The Odyssey: Informed Opinions from Our English Department
On December 23, 2024, Academy-Award winning director Christoper Nolan announced that he would be making his own adaption of the Greek epic The Odyssey. While it was met with speculation, this was not an inherently new idea. As early as 1911, an Italian silent film called L’Odissea attempted to retell Odyssey’s journey. With a runtime of fourty-four minutes and a budget of 200,000 USD, it is widely considered the first of its kind.
Conceptual applications of the Odyssey have also been present in the media for years preceding Nolan’s announcement. O Brother, Where Art Thou?, a comedy released in 2000, loosely follows the story of The Odyssey, though in the context of Mississippi during the Great Depression. Broadly speaking, the “hero’s journey” story archetype has existed since the dawn of storytelling, also predating The Odyssey with tales like the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh. Many of Nolan’s stories follow this formula.
Now that Nolan’s Odyssey is released in its final form, critics and fans alike have leapt at the chance to share their opinions about his take on the epic. Social media is inundated with polarizing opinions and scathing critiques, including one by Emily Wilson, the translator of the version of the Odyssey that is used here at CCS. Both preceding and following the film, it was nearly impossible to escape the “hot take” machine of the internet.
In an age where all voices, informed or otherwise, are enabled and amplified, the opinions of those who have spent countless minutes with the Odyssey, and are intimately familiar with its plot and themes, are valuable. Today, you will hear the opinions of two of our English teachers here at CCS, Mr. Campbell and Mr. Slaten, on Nolan’s Odyssey.
First impressions are extremely important when it comes to movie marketing and public opinion. Given Nolan’s already extensive filmography, there were already certain standards and expectations in place when it came to how he was going to adapt the epic. For example, Mr. Slaten is a long-time Nolan fan, harkening all the way back to Memento in 2000. He had a lot of faith in Nolan’s creative vision. However, when the trailers were released, he began developing some misgivings around the initial presentation of the film. “It was like if AI generated a Christopher Nolan take on the Odyssey,” Mr. Slaten recalls. Even so, his trust in Nolan’s abilities did not dwindle. Conversely, Mr. Campbell reports that what he anticipated was merely to see a “good Hollywood movie.” After all, “as an English teacher you want a version that is completely faithful to the text, but,” Mr. Campbell says, “that’s not realistic.” He did not enter with the expectation that Nolan’s Odyssey should, or would, be completely loyal to the text. The movie was allowed to be exactly what it is: a Hollywood, Christopher Nolan take on the Odyssey. While Mr. Campbell notes that it’s not the Odyssey adaptation he would’ve made, it’s still intriguing to see what attracted Nolan to the story itself.
Concerning the technical aspects of the film, there was also commentary to be had. Both teachers seemed to agree that the cinematography as a whole did not disappoint. Mr. Campbell specifically praises the lack of CGI when it came to creating the monsters in Nolan’s Odyssey. However, he did note that the movie itself was quite loud, which is not uncommon for Nolan films, but was relatively unpleasant all the same. He also observed some weaknesses in terms of dialogue, though clarifies that the fault likely lied within the script itself and not the actors. Likewise, Mr. Slaten enjoyed Ludwig Göransson’s soundtrack, and the general odd nature of the arrangements, due to how it suited the experience of being transported into a world and culture you do not quite understand. He opines that the costumes as a whole were not very strong, specifically for the character of Calypso. As a whole, Mr. Slaten says that he is “not in a position to judge” the technical faculties, but that they “generally exceed expectations.”
A large portion of the backlash surrounding Nolan’s Odyssey was the aspects of the story that were added, and the aspects that were left out entirely. For example, the famous “Nobody” scene with Odysseus and Polyphemus did not appear in the movie, nor did the tree that served as Penelope and Odysseus’ metaphorical foundation for their relationship. Mr. Campbell expresses that he went into Nolan’s Odyssey with an open mind. On an interpretive level, it’s “fun to see why” Nolan made the changes that he did, and after spending so much time with the story of the Odyssey, it was refreshing to see changes made. He thought that the changes Nolan made fit within the theme of the story that was trying to be told. Mr. Slaten shared a similar notion, though directly criticized the way this aspect of Nolan’s Odyssey was treated by viewers. According to Mr. Slaten, we should not be “asking accusingly ‘why would they take that out’, but genuinely inquiring why he would.” Many things were changed in order to better exemplify Nolan’s vision. Mr. Slaten says that “they do a good job of making the cyclops feel foreign, and keeping the ‘Nobody’ scene probably wouldn’t work because the language barrier is a part of that.”
“They do a good job of making the cyclops feel foreign, and keeping the ‘Nobody’ scene probably wouldn’t work because the language barrier is a part of that.” - Mr. Slaten
This opened the door for further conversation in regards to how media polarization affects the reception of a movie. Mr. Slaten emphasizes his distaste for how our culture develops immediate opinions on things before fully experiencing them ourselves. Most “hot takes” are formulated on the foundation of small snippets from a movie’s trailer. Plucking these scenes from their context inhibits having a whole, truthful perspective of the matter. “We should be seeking truth,” Mr. Slaten says, “which means seeking context.” Mr. Campbell readily admits that he has a social media feed that is heavily populated by Hollywood interviews, and acknowledges that the architecture of social media itself was made to promote polarization. It’s not necessarily unexpected, as any movie with relevant social commentary is going to create divides. Even so, Mr. Campbell says that he thinks movies that “poke the bear” are good and healthy for society as a whole. It is necessary to have these conversations, despite how our social climate can turn them from good-faith debates into volatile exchanges.
Naturally, the audience for which a movie is produced can drastically change the contents of the runtime. There is little question that Nolan’s Odyssey being created for a largely western audience changed how the adaption was approached. Mr. Campbell argues that “we need American versions of the Odyssey,” but it is inevitable that the original values will be lost along the way. He notes that, as Americans, it’s very difficult for us to get into the mindset of ancient Greeks. One way to combat this is to make it more palatable to the American consumer. But one must then ask: at what cost? Chasing palatability can result in deviation from the flawed nature of the original characters. For example, Nolan’s Odysseus is more of what we would consider to be traditionally virtuous. He seeks atonement from what he’s done, a quality almost entirely absent from the original characterization of Odysseus. Mr. Campbell believes that “it is an Americanized version, but it’s also a Christianized version. That idea of atoning for your sins is a Christian innovation. The Greeks would never have thought about it like that.” Mr. Slaten continues to believe in the merits of allowing an artist to work. According to him, you are destined to bring your own culture into your storytelling, whether you realize it or not. His view on this matter is informed by his experience with others’ work, and having personally seen the terrific positive impact that a reimagining can have on the fabric of a story. There is often tremendous intentionality in the decisions that are made. “There was nothing there that he was putting there just because it was in the book,” Mr. Slaten affirms.
“It is an Americanized version, but it’s also a Christianized version. That idea of atoning for your sins is a Christian innovation. The Greeks would never have thought about it like that.” - Mr. Campbell
The paramount question, of course, is whether or not they believed the movie was worth seeing. Mr. Slaten answered with a resounding yes, with the caveat that you can handle some battle blood. He would even recommend that those that haven’t read the Odyssey go and see it. Mr. Campbell would also encourage others to see it, but that one must go into it with the right expectations. When asked if he believes people should see the Odyssey or O Brother, Where Art Thou? first, the answer was resoundingly the latter.
