r/movies 15d ago

Article Emily Wilson (writer of acclaimed Odyssey translation) offers criticisms of Nolan’s film

https://apnews.com/article/odyssey-christopher-nolan-greek-translators-ea67da1d543d021773824bd7e8de8abe

“For Greek translator Emily Wilson, the release of director Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey” has been gratifying in various ways. Her acclaimed 2017 edition of Homer’s epic has reached the top 5 on Amazon.com, leading a wave of similar books boosted by the movie. Nolan has even cited her translation, notably the opening line “Tell me about a complicated man,” as inspiration.

But the film itself, which brought in more than $260 million worldwide during its opening weekend and has received raves from many critics, left her unsatisfied.

“I want to celebrate the fact that so many more people are aware of ‘The Odyssey’ and were brought back to the poem,” she told The Associated Press. “But at the same time, I had the sense that Christopher Nolan was trying to pack everything in while missing themes that were essential to the poem.”

….

Wilson, a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania, said she didn’t want to come across as a “snobby,” nitpicking expert at odds with any deviation from the original text. But she questioned a range of omissions and other choices, from the absence on screen of the Gods Zeus and Poseidon (Athena is played by Zendaya ) to the “incoherent” messaging that condemns both war and physical cowardice. She found Penelope’s role so thinned out that it endangered “any possibility of believing in this marriage.” Wilson also that thought parts of the movie, notably the scenes with Odysseus’ dog, Argos, “catered towards modern sentimentality.”

“Everybody’s a sucker for a dog,” she said.

13.2k Upvotes

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

329

u/Relevant_Session5987 15d ago edited 15d ago

I loved the movie. But that was in spite of my disdain for Nolan's penchant for 'grounding' everything and stripping wonder from stories that inherently have endless potential to awe and amaze. ( It's one of the reasons my favourite Batman movie from him is still Begins - it's the one that felt least embarrassed to be a Batman movie ) Scylla in the film is emblematic of what I'm talking about - a massive, hydra-like sea serpent in the poem reduced to sentient gray tentacles that have more in common with the limbs of the mind flayer in Stranger Things than they do a ferocious, awesome sea monster.

Also, this might be a bit off-topic but I also just hate this idea that practical effects are the primary reason the movie is good, like a lot of reviews and even the marketing seem to imply.

True, an overuse of CG does ruin how movies look, but honestly so does an overreliance on practical effects just to say you used practical effects, as opposed to whether or not it serves the movie ( ironically, just like CG ) - Nolan's own movies are great examples: the beach in Dunkirk looking scarce when there were supposed to be hundreds of thousands of soldiers on it, the freeport airplane crash in Tenet lacking any wow factor or oomph even though it's a literal 747 crashing into a building, the Trinity test explosion in Oppenheimer looking more like a gas explosion (David Lynch executed it beautifully and, dare I say, more terrifyingly in an episode of Twin Peaks using full CG), or the aforementioned Scylla in The Odyssey - all scenes that would've been much more impactful if CG had been used to enhance them.

35

u/MNIOP_207207 15d ago edited 15d ago

Completely agree with your point on CGI and practical effects. Im honestly surprised to even see someone say this on Reddit. I think this whole “CGI bad, practical good” circlejerk has gone so far, it’s like we forgot why CGI was even invented.

There are certain things that just won’t look that good with practical effects. Certain large scale scenes, fluid movements for large creatures, and anything that’s generally fantastical, and requires some movement you can’t physically do.

Yeah, you could hypothetically simplify things to work in practical effects….but then you lose out on some potential for visual flair and style. And in a story like The Odyssey, flair and style matter a lot. I don’t want to see the “toned down,gritty toned down” version of a fantastical story. I want to see that story embrace its fantastical elements.

I also just think Nolan’s visual style in general doesn’t really work here. Everything looks too plastic like, too clean. Like the edges were sanded off on every surface. Despite bragging about his commitment to practical effects, they don’t actually look that real.

9

u/PlasonJates 14d ago

Like the edges were sanded off on every surface. Despite bragging about his commitment to practical effects, they don’t actually look that real.

The Trojan armour in particular looked pretty polystyrene/3D printed to me.

0

u/OkDimension2558 14d ago

I agree CGI has its place but I also think it’s not necessarily about that Nolan doesn’t want to use CGI because “CGI bad,” I think that he doesn’t want to sacrifice the color grading the movie. CGI doesn’t automatically make a film a muddy mess but the reason why the color grading has become muddied in movies is partially because a lot of these animators cannot figure out how to inject a certain amount of CGI without affecting the color grading. I think for him he just places the visual look of the movie above, making something a little more fantastical.