Chipotlemonger said:

---

Yes that settles it, I need to buckle up and watch Obsession. I've been avoiding it as I haven't been in a scary movie mood lately. I normally get into that genre in October/November though.

---

I wouldn't describe it as scary, more like creepy/weird.

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

lol i tried to bring this up before. Homer may not have actually even existed. This whole thing is a Frankenstein of oral tradition that was rooted in ancient religion and then morphed into something else over time. It's crazy to confine this 'story' to 1 theme, style, or context because it NEVER was confined to even a single author. The battle of troy (if it actually occurred) was roughly 500 years before the poem was believed to be written. It's a complete work of fiction rooted in amorphous interpretation and evolution. This movie is Nolan's interpretation.

Sapper Redux said:

---

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid.

---

Nah.

What is absurd is pretending a deluded little girl, that has to force herself to sound gruff, is a man, and Greek warrior.

That is the definition of absurdity.

People gnashing teeth, a little overblown maybe, but not even coming in range of that level of absurdity.

AGinHI said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid.

---

Nah.

What is absurd is pretending a deluded little girl, that has to force herself to sound gruff, is a man, and Greek warrior.

That is the definition of absurdity.

People gnashing teeth, a little overblown maybe, but not even coming in range of that level of absurdity.

---

Being such an ******* about the existence of trans people is absolutely absurd and pathetic.

No

AGinHI said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid.

---

Nah.

What is absurd is pretending a deluded little girl, that has to force herself to sound gruff, is a man, and Greek warrior.

That is the definition of absurdity.

People gnashing teeth, a little overblown maybe, but not even coming in range of that level of absurdity.

---

Because we know FOR SURE what fake Greek warriors looked like, sounded like, etc lol.

Here is a quick synopsis from our good AI friends:

Based on anthropological studies of skeletal remains from Classical and Hellenistic periods, the average ancient Greek man stood between 5 feet 6 inches and 5 feet 7 inches (167 to 171 cm). This is only a few inches shorter than the global average today, with men weighing significantly less due to leaner, agrarian diets

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Can a person simply want the version on paper to be translated faithfully to the screen without being called a Chud, racist, etc.? And yes, there have been multiple translations but they're all generally consistent with the actions and motivations by Odysseus. I'm sorry if that offends you that someone might want a straightforward adaptation for the screen when we seem to only get a big-screen adaptation once every 30 years.

Is Nolan entitled to change the story to fit his own motivations? Sure. But the Nolan-goaltending and gnashing of teeth over some people's disappointment in Nolan's version is just absurdly stupid.

---

Make it yourself. And which version, by the way? Which translation? Apparently we can't use the translation by a woman. Heaven forbid. The Odyssey isn't a screenplay. There are ALWAYS compromises made in any adaptation. You're going to be forced to rely on myths and traditions outside of Homer to flesh out what was written. Oh, and no descriptions of what the people looked like. That wasn't the Greek style.

By the way, nice hypocrisy. You want free rein to attack Nolan's version without being hit back on.

Sapper Redux said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Can a person simply want the version on paper to be translated faithfully to the screen without being called a Chud, racist, etc.? And yes, there have been multiple translations but they're all generally consistent with the actions and motivations by Odysseus. I'm sorry if that offends you that someone might want a straightforward adaptation for the screen when we seem to only get a big-screen adaptation once every 30 years.

Is Nolan entitled to change the story to fit his own motivations? Sure. But the Nolan-goaltending and gnashing of teeth over some people's disappointment in Nolan's version is just absurdly stupid.

---

Make it yourself. And which version, by the way? Which translation? Apparently we can't use the translation by a woman. Heaven forbid. The Odyssey isn't a screenplay. There are ALWAYS compromises made in any adaptation. You're going to be forced to rely on myths and traditions outside of Homer to flesh out what was written. Oh, and no descriptions of what the people looked like. That wasn't the Greek style.

By the way, nice hypocrisy. You want free rein to attack Nolan's version without being hit back on.

---

Yeah if you don't like being called a racist, just stop critiquing my best friend Christopher Nolan.

M.C. Swag said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

lol i tried to bring this up before. Homer may not have actually even existed. This whole thing is a Frankenstein of oral tradition that was rooted in ancient religion and then morphed into something else over time. It's crazy to confine this 'story' to 1 theme, style, or context because it NEVER was confined to even a single author. The battle of troy (if it actually occurred) was roughly 500 years before the poem was believed to be written. It's a complete work of fiction rooted in amorphous interpretation and evolution. This movie is Nolan's interpretation.

---

I largely agree with this. If people are disappointed that the film wasn't a more faithful, page-to-screen adaptation from one of the many interpretations, that's completely fair. I don't personally share that view, but that's just a matter of taste. Likewise, I think it's just as silly to act as though any fair criticism of Nolan's interpretation is illegitimate as it is for people on Twitter to call it a "flop" or claim it only exists because of DEI, or buy into conspiracy theories about studios purchasing entire theaters to inflate ticket sales. I am more bothered by people coming on here and parroting that **** without even having seen the movie for themselves. Or without having interest in seeing it, for that matter.

Nolan has always been pretty clear that he isn't interested in making a museum piece. He tells stories the way he wants to tell them, and his track record speaks for itself. Whether that approach works for someone is entirely subjective. Personally, I really enjoyed this interpretation. I wish I had gotten the 'Nobody' pun with the Cyclops, sure. But I didn't need one year of Damon and Circe, and had I seen a bearded Zeus hurling lightning bolts from the peak of Mount Olympus, I probably would've rolled my eyes.

Like you said, we're discussing a fictional story that is thousands of years old, based on mythology, that was interpreted over and over again and largely shown via puppet shows in theaters because most people were illiterate. This is just a different interpretation of the story.

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGinHI said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid.

---

Nah.

What is absurd is pretending a deluded little girl, that has to force herself to sound gruff, is a man, and Greek warrior.

That is the definition of absurdity.

People gnashing teeth, a little overblown maybe, but not even coming in range of that level of absurdity.

---

Being such an ******* about the existence of trans people is absolutely absurd and pathetic.

---

Except he didn't say anything about them existing, just that a 5'1'' one shouldn't be cast as a Greek warrior.

Fenrir said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Can a person simply want the version on paper to be translated faithfully to the screen without being called a Chud, racist, etc.? And yes, there have been multiple translations but they're all generally consistent with the actions and motivations by Odysseus. I'm sorry if that offends you that someone might want a straightforward adaptation for the screen when we seem to only get a big-screen adaptation once every 30 years.

Is Nolan entitled to change the story to fit his own motivations? Sure. But the Nolan-goaltending and gnashing of teeth over some people's disappointment in Nolan's version is just absurdly stupid.

---

Make it yourself. And which version, by the way? Which translation? Apparently we can't use the translation by a woman. Heaven forbid. The Odyssey isn't a screenplay. There are ALWAYS compromises made in any adaptation. You're going to be forced to rely on myths and traditions outside of Homer to flesh out what was written. Oh, and no descriptions of what the people looked like. That wasn't the Greek style.

By the way, nice hypocrisy. You want free rein to attack Nolan's version without being hit back on.

---

Yeah if you don't like being called a racist, just stop critiquing my best friend Christopher Nolan.

---

Maybe if you don't want accusations of racism or bigotry, stop hyper fixating on the black actress because she isn't perfectly white enough.

Sea Speed said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGinHI said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid.

---

Nah.

What is absurd is pretending a deluded little girl, that has to force herself to sound gruff, is a man, and Greek warrior.

That is the definition of absurdity.

People gnashing teeth, a little overblown maybe, but not even coming in range of that level of absurdity.

---

Being such an ******* about the existence of trans people is absolutely absurd and pathetic.

---

Except he didn't say anything about them existing, just that a 5'1'' one shouldn't be cast as a Greek warrior.

---

The entire post I replied to was pretty hatful towards Page.

Yes, its not the critique of the movie or adaptation that bothers me. Its the woke-washing of it. Its like, to some, because he makes some choices in adaptation, and because he is trying to apply the themes he took from the poem to a modern audience, then the movie is trash and there is nothing to be gained from it. I don't think people are being overly defensive of Nolan or the movie to argue against that perspective.

Honestly, the discourse around the movie could benefit if people watched the movie and thought, hmmm I wonder how this applies to me today....

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Can a person simply want the version on paper to be translated faithfully to the screen without being called a Chud, racist, etc.? And yes, there have been multiple translations but they're all generally consistent with the actions and motivations by Odysseus. I'm sorry if that offends you that someone might want a straightforward adaptation for the screen when we seem to only get a big-screen adaptation once every 30 years.

Is Nolan entitled to change the story to fit his own motivations? Sure. But the Nolan-goaltending and gnashing of teeth over some people's disappointment in Nolan's version is just absurdly stupid.

---

Ship of Theseus problem ironically enough. How much can you replace and change or update, before it's a different ship? Nolan walked into this one intentionally. A feminist interpretation, casting choices, plot changes, aesthetic…at what point is it no longer sensible to keep it Greek?

The defensiveness of TC et al is silly at this point. It's western cannon beyond simple fiction; it's anchored in a great many minds, and this was always bound to happen. Even our dear professor knows this but overlooks it because it is a clash of worldviews: fidelity matters to some and not to others, and levels of faithfulness vary in society. Any time you have the post structuralist lens applied to ancient works (feminist, trans, etc.) there is an intent to change it rather than stay faithful, to center self above source and this is no different.

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Chipotlemonger said:

---

Yes that settles it, I need to buckle up and watch Obsession. I've been avoiding it as I haven't been in a scary movie mood lately. I normally get into that genre in October/November though.

---

I wouldn't describe it as scary, more like creepy/weird.

---

Creepy/weird stuff involving crazy females is possibly the "scariest" genre there is.

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I watched the movie Sunday. That whole scene was laughable and pretty brutal from a dialogue standpoint.

This would have made an A- movie an A+

Sapper Redux said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Can a person simply want the version on paper to be translated faithfully to the screen without being called a Chud, racist, etc.? And yes, there have been multiple translations but they're all generally consistent with the actions and motivations by Odysseus. I'm sorry if that offends you that someone might want a straightforward adaptation for the screen when we seem to only get a big-screen adaptation once every 30 years.

Is Nolan entitled to change the story to fit his own motivations? Sure. But the Nolan-goaltending and gnashing of teeth over some people's disappointment in Nolan's version is just absurdly stupid.

---

Make it yourself. And which version, by the way? Which translation? Apparently we can't use the translation by a woman. Heaven forbid. The Odyssey isn't a screenplay. There are ALWAYS compromises made in any adaptation. You're going to be forced to rely on myths and traditions outside of Homer to flesh out what was written. Oh, and no descriptions of what the people looked like. That wasn't the Greek style.

By the way, nice hypocrisy. You want free rein to attack Nolan's version without being hit back on.

---

Yeah if you don't like being called a racist, just stop critiquing my best friend Christopher Nolan.

---

Maybe if you don't want accusations of racism or bigotry, stop hyper fixating on the black actress because she isn't perfectly white enough.

---

Please specifically find a post where the person you were responding to hyper focused on her.

Thunderstruck xx said:

---

Just saw The Odyssey. Despite what you may have heard, literally all of the criticisms by conservatives were entirely correct. The movie is just as woke as you fear, if not more so. The DEI casting is atrocious. Completely takes you out of the story right from the beginning. But…

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) July 21, 2026

---

I will say this...Elliot Page is so distracting, even in a limited role, it actually cheapens the movie a bit. Movies are an escape, and that is a clear break from that escape...all so Christopher Nolan could do a favor for an old friend undergoing some serious issues? She sounds like an 11 yr old boy but is smaller and more effeminate than most 11 yr old boys.

I still have not seen anyone explain what the hell Christopher Nolan could have been thinking here. I get the Helen-of-Troy-being-supremely-mid and the race-swapping complaints, but that pales in comparison to casting Elliot Page for this role. She doesn't even appear real she is so out-of-place. And she sounds so awkward.

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGinHI said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid.

---

Nah.

What is absurd is pretending a deluded little girl, that has to force herself to sound gruff, is a man, and Greek warrior.

That is the definition of absurdity.

People gnashing teeth, a little overblown maybe, but not even coming in range of that level of absurdity.

---

Being such an ******* about the existence of trans people is absolutely absurd and pathetic.

---

Almost constant race and trans-baiting from this poster. This is the mentality of an 8 yr old, at best.

"You have criticisms of a tiny girl cosplaying as a boy playing the role of a Greek Warrior in a mythological epic, so you must hate trans people and believe they should not even exist".

Are you a real person?

William Foster said:

---

Thunderstruck xx said:

---

Just saw The Odyssey. Despite what you may have heard, literally all of the criticisms by conservatives were entirely correct. The movie is just as woke as you fear, if not more so. The DEI casting is atrocious. Completely takes you out of the story right from the beginning. But…

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) July 21, 2026

---

I will say this...Elliot Page is so distracting, even in a limited role, it actually cheapens the movie a bit. Movies are an escape, and that is a clear break from that escape...all so Christopher Nolan could do a favor for an old friend undergoing some serious issues? She sounds like an 11 yr old boy but is smaller and more effeminate than most 11 yr old boys.

I still have not seen anyone explain what the hell Christopher Nolan could have been thinking here. I get the Helen-of-Troy-being-supremely-mid and the race-swapping complaints, but that pales in comparison to casting Elliot Page for this role. She doesn't even appear real she is so out-of-place. And she sounds so awkward.

---

I think it's been made very clear buddy. To question or critique the casting of Juno, no matter how well reasoned, proves without a doubt, you despise the mere existence of trans people. Also, it makes you an ******* apparently.

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I think it's funny that everyone knows she is "mid" and has no business playing a greek demigod of "unrivaled beauty", but a segment of this group has to pretend she is perfectly cast, because of their political leanings or something?

Yall don't have to pretend...just admit that she is oddly cast but it still doesn't take away from the movie for you.

Urban Ag said:

---

William Foster said:

---

Thunderstruck xx said:

---

Just saw The Odyssey. Despite what you may have heard, literally all of the criticisms by conservatives were entirely correct. The movie is just as woke as you fear, if not more so. The DEI casting is atrocious. Completely takes you out of the story right from the beginning. But…

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) July 21, 2026

---

I will say this...Elliot Page is so distracting, even in a limited role, it actually cheapens the movie a bit. Movies are an escape, and that is a clear break from that escape...all so Christopher Nolan could do a favor for an old friend undergoing some serious issues? She sounds like an 11 yr old boy but is smaller and more effeminate than most 11 yr old boys.

I still have not seen anyone explain what the hell Christopher Nolan could have been thinking here. I get the Helen-of-Troy-being-supremely-mid and the race-swapping complaints, but that pales in comparison to casting Elliot Page for this role. She doesn't even appear real she is so out-of-place. And she sounds so awkward.

---

I think it's been made very clear buddy. To question or critique the casting of Juno, no matter how well reasoned, proves without a doubt, you despise the mere existence of trans people. Also, it makes you an ******* apparently.

---

Pretty crazy that you can call people a-holes on here now...and just constantly allege racism/transphobia/whatever...I have been banned for much much less.

This is the face 1000 ships would have set sail for.

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I watched the movie Sunday. That whole scene was laughable and pretty brutal from a dialogue standpoint.

---

Setting aside whatever you thought of the dialogue, why was it an artistic stretch to cast Lupita as her?

William Foster said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I think it's funny that everyone knows she is "mid" and has no business playing a greek demigod of "unrivaled beauty", but a segment of this group has to pretend she is perfectly cast, because of their political leanings or something?

Yall don't have to pretend...just admit that she is oddly cast but it still doesn't take away from the movie for you.

---

She's not oddly cast at all in this interpretation. In the movie, we are introduced to Helen via Meneleus. It is explicitly stated that Helen was used as an excuse to invade Troy by Agamemnon who doesn't actually care about her at all. That is a Nolan interpretation (and also an interpretation in the 2000s movie Troiy). The 'face that launched a 1000 ships' is then mocked by Meneleus as he reveals that Helen has a horrible scar down half her face. Her beauty was never a factor in the battle of Troy or even revered but it is some cruel irony that a woman's beauty was blamed as the catalyst of the war and that very beauty was marred by it.

Nolan isn't telling some romanticized story of 'beautiful Helen'; he's telling a war story where Helen is 1 of many traumatized victims and in that version, Helen could be literally anyone (including Lupita).

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I watched the movie Sunday. That whole scene was laughable and pretty brutal from a dialogue standpoint.

---

Setting aside whatever you thought of the dialogue, why was it an artistic stretch to cast Lupita as her?

---

You can tell this poster so desperately wants it to be racism lol.

You are projecting so hard right now

William Foster said:

---

Thunderstruck xx said:

---

Just saw The Odyssey. Despite what you may have heard, literally all of the criticisms by conservatives were entirely correct. The movie is just as woke as you fear, if not more so. The DEI casting is atrocious. Completely takes you out of the story right from the beginning. But…

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) July 21, 2026

---

I will say this...Elliot Page is so distracting, even in a limited role, it actually cheapens the movie a bit. Movies are an escape, and that is a clear break from that escape...all so Christopher Nolan could do a favor for an old friend undergoing some serious issues? She sounds like an 11 yr old boy but is smaller and more effeminate than most 11 yr old boys.

I still have not seen anyone explain what the hell Christopher Nolan could have been thinking here. I get the Helen-of-Troy-being-supremely-mid and the race-swapping complaints, but that pales in comparison to casting Elliot Page for this role. She doesn't even appear real she is so out-of-place. And she sounds so awkward.

---

still waiting to see it, but as soon as all of that on Page was leaked, I instantly lost a little respect for CN, and the project.

I challenge anyone on here to peruse some recent interviews with Page -- she's a clearly very troubled and misguided person and one that sounds like she's a minor mishap away from a full blown meltdown at any given time. Beyond the silliness, we're putting this blatant mental illness and instability on a pedestal, which is wholly irresponsible and immoral IMO.

Anyone who doesn't knock CN or the movie down a few credibility points on that casting is stubbornly holding onto the idol worship of CN and fooling themselves. If he were to throw her in as a hypaspist (squire)....it's a nothingburger, as it should be.

M.C. Swag said:

---

You are projecting so hard right now

---

Well many on here have explained the problem(s) they have with casting her. Yet you do not seem satisfied. Sorry, there has been some race baiting here to I was a little suspicious of your intent.

By your logic, why not cast a fat woman if she's not supposed to be pretty in CN's interpretation? If she is in fact supposed to be unattractive/damaged goods, or whatever?

William Foster said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I think it's funny that everyone knows she is "mid" and has no business playing a greek demigod of "unrivaled beauty", but a segment of this group has to pretend she is perfectly cast, because of their political leanings or something?

Yall don't have to pretend...just admit that she is oddly cast but it still doesn't take away from the movie for you.

---

Helen of Troy was conceived by Leda having sex with Zeus in the form of a swan and hatches from an egg, but we're gonna get bent out of shape because in a movie she doesn't look greek or matches some perception of beauty standards?

cajunaggie08 said:

---

William Foster said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tom Kazansky 2012 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

YouBet said:

---

I enjoyed the movie, but Matt Walsh's takes are largely correct. I think many are overlooking that Nolan made this movie a modern message about war and PTSD instead of sticking to the story. Both takes can be true. I can like it and recognize what was done with the film.

And, I think most are missing that because very few have read the story since high school and simply don't recall the original.

FTR, I really have no idea who Matt Walsh even is since I'm not on social media. I know he's a conservative talking head and that's it.

---

Just curious, but can an interpretation of the Odyssey ever make any changes to the source material? I realize you said you liked it so I'm not really critiquing you, but more the Matt Walsh's of the world.

The gnashing of teeth over the casting and emphasis in the story is just absurdly stupid. This is not a religious text. It's an oral tradition eventually written and adapted across millennia. Hell, the Romans went to town and wrote a fan fic based on the Iliad and Odyssey. The translations and obsessions over appearance that these chuds seem fixated on were products of the 19th century.

---

Of course it's allowed. It's also allowed for us to roll our eyes at an ugly Helen. It was an artistic stretch and hasn't hit from some opinions.

---

lol you really should watch the movie because Meneleus specifically addresses the 'face that launched a 1000 ships' aspect that you and others seem so hung up on.

---

I think it's funny that everyone knows she is "mid" and has no business playing a greek demigod of "unrivaled beauty", but a segment of this group has to pretend she is perfectly cast, because of their political leanings or something?

Yall don't have to pretend...just admit that she is oddly cast but it still doesn't take away from the movie for you.

---

Helen of Troy was conceived by Leda having sex with Zeus in the form of a swan and hatches from an egg, but we're gonna get bent out of shape because in a movie she doesn't look greek or matches some perception of beauty standards?

---

There's been no explanations. You interjected that i was searching for racism when asking a user to expound on the 'why' of the casting choice being bad.