gods (who in the Iliad are actively instigating, controlling, aiding and in some cases fighting on behalf of either the Trojans or the Greeks), the war in Nolan's adaptation is viewed as having been a conflict around trade routes and regional power politics. Agamenon in particular is singled out for his ruthless ambition and for using Helen's abduction (or escape) as a pretext for taking out a rival power. This is a far more modern view of the Trojan War which is more grounded and is also present in the 2004 "Troy" movie as well. Nolan goes a step further though revealing at the end of the movie that the deception of the Trojan Horse was itself the first violation of the law of Zeus in this universe and that it was this act that caused the gods to curse Odysseus and his shipmates and to begin the process of unraveling the order of the world in which they knew. The war itself is what sets off Odysseus misfortunes on his journey back not as in the poem (where Odysseus slighting the God Poseidon and his defiance of his preordained destiny). In this version, it's human failing and ambition that bring about the trials and suffering of the main character and his companions not the destiny set out by the gods.
The final ending of Nolan's movie, following this revelation about the war and the defeat of the suitors, is also radically different from the poem. In Homer's version, Odysseus moves further inland, initially to confront the families of the suitors who are searching for revenge. Athena though once again intervenes and makes peace between Odysseus and the suitors' families. It's then that he travels to visit his father Laertes in the countryside where he reunites with him. While pretty much every film version of the Odyssey skips this epilogue ending (as storytelling wise it makes more sense to end pretty soon after Odysseus takes revenge on the suitors), Nolan's adaptation does something different by showing Odysseus and Penelope leaving Ithaca in the hands of their son while they travel West. It's a more happily ever after style ending in the Hollywood vein which also alludes to Greek colonization of the Western mediterranean in places like modern day Naples or Sicily.
Allusions to History (Bronze Age Collapse and the People of the Sea)
There are frequent mentions in the movie of the "People of the Sea" which is a reference to the actual "Sea Peoples" who appeared at the end of the Bronze Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. Though their origins are not 100% clear, the Sea Peoples were believed to have several different groups of displaced peoples from across the region who began resettling and invading established Bronze Age empires and kingdoms around 1200 BCE. They were the cause of a great deal of collapse and destruction in the region and contributed to the destruction of most Bronze Age cultures in that part of the world save for Egypt.
The collapse of the Bronze Age is directly referenced by Odysseus as well towards the film's end though in the context of Nolan's film, it is Odysseus and his men who are both the Sea People and the ones who initiated the collapse of their world through the deception at Troy.
Other Things I'd Like to Talk About
For no particular reason and in no particular order, these are some other items I'd like to talk about related to the movie. Most of these are other differences between the source material and the film that stood out.
Sinon, played by Elliot Paige, is an interesting character to include in the movie as he only appears in the Aneid and not the Odyssey. Nolan appears to have relied on other sources besides the Odyssey to fill certain gaps in his film. Along with being the one to deceive the Trojans on the horse's real purpose (his role in the Aneid) Sinon in Nolan's movie also takes the place of Achilles in the underworld sequence (which is probably why so many netizens believed he was playing Achilles when the trailers dropped). My interpretation of this choice is that Sinon is meant to represent the "everymen" of Ancient Greece who were led to their deaths by leaders like Agammenon and Odysseus. This is an interesting contrast to the original poem as the superman "hero" of the Greek side, Achilles, is replaced by a minor "grunt" character who was simply trying to do right by their family, but who met a terrible fate due to the machinations of those in authority.
Another interesting scene was where Telemachus makes it to Sparta and visits Menelaus and Helen at their court. While this does also happen in the original poem, Helen is very vocal in Homer's text about how happy she is to be reunited with her husband and to have been returned to Greece after her exile in Troy. Within the context of Homer's writing this appears to be her genuine feeling as Helen's decision to leave Sparta for Troy with Paris was once again directed by the gods. However, in Nolan's movie, Helen's demeanor and the visible scarring on her body, indicate that she is not happy with her return and is now a prisoner of her husband. There's also an implication that she was injured (either by her husband upon her recapture or during the sack of Troy) and that she bears a heavy burden of guilt for being the symbol of the war itself.
Polyphemus, the Cyclops, is far more of a monster in the traditional sense compared to the myth as well. In the poem, Polyphemus has full conversations with Odysseus and his men (all while devouring them one by one).
Calypso's island in Nolan's film is portrayed more like a sandy form of purgatory as opposed to her home in the poem which is described as a kind of island utopia where she lives in a palace with servants tending to their every need. The lotus flowers he eats are a nod to another (often removed) sequence in the story where Odysseus and his men find an island of people who are constantly in a stupor due to consuming lotus flowers.
As a final note, despite the outcry over the casting of Nyong'o as Helen and Clytemnestra as not being historically or textually accurate, I'd like to point out that there is a (largely lost though still referenced) Greek poem called the Aethiopis which tells a portion of the Trojan War in which an Ethiopian king named Memnon and an Amazon warrior woman named Penthesilea lead armies to defend Troy and each duel Achilles before being defeated. I have a feeling though the "accuracy" cohort online would not be very pleased if these two characters actually made it into a modern film version of the Trojan War.
No comments:
Post a Comment