Thunderstruck xx said:

---

hunter2012 said:

---

“It is a spectacular sight and a brilliant, subversive adaptation… A refreshingly modern approach… Redefining the journey of…”

With this kind of linguistic gymnastics, all the chosen critics will desperately try to salvage this abomination.

You don’t redefine Homer. You… https://t.co/TMu0kXd883

— Victor Kyriazakos (@VKyriazakos) July 8, 2026

Why not make any other movie unless if the point was to erase and rewrite the Odyssey for the "modern audience"? Adaptations are like copies of a copy and the quality will degrade even with the best adaptations over time.

I'll say this with certainty, the poem will be around a hundred years from now, this movie may not have any rewatch value after a decade. In the end it's just the degraded and corrupted copy.

---

I don't think I've read the word "subversive" so many times than I have in the past week or so leading up to this movie. It's like all these "critics" who have "seen the movie" have all been fed the same script to praise The Odyssey. Really makes you think.

---

By my count, the word "subversive" was used ONE time in all of the reactions I posted. You're welcome to go back and try to find more, but I counted it literally just once.

Where else are you seeing it "so many times" this "past week"? Who are all of these other critics you've been reading? Because reviews aren't out yet, and the only opinions made public so far are those that dropped on social media on Monday.

I'm not saying there aren't more. I just find your "so many times" claim hard to believe considering I read damn near every reaction and barely encountered that word.

One thing I think is funniest about this whole fiasco is that you know most of these guys had, at most, sparknotes’d the Odyssey in middle school until they had to pretend to have a deep, abiding love of it a month ago to appear properly outraged. https://t.co/5331RtwqPD

— gene belcher, public defender (@AbolitionEsq) July 9, 2026

Sounds like cope.


Maybe people are pretty familiar with Homer's work and don't really want it done badly.

And again.... that's totally fine.

Read what I'm writing.

If that's what you want... I get it. I don't fault you or anyone else for that.

It has nothing to do with "cope."

Rather, I fault you for a relentless, week-after-week-after-week campaign in which you so clearly, and so desperately, need to see this thing tarred and feathered and mocked and kicked to the gutter.

You can tell me you actually hope it's good all you want.

But we both know that's a lie.

Otherwise, you wound't be in this thread for as long and for as often as you have, spending countless days bringing the sheer amount of negatively toward this movie that you do. You mock me... and then you're here at least 75% of the time I am, doing exactly what I'm doing, just in the opposite direction.

No sane person who hopes this movie is good acts that way.

Now, go ahead and tell me to "relax," and then spend another 20 posts tomorrow being just as relentless in your **** posting as you claim I'm being in defense of the movie.

I truly did hang onto hope that it would be pretty good for a while, only because Nolan is capable. But, unfortunately with each new trailer, each new revealed shot, Nolan's pressers, actors and actresses sounding off, it has convinced it it's going to be *****

Great.

I still think half of those conclusions could wait until you've seen it for yourself, but whatever.

Either way, can you not see how being relentlessly negative about the movie, for weeks/months on end, rubs some of us the wrong way / ruins our experience just the same?

Because you're not just expressing your opinion anymore.

You're not just disappointed.

You're not just hoping against hope the movie itself might be better.

All of those would be totally understandable.

Instead, you and others show up here literally EVERY SINGLE DAY with the sole purpose of bringing endless negativity, virtue signaling, and mocking to a thread for a movie you don't even really want to see (or at least see succeed) anymore.

You don't find that just a little... sad? Weird?

Because, again, you've long since worn out your "we should be allowed to express our opinions" excuse. Of course you should be allowed to express your opinions. No on has ever said or kept you from doing otherwise. But you're not even remotely doing that anymore, in the innocent way you keep framing it. Rather, for weeks it's been nothing but a relentless stampede of a campaign on your part to make sure everyone knows how ****ing stupid everyone involved with this movie is, and how ****ing stupid anyone who wants to see this movie is. You're actively rooting for this thing to fail, and bringing all kinds of culture war discourse in the process, without any consideration for anyone who wants to simply discuss/look forward to a new Christopher Nolan blockbuster.

All the while you scoff at anyone who dares question your intentions, painting anyone who gets in your way as a big meanie... while being just as condescending yourself.

Worse? You do this in every thread in which you deem a movie deserving of your ire.

Me? I'm just trying to have a good time talking about and looking forward to movies.

For you and a handful of others here? Every thread is nothing more than a potential target in your anti-woke quest to **** all over woke Hollywood.

And it's so ****ing exhausting, man.

How do you know those ladies didn't see the film from the other review tweets?

You still don't understand that art is subjective and that opinions on it are going to vary greatly. What's exhausting is that you can't recognize that and continually insist that people holding a negative view are not just wrong, but flawed. Look in a mirror for what's truly exhausting.

TCTTS said:

---

One thing I think is funniest about this whole fiasco is that you know most of these guys had, at most, sparknotes’d the Odyssey in middle school until they had to pretend to have a deep, abiding love of it a month ago to appear properly outraged. https://t.co/5331RtwqPD

— gene belcher, public defender (@AbolitionEsq) July 9, 2026

---

As opposed to Lupita Nyong'o stating she had never read The Odyssey.

It's too bad the internet wasn't a big thing back when Leo and Claire Danes did Romeo and Juliet. It would have been such fun to hear everyone complain about the modern setting and wrong races for all the actors.

Quote:

---

And it's so ****ing exhausting, man.

---

100% this.

The relentless back-and-forth actually soured me on even seeing the movie.*

I have never read The Odyssey. Not sure how I got through school without having to, but it is what it is. The thing with casting a black actress does stick out to me, and I find the defense (it's a fictional story) to be weak. This was written in a time when an author would have written about what he saw every day, and I rather doubt there were any blacks walking around Greece in that time. Fictional or not, that character would not have been black.

On the other hand, the incessant sniping about Nolan's intent here for purely DEI or political reasons, when he's never done that kind of thing in a public manner (I have little doubt that he is a lib personally, but he keeps his own views guarded as far as I can tell) is a waste of everyone's time.

The comparison to game threads is appropriate for these movie threads.

* After watching one of those behind-the-scenes videos recently posted, I went ahead and grabbed a ticket for a showing on my local IMAX screen on the Saturday after it opens.

AustinAg2K said:

---

It's too bad the internet wasn't a big thing back when Leo and Claire Danes did Romeo and Juliet. It would have been such fun to hear everyone complain about the modern setting and wrong races for all the actors.

---

This is one of my favorite onion articles:

https://theonion.com/unconventional-director-sets-shakespeare-play-in-time-1819569151/

One of the real ironies here is that the internet warriors hell bent on defending the sanctity of western myth seem to have very little education in how the great stories of western literature have been handed down and recycled over the centuries.

AustinAg2K said:

---

It's too bad the internet wasn't a big thing back when Leo and Claire Danes did Romeo and Juliet. It would have been such fun to hear everyone complain about the modern setting and wrong races for all the actors.

---

I'm not getting into everything else that's being argued but there is definitely a difference in my mind between what this version of Odyssey is appearing to do versus what Romeo+Juliet did. Taking something and putting it in a clear and obvious different setting is vastly different and should allow for far more artistic creativity. Similar to O Brother, Where Art Thou being an obvious Odyssey adaptation but being set in 1930s Mississippi. Forbidden Planet (a 1950s sci-fi movie) is based on Shakespeare's The Tempest. Nobody cares about those having differences in large part because the setting is completely and obviously different so other changes don't cause cognitive dissonance.

Well if you want to be authentic to how the Greeks did it, you'd need to cast dudes for all the female parts….

Not sure how that would play in 2026

amercer said:

---

Well if you want to be authentic to how the Greeks did it, you'd need to cast dudes for all the female parts….

Not sure how that would play in 2026

---

I literally said I'm not getting into everything else going on, just commenting on the comparison to Romeo+Juliet. Are you dense?

Sorry. it was a joke.

People taking themselves seriously should head to a different board since this one is about entertainment.

Again, Matt Damon is such a terrible choice for the lead, it just looks bad.

I don't care about the side characters not being historically accurate, the entire thing is a myth anyhow....Damon just doesn't cut it for me in the roll.

rather watch O' Brother where art thou for the 10th time.

amercer said:

---

Sorry. it was a joke.

People taking themselves seriously should head to a different board since this one is about entertainment.

---

We already have a board for stupid people to make nonstop inane jokes while laughing at themselves, it's the General Board. If you're going to kick out serious discussion you'll have to take that up with this board's unofficial moderator as well.

GoAgs92 said:

---

Again, Matt Damon is such a terrible choice for the lead, it just looks bad.

I don't care about the side characters not being historically accurate, the entire thing is a myth anyhow....Damon just doesn't cut it for me in the roll.

rather watch O' Brother where art thou for the 10th time.

---

I don't know. He certainly wasn't what I pictured when I was reading The Martian but that movie was great.

I'm gonna go out a limb and say that 99% of people never thought of the odyssey again after high school. The vast vast majority never read it, paid attention in class, or care that much about the source.

This isn't the same as taking a modern day fantasy favorite that millions have read like Harry Potter and ****ting on the source material putting your own spin on it.

Fenrir said:

---

amercer said:

---

Sorry. it was a joke.

People taking themselves seriously should head to a different board since this one is about entertainment.

---

We already have a board for stupid people to make nonstop inane jokes while laughing at themselves, it's the General Board. If you're going to kick out serious discussion you'll have to take that up with this board's unofficial moderator as well.

---

He doesn't start his shift until later in the day, how are we supposed to get 70+ pages in the meantime?

Incidentally, picked up my IMAX tickets for Evo Kyle at the Thursday showing a little while ago. It was about half purchased already. That is probably a good sign that despite the R rating, this will have a good strong week. It's definitely not a sellout for this theater, so we will see.

My 2026 rankings so far:
1. Disclosure Day
2. Masters of the Universe
3. Project Hail Mary
Last by a longshot...Iron Lung

I am hoping that this movie takes the top spot, but not sure. May have to wait for the dog movie or the whale movie.

CheeseSndwch said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

One thing I think is funniest about this whole fiasco is that you know most of these guys had, at most, sparknotes’d the Odyssey in middle school until they had to pretend to have a deep, abiding love of it a month ago to appear properly outraged. https://t.co/5331RtwqPD

— gene belcher, public defender (@AbolitionEsq) July 9, 2026

---

As opposed to Lupita Nyong'o stating she had never read The Odyssey.

---

CliffsNotes for the olds!

Maybe Nolan should have given it a different title and treated it like the 13th Warrior.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

You still don't understand that art is subjective and that opinions on it are going to vary greatly. What's exhausting is that you can't recognize that and continually insist that people holding a negative view are not just wrong, but flawed. Look in a mirror for what's truly exhausting.

---

I think the issue is people are bleeding all over this thread holding a negative review of something they haven't seen, solely because of the political views of the actors and the creator and how they perceived that impacted the casting decisions. There's a difference between that and someone who has seen the movie saying they didn't like it.

Once the movie comes out hopefully this thread can get back to actually talking about the movie itself. It may suck, but that seems doubtful given Nolan's track record.

Fenrir said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

It's too bad the internet wasn't a big thing back when Leo and Claire Danes did Romeo and Juliet. It would have been such fun to hear everyone complain about the modern setting and wrong races for all the actors.

---

I'm not getting into everything else that's being argued but there is definitely a difference in my mind between what this version of Odyssey is appearing to do versus what Romeo+Juliet did. Taking something and putting it in a clear and obvious different setting is vastly different and should allow for far more artistic creativity. Similar to O Brother, Where Art Thou being an obvious Odyssey adaptation but being set in 1930s Mississippi. Forbidden Planet (a 1950s sci-fi movie) is based on Shakespeare's The Tempest. Nobody cares about those having differences in large part because the setting is completely and obviously different so other changes don't cause cognitive dissonance.

---

Correct.

There is a HUGE difference in adapting a classic for a "retelling" versus claiming you are actually adapting the original story. O Brother Where Art Thou is obviously the most perfect example. That is how I view "artistic license" being implemented to perfection. It is a literal retelling of the Odyssey but in a different setting. I would NEVER have a critique about this.

Hell, if Spike Lee announced he was doing a retelling of the Odyssey set in Harlem, I would be very interested in what that would look like and how that would turn out. If EVERY SINGLE actor in this retelling was black, I would have absolutely no problem. Would there be people out there still mad? Of course there would be. All I can speak to is my own personal opinions.

But, again, when one of the biggest Directors in the world announces he is filming "The Odyssey", and this filmmaker ONLY makes grounded and serious movies, I expect this to be a true adaptation of Homer's poem. Sure, there will always be artistic license and dramatization, but no one can look at that casting and not see that as Nolan dipping his toes into the the BS that has been rejected by audiences for the last decade.

The inability to see the differences is astounding to me.

Madmarttigan said:

---

I'm gonna go out a limb and say that 99% of people never thought of the odyssey again after high school. The vast vast majority never read it, paid attention in class, or care that much about the source.

This isn't the same as taking a modern day fantasy favorite that millions have read like Harry Potter and ****ting on the source material putting your own spin on it.

---

You think this thread is bad?

You just wait, my friend. Once more starts coming out about The Chronicles of Narnia, the **** is going to go off. Ultimately, I have no true connection to The Odyssey, as you point out. I simply have opinions on what is going on in Hollywood and a lot of my feelings on the matter stem from feeling a bit let down by Nolan, who is one of my favorites. But for The Chronicles of Narnia? Now they're ****ing with something beloved by millions of people, especially Christians.

This thread needs to get back to being more lighthearted film enjoyment so to assist I present Lord of the Rings with Jim Carrey.

La única forma de mejorar El Señor de los Anillos es con Jim Carrey: pic.twitter.com/oCLTYNIGWB

— Imladris (@__Imladris__) July 8, 2026

amercer said:

---

GoAgs92 said:

---

Again, Matt Damon is such a terrible choice for the lead, it just looks bad.

I don't care about the side characters not being historically accurate, the entire thing is a myth anyhow....Damon just doesn't cut it for me in the roll.

rather watch O' Brother where art thou for the 10th time.

---

I don't know. He certainly wasn't what I pictured when I was reading The Martian but that movie was great.

---

I didn't like him and affleck in the last duel which was a decent movie otherwise so maybe that is clouding my judgement.

To say the commentary on a movie that hasn't been released yet has gotten out of hand is underselling what's being discussed on this film. I lean conservative on most subjects, but I'm also able to separate art, artist, and myself in most situations in the search for entertainment. I honestly don't understand why it matters to anyone who plays Helen of Troy, a Greek warrior, or a Greek god/goddess in a film based on an epic poem written thousands of years ago. It's no different to be upset about the casting in any of his Batman movies. I'm not outraged with the people taking issue with it, I just don't understand why it moves the needle at all for anyone. Nolan doesn't have a history about trying to make socio-political statements with his movies as I've understood them. If he did, then I think Oppenheimer could have been told very differently. A lot of people on the left were upset with Nolan about Oppenheimer because he didn't make the statement that they wanted, James Cameron and Spike Lee in particular from what I remember.

All that being said, I do think there is some weirdness in the trailers that strikes me as off and gives me pause about the movie, though minor. It's specific to the dialogue and the accents though, not who's saying the lines. I feel like Nolan has earned the benefit of the doubt and outrage culture needs to, at a minimum, hold off until they've actually seen the movie to be offended. Just because you don't like the casting choices, it doesn't mean that Nolan is preaching to any of us. If you're looking for reasons to be offended, I'm sure you can find them, but I think you'd be better served using those feelings about real events going on in the real world. There's plenty of real things going on in the world to be upset about, why waste energy on this?

Yes... we all only have the mental capacity to think about one subject at a time. You got us!

Its not an inability to see the difference, its that different people have different ideas and expectations when it comes to adaptations. You are expressing that you would hope, given the setting, that it be more historically accurate. That is your opinion to have. Others don't draw the line in that same place. Its not that people aren't intelligent enough to agree with you, its just that they don't have the same preference or expectation. Can you respect that differing opinion as legitimate as well?

veryfuller said:

---

Its not an inability to see the difference, its that different people have different ideas and expectations when it comes to adaptations. You are expressing that you would hope, given the setting, that it be more historically accurate. That is your opinion to have. Others don't draw the line in that same place. Its not that people aren't intelligent enough to agree with you, its just that they don't have the same preference or expectation. Can you respect that differing opinion as legitimate as well?

---

When people start comparing Rome+Juliet to what we've seen out of the previews for this current adaptation, I'm not sure how to take it other than an inability to see the difference.

Lathspell said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

It's too bad the internet wasn't a big thing back when Leo and Claire Danes did Romeo and Juliet. It would have been such fun to hear everyone complain about the modern setting and wrong races for all the actors.

---

I'm not getting into everything else that's being argued but there is definitely a difference in my mind between what this version of Odyssey is appearing to do versus what Romeo+Juliet did. Taking something and putting it in a clear and obvious different setting is vastly different and should allow for far more artistic creativity. Similar to O Brother, Where Art Thou being an obvious Odyssey adaptation but being set in 1930s Mississippi. Forbidden Planet (a 1950s sci-fi movie) is based on Shakespeare's The Tempest. Nobody cares about those having differences in large part because the setting is completely and obviously different so other changes don't cause cognitive dissonance.

---

Correct.

There is a HUGE difference in adapting a classic for a "retelling" versus claiming you are actually adapting the original story. O Brother Where Art Thou is obviously the most perfect example. That is how I view "artistic license" being implemented to perfection. It is a literal retelling of the Odyssey but in a different setting. I would NEVER have a critique about this.

Hell, if Spike Lee announced he was doing a retelling of the Odyssey set in Harlem, I would be very interested in what that would look like and how that would turn out. If EVERY SINGLE actor in this retelling was black, I would have absolutely no problem. Would there be people out there still mad? Of course there would be. All I can speak to is my own personal opinions.

But, again, when one of the biggest Directors in the world announces he is filming "The Odyssey", and this filmmaker ONLY makes grounded and serious movies, I expect this to be a true adaptation of Homer's poem. Sure, there will always be artistic license and dramatization, but no one can look at that casting and not see that as Nolan dipping his toes into the the BS that has been rejected by audiences for the last decade.

The inability to see the differences is astounding to me.

---

sorry, but this is the only answer. anything different and you're just kidding yourself for sake of the hive mind. don't care if it's a staff tagged opinion or not.

veryfuller said:

---

Its not an inability to see the difference, its that different people have different ideas and expectations when it comes to adaptations. You are expressing that you would hope, given the setting, that it be more historically accurate. That is your opinion to have. Others don't draw the line in that same place. Its not that people aren't intelligent enough to agree with you, its just that they don't have the same preference or expectation. Can you respect that differing opinion as legitimate as well?

---

sorry, but I can't. I think anyone rational also can't. it's pretty cut and dry -- this wasn't marketed as a Romeo + Juliet style conceptual adaptation. Full stop.

Now, if the studio and Nolan were halfway intelligent, they'd lean into the conceptual adaptation now before they lose their ass financially. Digging their heels in and saying the sky is red instead of blue isn't going to help their cause.

AustinAg2K said:

---

It's too bad the internet wasn't a big thing back when Leo and Claire Danes did Romeo and Juliet. It would have been such fun to hear everyone complain about the modern setting and wrong races for all the actors.

---

That is actually a good point. I think, ultimately, this hits the nail on the head as to why so many people are anxious/leary/disappointed about what they are hearing on this one.

It kind of sounds like that is what he might be going for...an edgy/modernized/artsy twist on an ancient story...an intentional and deliberate *******ization, with modern dialect and music and everything (I have yet to hear if Gucci Mane or 21 Savage will be on the soundtrack). I think people just don't really expect this from Christopher Nolan, and in today's climate, some might be naturally wondering if he has been corrupted by the woke mind virus plaguing Hollywood today.

I'll say it again though...if that is the route CN is going...if anyone can pull it off and shut the haters up, it is him. I have been kind of hoping it would feel like a genuine epic from that time though. We will see.