Reflection

See it before judging it...

A viewing of Nolan’s Odyessy offers a less intense impression than the commercial hype and reviews promise. It is neither brilliant nor mediocre, but somewhere in between despite memorable portrayals by the talented cast.

If box office receipts are the metric, $264 worldwide with $124M nationally for its first weekend, are a healthy indicator of public response. The film is a commercial success.

Whether it succeeds as a cultural or artistic effort is less obvious.

It is but the latest of a long series of movies on the same topic, based on an even more prodigious number of translations, many by the familiar and famous authors known for other work.

For lines so frequently rendered, what can be expected to distinguish the current iteration from its predecessors?

In an era of widespread challenge to traditional roles (especially male warrior roles), it might be unreasonable to expect the film to show the heroic backbone or scope of the original. The heroic stance in something vaguely recognized as patriarchy, and as such, a candid portrayal of heroic Greek figures as they were understood in Homer’s time, verges on being taboo in the woke viewer audience of today.

Much of the action seemed muted by Odysseus’ musing and interior monologue. To cast a warrior distracted by philosophical doubts during the violent sacking of Troy in midst of hand-to-hand combat, erodes his heroic role.

Perhaps as a general and strategist, and not merely a warrior, this seems reasonable.

Matt Damon’s Odysseus is accused of lying to his men and withholding information, as if his actions were a betrayal of troops under his command when he was vouchsafed confidential foreknowledge of their fate. He often and loudly proclaimed his concern for his troops, but his actions contradicted his words. Such was the challenge of leadership for any commander, that his actions may get his people killed.

Troops unconvinced of the concern of their commander for their welfare, tended toward skepticism if not mutiny.

His promise and concern that his casualties be properly commemorated after their ultimate sacrifice, seemed hollow and superficial.

***
There is much to consider in the episodes in which Odysseus confronts women. In fact, the voices of conscience in his head, were exclusively feminine. Likewise, the sole representative of Mt. Olympus in the screenplay (Athena) is female, although the wrath of Posiedon is alluded to for several of Odysseus’ transgressions.

Some (Circe and Calpyso) reluctantly guide him homeward but only after their own agendas and lust, are met.

Men and women interact in the film to reveal ethical and moral values inherent not only in the epoch in which the action takes place, but in contemporary society.

Reviewers have made much of casting Helen and Sinon in non-traditional ways but neither carry as much impact or cultural offense as some reviewers suggest.

***

It is a brilliant, age-old story, a competent screenplay, some sound but uninspired acting and directing that bears further consideration before value judgements are rendered.

At very least, the film merits a wide and broad viewership and should catalyze informative, and controversial, discussion. However, what can be said of a film so uneven in its qualities, even if it ticks off the necessary woke boxes to qualify it for competitions?

Just go see it and make up your own mind.