Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey isn’t really about monsters, gods or sea voyages. It’s about what happens when a celebrated war hero finally runs out of places to hide from what he’s done.
There are monsters, storms, shipwrecks, sorcery and plenty of blood, but none of that is really the point. What interests Nolan is not simply whether Odysseus can get home. It is whether a man who has seen and done what Odysseus has seen and done is capable of coming home at all.
Matt Damon plays Odysseus not as a swaggering hero but as a man worn down by experience. He is clever, certainly. He still has the quickness of mind we associate with Homer’s great survivor. He reads situations, calculates risk, deceives when necessary and understands that brute strength is not always the answer. Yet Damon carries something heavier through the film. This Odysseus has lived too long with the consequences of his own intelligence.
The fall of Troy hangs over everything.
The Trojan Horse has always been presented as the supreme example of Odyssean cunning, the trick that finally ended a seemingly unwinnable war. Nolan is far less interested in celebrating the brilliance of the deception than in what followed. The gates open, the Greeks enter the city and victory gives way to slaughter. Odysseus cannot separate the triumph from the carnage. His greatest military achievement has become the memory he cannot escape.
The film repeatedly returns to Troy, not as a place of glory but as a wound. Odysseus is haunted not only by what happened to him, but by what he helped make happen.
That is a much more interesting starting point than simple heroism.
Nolan has spent much of his career making films about memory, guilt, time and the stories people tell themselves in order to live with what they have done. Seen in that context, The Odyssey almost feels inevitable. Homer’s poem is already full of recollection, invention and self-mythology. Odysseus is not simply a man who has adventures. He is also a man who narrates them, shaping his own legend as he goes.
Nolan leans into that. The past never stays neatly in the past. Troy, the sea, the dead and the lost companions intrude constantly on the present. The result is a story where the journey matters less as geography than as reckoning.
For all the scale of the production, the film ultimately rests on something intimate. Anne Hathaway’s Penelope is central to that.
It would have been easy to reduce her to the faithful wife waiting patiently for the adventurer’s return. Nolan wisely avoids it. She has endured a siege of her own. Odysseus has been absent for twenty years. Their son has grown up without him. Ithaca has filled with men who treat the King’s disappearance as an opportunity, consuming his household while circling his wife.
Penelope survives through patience and intelligence.
That makes her much closer to Odysseus than the traditional image of the passive wife suggests. Both survive by reading people, delaying decisions and concealing their intentions when necessary.
Hathaway plays her with restraint. There is anger, but it has been compressed by years of waiting. There is love too, though Nolan never treats love as a magic solution to everything that has happened.
When Odysseus finally returns, the question is not simply whether Penelope recognises him. The more difficult question is whether she can recognise what remains of him.
Twenty years is a long time. The young king who sailed for Troy is gone. The woman he left behind has changed too. Survival has altered them both.
This is where the film is at its strongest. The reunion is not sentimental. There is no suggestion that the past can simply be resumed. Odysseus may have reached Ithaca, but homecoming requires something more difficult than navigation. It requires him to be seen honestly.
That idea runs through the relationship with Telemachus as well.
Tom Holland gives the son a convincing mixture of admiration, resentment and uncertainty. For Odysseus, twenty years is an absence. For Telemachus it is almost a lifetime. He has grown up with a father who is more story than man.
That creates a peculiar distance when they finally meet.
Telemachus wants the man he has imagined. The man who returns is damaged, secretive and violent.
The slaughter of the suitors makes this especially uncomfortable. Nolan does not present it as a simple moment of righteous revenge. The violence is thrilling in the way large-scale cinema can be thrilling, but it is not clean. By this point we have spent too much time watching what violence has already done to Odysseus.
The film understands that brutality can be justified within a story and still leave a mark on the person carrying it out.
That is one of the things that separates this Odyssey from a conventional action epic. Nolan is interested in warriors, but not especially interested in worshipping them.
Even victory carries a cost.
The film also makes a deliberate decision to push the gods into the background. Homer’s gods are constantly interfering, taking sides, offering protection and exacting revenge according to whims that often seem terrifyingly human.
Nolan reduces that machinery.
Homer purists will probably hate that choice, and they are not entirely wrong.
Part of the strange power of the original poem lies in the fact that human beings never fully control their own fate. Nolan prefers responsibility. By pushing the gods away, he leaves Odysseus more exposed. He cannot blame everything on Poseidon or divine hostility. His actions belong to him. His guilt belongs to him.
Something of Homer’s oddness is lost, but something else is gained.
The Calypso episode makes that especially clear.
Charlize Theron’s Calypso is not simply a sorceress keeping a man captive. Nolan turns the island into a kind of emotional suspension. Time barely seems to move. Nothing progresses. It is beautiful, seductive and deadening.
For Odysseus, that makes it dangerous.
Calypso offers something more tempting than immortality. She offers the possibility of not having to go back. No Troy. No Penelope. No Ithaca. No reckoning.
For a man carrying the weight Odysseus carries, that is a serious temptation.
Thankfully, none of this comes at the expense of the pleasures of the original story. The Cyclops is there. The sea is dangerous. Ships look fragile. Men look small and vulnerable.
At its best, the film captures the primal quality these stories require: the sense that the world is vast, indifferent and quite capable of swallowing human beings without noticing.
The physical quality of the production helps enormously. Wood looks like wood. Stone has weight. Rope bites into hands. Ships creak rather than glide. The Mediterranean is beautiful but never friendly.
That gives the fantasy substance.
The monsters feel as though they belong in the same world as the men confronting them.
Lupita Nyong’o’s Helen adds another layer to Nolan’s treatment of Troy. Rather than treating Helen as the woman whose beauty supposedly started a war, the film presents her as a figure who has become an explanation for decisions made by other people. Nolan seems deeply sceptical of the idea that wars begin for the reasons printed on the banners.
That is a far more convincing reading of the myth.
Nyong’o plays Helen with a weary awareness of the stories built around her. She becomes less a cause of history than a victim of the narratives imposed upon her.
The casting of a black woman as Helen attracted predictable arguments, but they seem beside the point. Helen is not a historical figure preserved in a photograph. She is a mythological figure onto whom generations have projected their own idea of beauty. The more interesting question is whether the actor can carry the weight of that projection. Nyong’o can.
For such an enormous production, the film is remarkably doubtful about grandeur. Troy falls. Odysseus survives. He outwits enemies.He makes it home.
Yet almost every victory is presented alongside its aftermath. What did it cost? Who was left behind? What did the victor become?
Those questions connect the film to Oppenheimer and Dunkirk. Nolan remains fascinated by people caught inside events larger than themselves, especially when achievement and catastrophe are difficult to separate.
There are weaknesses.
Nolan sometimes makes the ancient world feel a little too psychologically familiar. His characters occasionally think and speak in ways a modern audience will recognise immediately. That makes the film accessible, but it also smooths away some of the alien quality of Homer.
Honour, hospitality, bloodline, revenge, fate and divine power all operate differently in the poem than they do in modern storytelling.
The film occasionally translates too much.
The reduced role of the gods is part of the same issue. Morally, Nolan’s universe is satisfying. Mythologically, it is less strange.
There are also moments when the scale begins to overwhelm the material. Nolan loves vast landscapes, crashing sound and monumental imagery. Sometimes something monumental is happening. Sometimes two people are having a conversation. The film is strongest when it remembers the difference.
That is why Damon and Hathaway matter so much. They provide an emotional centre that no amount of spectacle could replace.
By the time Odysseus reaches Ithaca, it becomes clear that Nolan has been telling two different stories. One is the familiar one. A man is trying to get home. The other is more interesting. A man is trying to become someone who can live at home again.
The final passages are powerful because they do not pretend return is the same thing as restoration. There is no restoration. There is only whatever comes next. Odysseus has spent years outwitting monsters, kings and gods. Penelope asks something much harder of him.
She asks him to stop performing the legend.
She asks him to be the man who came back.
By Pat Harrington
Advert
