• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

The Odyssey (Review)

And Mel Gibson's Apocalypto might be the best example on how you do a historical set film (no matter how much mythical fiction there might be).

Thank you for mentioning that. IMO Apocalypto is an under-rated classic. It's an indictment against the Hollywood establishment that it did not win any major awards even though it was nominated for so many. I could barely believe my eyes when I watched it, here are a bunch of non-actors (people who were literally picked up off the streets!) putting in incredible performances. They totally sold you the immersion, you really felt like you were in pre-colonial Mayan civilization. There was no clumsy political messaging that would break the immersion or date the film, which is why it has aged so well. It's still eminently watchable. Can't say the same for the latest Nolan slop.
 
2004's Troy was more immersive. Nolan just made some real weird stylistic choices with the armor and other parts of the wardrobe/costumes. I am no expert, but nothing felt particularly bronze age about The Odyssey. It just didn't "look" right.

And sorry, this is absolutely a matter of taste, but Brian Cox was a much better Agamemnon. The aura-mogging Chadamemnon is just a meme.
 
That's why Dunkirk was good nobody said much and plot twists were subtle and interesting.
Dunkirk was a weird one for me. The movie as a whole had and interesting plot, yet I felt almost nothing for the characters, it was more like we where being told to feel sorry for them because they where the good guys with some bad guys that we barely saw threatening them. It felt empty somehow, just like the beaches felt empty. Compare that to the Dunkirk beach in Atonement that was sprawling with people and character.
But it did have great tension which what was made it watchable.

Thank you for mentioning that. IMO Apocalypto is an under-rated classic. It's an indictment against the Hollywood establishment that it did not win any major awards even though it was nominated for so many. I could barely believe my eyes when I watched it, here are a bunch of non-actors (people who were literally picked up off the streets!) putting in incredible performances. They totally sold you the immersion, you really felt like you were in pre-colonial Mayan civilization. There was no clumsy political messaging that would break the immersion or date the film, which is why it has aged so well. It's still eminently watchable. Can't say the same for the latest Nolan slop.
Yeah it's a great movie and shows how good.you can be immersed when done right. No need to try to translate an era for modern movie watchers, just make a good story and they will watch it!

2004's Troy was more immersive. Nolan just made some real weird stylistic choices with the armor and other parts of the wardrobe/costumes. I am no expert, but nothing felt particularly bronze age about The Odyssey. It just didn't "look" right.

And sorry, this is absolutely a matter of taste, but Brian Cox was a much better Agamemnon. The aura-mogging Chadamemnon is just a meme.
Yeah like some video essay pointed out, not even the Mediterranean sea was blue in the movie, and that's despite the BTS footage showing a very blue sea. It's quite impressive that Nolan even manage to remove the character of the water ;)
 
Well nine pages later, everyone agrees it's too loud, almost all say bad casting, dark but visually entertaining and wife has zero interest, I'm waiting for streaming. Speaking of epic long movies that fly by don't miss Marty Supreme, a comedy streaming now. I'm calling it 2025's best picture.
 
Thank you for mentioning that. IMO Apocalypto is an under-rated classic. It's an indictment against the Hollywood establishment that it did not win any major awards even though it was nominated for so many. I could barely believe my eyes when I watched it, here are a bunch of non-actors (people who were literally picked up off the streets!) putting in incredible performances. They totally sold you the immersion, you really felt like you were in pre-colonial Mayan civilization. There was no clumsy political messaging that would break the immersion or date the film, which is why it has aged so well. It's still eminently watchable. Can't say the same for the latest Nolan slop.
How do they sound on the iPhone?
 
The new Spiderman movie comes in at 2 hours 20 minutes and that seems too long to me.
A good formula is if the director can't get his message across in less than 2 hours ten minutes, then something is wrong with his edit capability.
 
This thread of comments is interesting and is reminding me to keep an open mind and just watch the movie as entertainment. :)
Yes, everyone who looks for historical accuracy from any Hollywood film is going to have a hard time

For me as I have home cinema system I'll just wait for a digital release, then at least I can avoid the super loud volume

I have no problem with skin colors of cast, it's a rather universal story that could be adopted in many settings, time periods etc
I've never seen men complain this much, it's pathetic
 
I have no problem with skin colors of cast, it's a rather universal story that could be adopted in many settings, time periods etc
I've never seen men complain this much, it's pathetic

I think we know why certain men dislike this movie, it holds a mirror up to their entire existence (plenty of discussion online/youtube about this but I’ll not post as I’ll incur the wrath of the mods :D )
 
When a movie is totally boring like this one, it's best to watch it at home where you can turn it off and do something else or fast forward.

When characters are not properly developed and the script is poor it's a waste of time. IMAX doesn't fix a boring script. So many things could have been done to make it interesting, but instead it was a complete waste of time. I like some of Nolans movies ie interstellar. But, Odyssey and TENET were audio nightmares with poor scripts. It's amazing he can still work as there is almost zero consistency.
 
I think we know why certain men dislike this movie, it holds a mirror up to their entire existence (
Maybe it holds a mirror up to your entire existence.
 
The new Spiderman movie comes in at 2 hours 20 minutes and that seems too long to me.
A good formula is if the director can't get his message across in less than 2 hours ten minutes, then something is wrong with his edit capability.
Good luck adapting a book like The Odyssey into a two hour movie. To me many parts of this felt rushed and with little breathing room, so it could have been at least half an hour longer, maybe up to an hour more, though that wouldn't fix the other not so good parts.
What do you feel about the LotR trilogy btw? 1200 pages that Peter Jackson crammed into three movies with a total runtime of 11 hours and 26 minutes for the extended version, and it's a lovely 12 hours (including bathroom visits and popcorn refilling).
 
Last edited:
Ooooh, I think I’ve hooked a big one…. :p, we’re gonna need a bigger boat.
I was just reading this book from Jonathan Haidt about morality.

His book tries to explain that moral intuition drive our politics—and dismissing opposing views as mere “ignorance”, "masculinity issues" or “stupidity” is a lazy way to avoid engaging with real moral differences.

Dismissing alternative perspectives as "pathetic" doesn't make you enlightened; it just signals that you're comfortable inside a partisan echo chamber.

Maybe you should try to understand why people value things differently, rather than hiding behind psychoanalysis to protect your own worldview.
 
I enjoyed it. The dynamics are huge.
However, they screwed up the arrow through the axes bit.
 
I was just reading this book from Jonathan Haidt about morality.

His book tries to explain that moral intuition drive our politics—and dismissing opposing views as mere “ignorance”, "masculinity issues" or “stupidity” is a lazy way to avoid engaging with real moral differences.

Dismissing alternative perspectives as "pathetic" doesn't make you enlightened; it just signals that you're comfortable inside a partisan echo chamber.

Maybe you should try to understand why people value things differently, rather than hiding behind psychoanalysis to protect your own worldview.

Yeah I agree, and I believe there are two camps about this, one camp that are misogyny and racist that don't like having women or black people represented in movies or series, but I believe that that camp is quite small (but loud), and the other camp that believe that it sometimes doesn't make historically or anthropologically sense. I belong in the second camp.
One of the worst offenders here that I can remember in recent times is The Rings of Power, where the Harfoots (a group of nomadic hobbits) that very extremely wary of outsiders that stayed close together, yet they where a big mix of all white and black which doesn't make sense much sense, if they are a close group and have been living like this for a long time they should be more or less the same coloured. Also this is set in a land that is based on medieval Europe, so having any black makes little sense to begin with, no matter if it's a fantasy or not.
Becuase every piece of movie, series or any kind of art do have a "universe" with a set of rules that it builds it's entire plot around, and being a fantasy it often have magic and beings that don't exist in the real world etc, but the rules of the real world very often applies, sort of like everyone do breath air, eats food, gravity being a thing, rain being wet etc. And at least to me and many other people the nature of where people are born and how they look depending on the environment they live in is also quite rigid no matter if it's history, fiction or fantasy. This is why I think having a group of secluded hobbits in The Rings of Power being extremely diverse doesn't make any sense, but on the other hand in the same series there is Númenor, a big central city with lots of people, traders etc are coming in from many parts of the world, so here it makes much for sense that the characters are much more spread in their ethnicity, no problem.
And sure, one can let something like the hobbits diverse colours slide if they rest of the story is actually good, but in the case of The Rings of Power it wasn't, like having the main character swimming 100 miles in the ocean, survive a 30 meter fall with barely a bruise, soley beating several bigger men in combat or surviving a volcano blast in the face is just one of many problems. Galadriel have been called girlboss with the thickest of plot armor for a reason, and those characters are barely fun to watch.
Now a badass woman like Ridley in Alien on the other hand, no girlboss, no plot armor, no politics, just a well written character in a very good movie (with a diverse cast as well that probably not many people at all have ever complained about).

And now when it comes to The Odyssey there have been complains about Lupita Nyong'o playing Helen of Troy because she shouldn't be black. And yeah I agree about that, but I also think more or less of the cast shouldn't be in there either. Neither Lupita Nyong'o or Matt Damon looks like they come from the eastern parts of the Mediterranean. And again, I don't care if it's a documentary, fiction of fantasy, if it's set in the Mediterranean please have them at least look like they come from there.
I'd even argue that not having people that come or at least look they come from the region where a movie is being set is more racist that complaining about a black women playing Helen of Troy!

Some people do argue that they need big names such as Matt Damon in the cast list to sell tickets, and yeah unfortunately this seem to be true for some reason I don't fully agree with or even understand, but there are big actors that could sell tickets while also looking Greek to play Odysseus, Oscar Isaac for example, maybe Billy Zane or everyones favourite Pedro Pascal ;)
Though we did have some fitting actors, Zendaya, Jon Bernthal and John Leguizam so it wasn't all bad.

But I gotta ask those of you that are fully fine with having a diverse cast despite it doesn't make historical or anthropological sense, would you be fine with Matt Damon playing Kunta Kinte?
 
IMO not coming close to TENET or Interstellar.
 
The new Spiderman movie comes in at 2 hours 20 minutes and that seems too long to me.
A good formula is if the director can't get his message across in less than 2 hours ten minutes, then something is wrong with his edit capability.
While some stories need longer to be told properly, typically super hero movies aren't one of those.
 
But I gotta ask those of you that are fully fine with having a diverse cast despite it doesn't make historical or anthropological sense, would you be fine with Matt Damon playing Kunta Kinte?
Yeah and for decades nobody ever complained about all the genetic Northern Europeans in biblical movies with very few Semitic actors in key roles. I think in this case much of it is pure racism by critics and wanting big name stars by producers.
His book tries to explain that moral intuition drive our politics
So that explains gerrymandering and hiding pedophiles. I didn't read that book to be fair.
 
The story itself was historically inaccurate; Homer knew much less about the Bronze Age than we do now

Not that it matters, anyone crying historical accuracy decided how they felt long before they figured out how to justify it
 
Back
Top Bottom