RGR

RGR

Published Aug 2026

THE ODYSSEY

80

Plenty of spectacle, tension and high-craft, but misses the depth and magic of a true blockbuster classic.

From:

Alinea Games

Stanley Kubrik

Year:

2018

1968

Genre:

Strategy, Text Based

Sci-Fi

Played:

Watched:

200+ hr

1x

Creator:

Christopher Nolan

Years:

2026

Genre:

Action-Adventure

Watched:

1x

Published Feb 2025

Published Aug 2026

A modern interpretation that polarizes audiences for all the wrong reasons.

I've been a persistent arm-chair critic of Nolan. I think he's made two, maybe three great movies, but no legendary ones. He also has his name on what I consider some of the most overrated movies made by man - Tenet, Inception, DKR - so I'm a little surprised at how much I enjoyed The Odyssey, and the defense I'm about to put up against some of the criticisms I'm seeing come his way.


That focus of disapproval has been towards the film's failure in capturing the accuracy and depth of the original poem and characters, especially Odysseus, with a notable attack coming from Emily Wilson, author of one of its most famous translations, proclaiming the "shame" she would have felt at writing such a thing.


What's being missed here is that Nolan is trying to make a blockbuster, and a deliberately modernized one. It's a genre in its own right, so should be critiqued primarily within the context of what that experience sets out to achieve. Does it push the boundaries of filmmaking, is it ambitious in scope, is it exhilarating and delivering spectacle, and is there a range of emotional hits, appealing and relating to the broadest set of people?


Source accuracy, character complexity, and thematic depth are important too, no doubt, and when blockbusters deliver on such things it propels those titles to the highest realms of cinema, but I also don't see it as a huge violation if those core aforementioned components are landed on, and the intellectual substance comes secondary to that.


After all, we never cared that The Titanic or Braveheart failed to accurately represent their respective historical events and complex political realities. We were all entertained with Gladiator, despite its textbook hero and lack of commentary on the Roman class system. And I note that Aragorn is a confident, destiny-driven heir in the books, but a haunted vagabond and reluctant king in the movies.


And then a quick mention on the casting choices, which some felt the need to turn into yet one more talking point in the tiresome culture wars.
Like the source accuracy comments, it overlooks the deliberate choice to modernize this retelling, so replacing Greeks with a typical US looking and speaking demographic is not surprising, nor idealogical in nature.

So here's where I think this movie does a great job by appropriate measure. Firstly, Nolan actually manages to successfully bring horror elements into the film, which is a rare feat for the genre. You get a touch in the Cyclops scene, but for me the highlight is Circe's grotesque molding of the crew into swine. It was directed and acted so well, and you feel disturbed by it. The scene prior, with the Laestrygonians - those silver-armored giants that emerge through the fog with relentless slaughter - also had a nightmarish component there too.


In part, it's the realism that he always brings to his productions that enables feelings of true tension to arise. The Trojan horse sequence, when applied through that lens, gave us the best interpretation of that events we've had, and was a personal highlight. Even the shades emerging through the dirt from Hades was shot with real buried actors, and it's a cool, moody, and unsettling character scene.


And of course, the excellent score brings everything home. The Zimmer orchestral approach has been done-to-death, so I was happy that we got something more atmospheric instead. OK, it definitely lacks some memorability, and the mixing and loudness was awful, but the unorthodox combination of obscure ancient instruments alongside modern textures is immersive, original, and at its best in those tense or energetic moments.


The scale of everything is also impressive, and the cinematography leans into this, with plenty of satisfying wide shots to enjoy. The many practical effects and sets were also delightful, and the big names on the lineup deliver the benchmark level of quality we'd expect, even if there's no standout or award winning performances. So the film does carry with it a presence of an epic production, and there's more than enough of the essence of the original content to instill some of that epicness into the narrative journey too, so I enjoyed watching that spectacle unfold.

That all said, the film is lacking in some meaningful ways. The realistic style and tone is at odds with historical personality. Costume design has taken a few digs in this regard, and I think it's fair. As for the environments, a friend of mine described it as bleak Northern European, with a moody IG filter, and I can see that. There’s very little Greek identity shining through, so all that rich and interesting design you’ll find in classical paintings and depictions is reimagined into something more suited for the world of Batman, which is a shame.


In hindsight, Odysseus is also a missed opportunity. I liked the character enough, and I like Matt Damon, but the role probably could have been better cast. There's definitely some messaging on war and trauma that comes through with his journey, but when you reflect on Wilson's point, that a complex and morally ambiguous anti-hero has been sanitized into a more cookie-cutter hero, it's hard to disagree. We essentially get a repackaged Cobb (Inception), Coop (Interstellar), or Bruce (Batman), which is much less interesting in comparison to what could have been.


The dialogue is also poor. When philosophical or symbolic, it's fine, but when turning conversational or expositional, it's so uninspired and flat. The modern accents and phrasing can undercut the mythic atmosphere, but the main issue is that you care about no one, because it's lacking well-written character interactions that lead to memorable scenes with emotional impact.


As a comparison, in James Cameron's Aliens, you know, care about, and enjoy what everyone in that crew and cast brings to the table. They have iconic lines and memorable contributions to the drama. They are funny, heartfelt, angry, contemplative, and they are as ingrained into that journey as much as the leads. Three hours of The Odyssey and I couldn't care less about Odysseus' crew, who are meant to be the centre of his determination, heroism, and guilt, or even about Odysseus himself, who just about earns your investment in his goal to return home


It's hard to put your finger on it, but there's just no compelling emotional through-hook in the film. Even the family drama in Ithaca is a bit one-dimensional. Anne Hathaway as Penelope was great, and her exhaustion and predicament are felt, but good acting is not enough to create memorable characters if the writing beneath it is uninspired. Pattinson's villain and Tom Holland's Telemachus both feel very run-of-the-mill as a result.

And finally, on to the action, the most disappointing aspect for me. It's not bad per se, but the screenplay is so vanilla. There's barely any interesting choreography or dynamic moments to large-scale conflict, and the rawness and violence is one level below the sacrilege, darkness and moral collapse that Troy's fall and film's message is hoping to comunicate. Sacking and defending the gate at Troy was an a average sequence, as an example, and the hand-to-hand combat staging was more of the same: very shaky, blurry, and lacking personality, making that final showdown in Ithaca decent enough, but mostly generic and unremarkable.


So, not the blockbuster masterclass it could have been, but there was no denying I was entertained, and importantly, was never forced to suspend belief in a serious way. Modern movies and TV series are becoming increasingly contrived, almost always relying on nonsensical plot points and character behaviors to forward events, and lazy writing like undermines things for me big time. So even if praising a film of this budget and scope against such a basic benchmark feels off, I'm just grateful that Nolan's written something that at least doesn't violate the laws of acceptable cinema.

That visual experience is enough to make this movie worth a watch, but I would have liked to be more engaged with the story, which doesn’t bring the same intensity. To make a comparison with Edge of Tomorrow, it doesn’t have the same psychological impact of what it means to repeat the day, and the conflict with the Mimics is more generic. Rita’s inner struggles are represented just about enough, but her trauma backstory feels random and underdeveloped. The broader context and implications of the characters in the world are also lacking, with few interesting character interactions to bring that depth. Introducing Kaiji helped, but I think the very short runtime of 80 minutes hindered some of the potential to go deeper more broadly.


Japanese anime also has a tendency to go way too far with expositional dialogue, and this film is no exception. That lazy writing really dials up in the last act, where the head scientist infers astonishingly complex insights and plot points from very little, artificially adding jeopardy by forcing in new rules that limit the repeating-day mechanism and the characters' relationship with Darol. The final battle, while looking amazing, is also a bit too easy and unearned. These are not deal breakers, but they certainly demonstrate why this movie is a step down when compared to Edge of Tomorrow’s writing, which, to be honest, already had a touch of generic Hollywood sci-fi to begin with.


This all said, I liked the first act and how it paced through the journey and Rita’s learning curve. The romance dimension was nice too. I enjoyed myself throughout the movie, and when the animation and best story moments combine with what can be a beautiful atmospheric soundtrack, it felt like peak anime — making me smile in my seat as I watched it on the big screen. I likely wouldn’t watch it again, but I am glad it exists and will certainly be enjoying some screengrabs of those wide atmospheric shots when the digital copy finds its way online.

VERDICT

I'm surprised at my high rating score, as this film does fall short in ways that a blockbuster of this calibre should be excelling in. But there's genuine cinematic power here, with its massive scale, impactful score and world-class craft that can in moments come together to create atmospheric and tense sequences that stay with you. It's grand, but rightly labelled superficial, falling short on offering timeless emotional and thematic content that has elevated blockbusters to legendary status in the past. Memorable action and performances should have stepped in to fill this gap, but missed, but the film's overall immersiveness, tightness, and spectacle does enough to make this an enjoyable theatrical experience, especially if your expectations are kept measured.

RATING BREAKDOWN

Story

77

Directing

77

Visuals / Production

85

Acting / Dialogue

70

Music / Sound

84

BONUS

concept design

practical effects

FINAL

80

Thanks for reading

Thanks for reading

Thanks for reading

CONTACT

contact@ratersgonnarate.com

CONTACT

contact@ratersgonnarate.com