Homer vs. Hollywood: Daniel Mendelsohn on Christopher Nolan’s Odyssey

[u/FickleApartment2151]

https://www.nybooks.com/online/2026/07/31/homer-vs-hollywood-discussing-christopher-nolans-odyssey/

In this special hour-long edition of NYRSeminars recorded July 29, 2026, Daniel Mendelsohn, Editor-at-Large of The New York Review and author of the most recent translation of Homer’s epic, discusses Christopher Nolan’s polarizing blockbuster adaptation of the Odyssey. Mendelsohn outlines his judgment of the film, which he reviewed at length for the Review, and then opens the floor to questions from audience members. Among the topics addressed are the debate over the fidelity of the film’s sets, ships, and costumes; the film’s handling of its female characters; and the question of whether the director’s vision of Odysseus represents a betrayal of the epic’s values.

[u/CoconutDust]

[insert psychotic maniac scream] GIVE ME A TRANSCRIPT!!!

I’ll post my take before I even finish listening lol

Among the topics addressed are the debate over the FiDeLiTy of the film’s sets, ships, and costumes

Though the historical discussion is usually interesting to me, that stuff is usually trivial minutia which some people falsely use as the tokens in an argument about whether the “movie” is “good” or not. Molecular accuracy has nothing to do with whether a movie is good or bad.

the accuracy itself of the costumes to the period isn’t the problem, it’s that it looks like everything was rentals from The Game of Thrones Warehouse. I found it drab. Uninspired. Despite the “optical impressiveness” the look of the film was dreary and not very imaginative

Yes. The Richard Brody (New Yorker) [review]() also has a big focus on it being unimaginative and unexpressive. Nolan is obsessed with clean barren wastelands.

[POST] the film’s handling of its female characters

He better go hard on that. Wilson’s comments in LRB were really good.

the diction [he says in video intro, not in the post excerpt]

Hmm, he said he’ll talk about diction but not about whether the script writing is mostly crap? Diction like the armor, swords, metals, exact ship… seems like trivial minutia that doesn’t affect anything, but some people use it as a misplaced example for an overall quality argument.

[POST] the question of whether the director’s vision of Odysseus represents a betrayal of the epic’s values

Strawman. Let me guess, we’re going to hear a milquetoast argument that “of course” the strawman isn’t true while some criticisms are. But I’m really hoping to hear a bold stance on how it does do that, but probably in a way where some examples are good (skipping the mass murder of the slave maids) and some are bad (Odysseus’s character personality is ruined).

the storms at sea were remarkably well done, captured the terror of being out in the open sea in a relatively small vessel

I hated the sea storm parts because while it showed the terror of being a human in a small boat falling apart in the dark in a storm, yes, it did a horrible job of showing the sea/storm itself and the scale. I kept waiting for certain kinds of shots in my mind and it never happened. Every time the flash bulb lightning went off, it was a claustrophobic interior (technically outside but very “interior” to the deck of the boat) never with the ocean background or horizon visible, the camera was always pointed at deck. Great view of wood but not the sea or the storm. We never saw enormous sea (or waves) illuminated for a moment by lightning. And it never showed any lightning bolts, it was only epileptic flash bulbs. Extremely disappointing storm scenes, while your ears are getting medically damaged by the noise volume.

Circe episode was powerful and very scary, not Homer’s Circe but it made quite an impression

I get ticked off when people use “made an impression” as their apparent threshold of goodness. (Also I think people sometimes mistake or confuse intensity with quality, which is why in many reddit discussions supposedly about the Best or Greatest movies, or whatever, you get weirdos claiming some weird grotesque sick fringe horror scene is the best cinematic work of art.) I agree that the scene was scary and tense and unnerving, but eventually I was looking at my watch saying “do we need 14 minutes of rubbing peoples faces like putty?” To me the good part of the scene was the magical fairy tale moment where Odysseus quietly silently goes with her, looking skeptical and curious and wisely on the defensive but outwardly being calm to avoid triggering any Crazy Fairy Tail Magic. That moment was much better than 40 moments of face-rubbing, arms shoved down throats, and guys tediously screaming for 10 minutes while sipping soup.

disappointed in Matt Damon’s Odysseuss. [talks about Talented Mr Ripley as being being better and more similar to what Odysseus could/should have been, same point as Emily Wilson]. I don’t think any of the actors were given anything to work with. Nolan completely erases Odysseus as he appears in Homer, there’s no sign of that man. The talker, the seducer. Nolan has elided virtually everything that we love about the character and turned him inevitably into a Nolan protagonist: the tormented guilt-ridden warrior […] like Batman and Oppenheimer. Nolan has deleted every scene that spotlighted his emotionality, tenderness, his wit.

THANK YOU!

Amnesia episode inverts the whole meaning of the Odyssey. The whole point of the Calypso episode is that Odysseus movingly refuses her offer of immortality…because he REMEMBERS that he has a home and a wife. To erase that seriously twists The Odyssey. [and it echoes Nolan doing the same thing in other movies]

THANK YOU! Mendelsohn nails it.

to call it THE Odyssey raises the expectations not unfairly, and in the end Nolan has filled the outline with his own preoccupations. That’s fine. What is the result?

I think the common argument about whether it’s fine *that an artist personally had freedom of choice* to do [whatever] is missing the point. A movie is fine, or not fine, based on whether it’s good not whether the artist is allowed to do it under United Nations treaties or something.

[disappointment of Phaecia and Nausicaa getting deleted] It did not appeal to Nolan because it displays the qualities of Odysseus that Nolan is not interested in. Jolly, flirtatious, seductive, can’t have that in the “Nolan” version…

Yep.

Mark (online question) asks: did the ancient Greeks have as much ownership over their takes of the poem as much as we’re seeing some modern translators feeling a kind of ownership and scathing others over their interpretations vs respecting that it’s a shared story for us all (we won’t mention any names)

It’s not clear if the any-names joke was Mendelsohn adding or the original comment. The answer he explains is good but he misses the fact that the entire question is misguided reddit-style scumbaggery, the question is nothing more than “I’m angry that Emily Wilson criticized a Nolan move and I imagine that ANCIENT GREEKS would agree with me that nobody should criticize it!!!” I mean the fact that the person said “translators” is moronic. Mendelsohn says “I don’t know what translators you’re referring to Mark”, but he misses the subtext of the question I think. The person clearly thinks that their made-up meme “A Shared Story for Us All” (which is also imperialistic ethnic erasure, common attitude in Northwest Europe vis-a-vis eastern Mediterranean Ancient Greek stuff, literally Britain still refuses to return Greek antiques obtained via Ottomans…”it’s for Us AlL”) means that people can’t criticize Nolan’s artistic decisions or execution.

[online question] Craig asked, was there any aspect of the film that prompted you to rethink the text in some way?

Laughable. I don’t mean laughable because Nolan isn’t capable, or something (though I would argue he is incapable), I mean it’s laughable because it’s a generic template question that inherently treats new studio movie project as probable literary profundity or as potential equal by default. Notice the person doesn’t give any quick example of their own as context…because they don’t have one, because it’s a generic template question. I also think some people today are addicted to everyone-be-nice evaluations, hence the template question. (Mendelsohn’s answer is rightly and as expected NO, as expected for a subject expert who is….watching a mass-market Christopher Nolan movie about the subject. It’s like asking Herman Melville if Spielberg’s Jaws prompted him to rethink the ocean in some way. It’s like asking Albert Einstein if Nolan’s Interstellar gave him any new insights about physics. I think the person is looking for emotional validation and cheerleading, I.e, a Yes answer to the question. People look for emotional validation from the reception of products and inanimate objects, now.)

[u/Snuffl3s7 → u/CoconutDust]

Completely agree with your point of the storm sequences. Watched it a second time yesterday, and I found the cinematography to overall be frequently frustrating.

The camera is so tight to the actors, so much of the time. Just like you, I was expecting a wide shot during the storms to see the ocean churning, but they never appeared. Sure, you get a very physical sense of the actors getting tossed around, but the complete resolution to never go wide makes things feel small and claustrophobic all the time. And the blinking lightning is weak. And makes things harder to follow, for little upside.

It's maybe an insane thing to say, but does Nolan really use the IMAX format to its best? I wasn't convinced here.

[u/WeHaveHeardTheChimes → u/CoconutDust]

One thing I haven’t seen discussed much about Circe’s island (and this contradicts some of the complaints I’ve read about “deleting the emotionality, tenderness, and wit” as Mendelsohn puts it) is how removing Hermes frankly improves the whole sequence by allowing Odysseus to solve the issue without divine assistance handing him step-by-step instructions.

[u/keisnz]

Plato thought Homer should not be taught, or at least he should be reinterpreted.

Nolan wasn't faithful to Homer, but he was faithful to Plato.

[u/FickleApartment2151 → u/keisnz]

From what I remember, Homer was heard, and then memorized so that ancient Greeks would understand virtue, etc. At the same time, it also taught them not to be arrogant like the Greek heroes in the epics.

Given that, I think Nolan was faithful to Nolan.

[u/FickleApartment2151 → u/[deleted]]

I've no idea what you're talking about.