Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

lrb.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 183 posts

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#21

Post by comex »

wzdd wrote: post #9
GlobalFrog wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there are no sex scene in the original tale. Sex is slightly evocated by two mentions of Ulysses sharing the bed or Circe and Calypso, but without any depiction of sex.

Wilson didn’t write “sex scene”, she wrote “sex”. In the story there is plenty of implied sex. In the movie there is none. It’s not a major issue in itself, it’s part of a broader point about movie Odysseus being “uncomplicated” versus the story— both morally, and when it comes to passions (sex, food, revenge).

The review does in fact use the phrase “sex scenes”.

Not that I disagree with your latter point.

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#24

Post by epihelix »

petesergeant wrote: post #12

I read about 2/3rds of this before giving up. People who are upvoting it: what are you getting from this review that I'm missing, exactly?

Personally, I was delighted to read the thoughts and perspective of someone who knows and understands the Odyssey better than just about anyone, on the Nolan film adaptation. It was eloquent and educated, and provided some unique criticisms that I've not read elsewhere.

The fact that Nolan claims inspiration from the author's translation adds additional interest and relevance, of course.

Plus, there were some delightfully cutting lines about how abysmally terrible and expository Nolan's dialogue is, which alone were worth the price for admission for me.

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#25

Post by Barrin92 »

bragh wrote: post #3

Fair enough about the other points. But this is a ridiculous "hot take": > There are no sex scenes, and all the food looks horrible. Yes and if there were sex scenes, then the film would get criticized for having sex scene(s), not being able to tell the story of a Greek epic without turning it into erotica or something.

Nolan, by his own account, has made clear that he doesn't consider himself captured by his audiences and makes what he likes so I'd say it's allowed to talk about inclusion or exclusion of material on their own merit, not what people would have to say about it.

Not just in this movie but in general I think Nolan lacks any kind of sensuality, lyrical qualities, humor or eroticism. Which are key features of classical literature. Cosmic seduction, divine erotic passions are a big deal in the Odyssey and Nolan is closer to the "asexual Ken doll Marvel superhero" genre than he is to the classics with this one.

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#26

Post by fasterik »

squidsoup wrote: post #2

> "The Odyssey features his usual combination of grandiosity and superficiality". A pretty succinct summation of Nolan as a filmmaker.

I would say that Nolan is no more grandiose and superficial than Kubrick. Their films aren't about characters and plot, they're about images and sound.

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#27

Post by watwut »

throwaway3060 wrote: post #19

I am not an expert in this space, so hopefully an actual expert will come by and clarify, but I am pretty sure that "The current consensus [...] is that there was no such thing as ‘the sea peoples’" is just flat out untrue. (IIUC, what is the current consensus is that they did not "cause" the late bronze age collapse). That colors how I read the rest of the review. Edit: Personally, I enjoyed that particular addition…

Willson is actual expert.

I also think that it is ok to be unrealistic in myth movie.

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#28

Post by juleiie »

squidsoup wrote: post #2

> "The Odyssey features his usual combination of grandiosity and superficiality". A pretty succinct summation of Nolan as a filmmaker.

When I was a kid I loved Inception. As an adult I prefer Prestige.

I wish he would go back to his older philosophy of movie making but he never made a bad movie I Think

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#29

Post by mi_lk »

Well the author, an expert in Homer, doesn't hold punches that's for sure.

It also shows a literature critic doesn’t really translate into a film critic because this piece is borderline pedantic about the adaptation script and not the movie as a whole.

Re: An Uncomplicated Man – A review of The Odyssey, directed by Christopher Nolan

#30

Post by WalterBright »

radu_floricica wrote: post #15
zooweemama wrote: post #13

I haven't seen it yet, but how do people feel it compares to Lord of the Rings as an adaptation?

I don't think it does? Nor is it trying to. LotR was something that happens once every 50 years - a movie series that's as good as the source material and holds quality over 3 movies (wonder why they didn't do the Hobbit as well). The Oddyssey is a summer blockbuster. A good one, I definitely recommend it, but far from memorable.

> wonder why they didn't do the Hobbit as well

I have a theory. When Jackson made LotR, he was not a celebrity. I expect people on his staff would say "that's not going to work."

After LotR, Jackson was a god. Nobody on the Hobbit staff dared to say "no". For example, the Hobbit had numerous cliffhangers. Only one was necessary.

You can see the same thing in his King Kong remake. Nobody dared tell him to cut some of the redundant things.

The music on the Hobbit was pretty forgettable, too. I wonder what went wrong with that.

Post reply on HN