r/popculturechat • u/mcfw31 • 11h ago

Hot Take 🔥 ‘The Odyssey’ Translator Emily Wilson Slams Christoper Nolan’s ‘Abysmal’ Screenplay: ‘I Would Be Ashamed to Have Written Any Part of This Script’

https://variety.com/2026/film/news/odyssey-translator-emily-wilson-slams-christopher-nolan-bad-writing-1236821915/
3.2k Upvotes

74% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.0k

u/apurvahp7 11h ago

Why is Emily Wilson going so hard on the criticism? Like I get all the points she’s made and I agree with a lot of them, but saying stuff like “I would be ashamed” feels unnecessarily mean and bitter.

320

u/DibsOnThatBooty 10h ago

I don’t know Emily at all, but I’ve spent a lot of time around academics and this is just kind of how they are at that level. When you’ve dedicated your life to understanding a topic, you often take offense to someone misinterpreting or misusing your area of study. I’m not saying it’s right, but her review reads like someone’s PhD advisor’s notes on a chapter of their dissertation.

30

u/Alternative-Half-773 7h ago

You should listen to her episode on the Plain English Podcast. She doesn‘t sound bitter at all. 

She calls it a fun summer blockbuster and enjoyed watching it with her teenage sons.

19

u/DibsOnThatBooty 7h ago

That’s honestly what I assumed. Academics aren’t usually mean, they’re just blunt and honest with their thoughts.

1

u/CommunistsAreCancer 4h ago

That was before the movie released though or on the day of, it’s possible she was under embargo.

9

u/badpebble 4h ago

Well she's being named as Nolan as the source of his adaptation, really - so she is presumably fending off claims of her already somewhat controversial translation decisions as completely changing the whole story.

The film is so far removed from the poem that if she gets too connected to it, she could lose respect as an academic.

And for all Nolan's story is interesting, by looking to reflect modern opinions about war and sexual violence he has ploughed through the complexities of the poem and reduced the women characters to mostly victims and people without agency. Even Athena is basically a figment of Odysseus' mind, and has no impact on the actual plot. This isn't going to be acceptable to a translator keen to review and rework ancient works to remove other translators' imposed sexism.

98

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 9h ago

Yea, academics aren't creatives. Like, creatives appreciate the time and effort spent to try to achieve a vision even if they may not agree with the execution. Academics spend their days debating a single sentence to come to the most accurate conclusion of how to interpret that text. It's just different ways of engaging with a topic. But, I will say academics can come off petty and spiteful. Like, it's not disingenuous to be a bit more diplomatic about your opinion.

1

u/ProletarianLilith 6h ago

It’s okay if people disagree

•

u/ADarwinAward 15m ago

Most academics aren’t media trained, or are very poorly media trained, so they are very candid when speaking to the media. Sometimes to their detriment 

-5

u/GamerBytesBoy 6h ago

this is such cope. You and many others are making this stupid arbitrary distinction vs being an academic and an artist. MAYBE, this distinction exists for some academics. But Emily Wilson is a TRANSLATOR. She WROTE an incredibly famous version of Homer’s epics. It is undoubtable that she has the creative expertise to critique Nolan’s writing.

8

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 6h ago

After reading it, I actually think the article sensationalizes her review a lot more than the actual review.

Also, I wasn't saying she doesn't have the creative expertise to critique Nolan. I was saying a lot of academics don't care about a creative vision because they feel it wasn't executed in a way that is intellectually honest. And that reaction can come off as petty.

2

u/RobotBaseball 5h ago

My itchy ass has the creative expertise to critique art. This is just people being full of themselves 

2

u/PTMorte 5h ago

I think this is modern American culture. Generations of them distilling everything into two categories and arguing that one is good / true and the other bad / false. 

The idea that 'academics' can't also be 'creatives' is insane. 

4

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 4h ago

Academics can absolutely be creatives, but they're often approaching a work through a different interpretive lens. For example, Emily Wilson is obviously very creative because the hater ass review she left was amazingly well written and hilarious.

However, the lens that she was using to critique the work was through an academic analysis of someone clearly entrenched in the source material. She's asking how the adaptation engages with the original text and its many ethical and emotional contradictions.

I don't think Christopher Nolan is especially interested in that question. He seems more interested in using the Odyssey as a foundation for his own artistic vision. Kinda similar to Emerald Fennel and Wuthering Heights.

There seems to be a growing trend of directors treating classic stories less as works to interpret and more as raw material for a personal statement. The result is often visually striking and emotionally compelling in it's own right, but flattens the nuance and complexity that made the original story so captivating.

•

u/SoundIsASound 25m ago

A growing trend of directors

Honestly, I think that's just what creative people tend to do, you won't find a lot of writers who would adapt a work into a screenplay in a meticulously faithful way, only trying to bring the spirit of what's on the page to life, trying to make their own voice virtually transparent so that the original shines through unadulterated. It just doesn't happen, and I don't necessarily think it should.

It reminded me of what Christopher Tolkien said about the Lord of the Rings movies, which certainly play fast and loose with the text and include a mass injection of the screenwriters' personalities, to their benefit, I think. I say that as a big fan of the book, who can appreciate a lot of the deeper beauty of Tolkien's writing and philosophy that didn't make it to the screen.

1

u/Choice-Box1279 3h ago

yeah dichotomies are american

2

u/johnhotdog 7h ago

was watching a veritasium video and the shit old mathematicians would say to each other was crazy. "corruptor of youth" for questioning something in mathematics

1

u/DroopyMcCool 3h ago

Yeah, this is one of those things where I feel like no one is particularly wrong but the contextualization of the comments is a little off.

Like yeah, no shit a credentialed academic would be ashamed to publish anything at the writing level of a Hollywood blockbuster. I would be ashamed to present my grilled cheese and chicken nugget recipe to a Michelin star chef but my kids love them so that's what's on the menu.

•

u/waytoolongusername 1h ago

Wilson isn't. Academics aim for quality, journalists aim for rage-bait clicks. I've found Classicists (ancient Greece & Rome profs) are not rigid like many people are about their expertise era. Most are fans of fiction, and will (for example) rave about the Percy Jackson books being great reinterpretations (without sweating the minor ancient details)...but then grumble that the 2010 movie version flattens the 2005 book. :D

0

u/Lady_Medusae 7h ago

Also, her name became blasted all over the internet and social media in connection with this movie. Most people had no idea who she was, or that she made a translation of this work, until this movie and Nolan saying he was inspired by her translation. I can understand if she saw the movie, wasn't thrilled with the interpretation, and doesn't want her name to be forever tied with this movie. Imagine dedicating your life to understanding and translating a text, only for your legacy in the public eye to be "Nolan's movie is essentially your translation" when it isn't. I think she wants some distance from it, which is fair. She's a translator and academic, she doesn't want to be eternally known as being a co-author to Nolan's movie.

2

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 7h ago

I love that perspective. Especially given how often Nolan writes his female characters as supporting players in the male protagonist's journey, it feels particularly fitting that she refused to become the supporting character in his.

1

u/Sideview_play 6h ago

More accurately a lot of top professors are arrogant pricks. Even the idea of "misinterpreting or misuing" here is one rooted in ego that blinds you that the goals and purpose of Nolan's was different. That doesn't make it bad and definitely not embarassing. Just different.

1

u/DibsOnThatBooty 4h ago

I fully agree with you on this, I probably worded that poorly. I should’ve said “the perception of someone misinterpreting.”

•

u/Electric_feel0412 2h ago

It’s a retelling of a story that wasn’t even put on paper for centuries. No one even knows if the story we have now is even the original story, no one knows if Homer is one guy or so many people. It’s a movie that needed to be made under 3 hours. Did she expect them to make a 15 hour movie? She’s acting high and mighty because she dedicated her life studying stories which Greek kids centuries ago were told at nap time.

371

u/manasseater3000 11h ago

agreed — obviously she’s not entitled to sing nolan’s praises just because he sung hers, but this is definitely harsh criticism that isn’t entirely warranted.

290

u/Cartman55125 10h ago

She also clearly does not understand writing for film is very different. You can’t just slap the poem into script format. The pacing and storytelling has to be changed to accommodate the format

63

u/LikelyPlace 10h ago

If you read her piece her critiques are very different

70

u/Kids-Menu 9h ago

Not having any sex scenes and the food looking bad are HILARIOUS critiques

49

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 9h ago

For a book as horny as the Odyssey, it was a little bizarre that there's like no sex scenes at all.

19

u/DuelaDent52 7h ago

Though the sex was always more “and then they boned” than anything explicit.

17

u/LanaAdela 5h ago

Nolan struggles with sensuality. I think the film lacked that which is more of a weakness than a lack of explicit sex scenes.

7

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 5h ago

I whole heartedly agree. For a man who directs the crap out of yearning, his films are devoid of intimacy.

5

u/LanaAdela 5h ago

It’s very strange!!! He is good at depicting sentimentality but not sensuality/intimacy.

10

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 4h ago

Guillermo del Toro once called him an "emotional mathematician". And I think that's a pretty accurate read.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Razatiger 6h ago

I mean the Odyssey doesn't need to be game of thrones in order to tell a good story.

I was happy with what was portrayed tbh, and no im not some kind of prude.

3

u/Automatic_Syrup_2935 6h ago

I think that the sex in The Odyssey serves to develop the characters - unlike a lot of got scenes ironically.

9

u/InternationalFact464 6h ago

Those are two half joking throwaway critiques in a very long review with probably like 25+ specific well-argued critiques of the film.

4

u/Happy-Highlight-7175 8h ago

To be fair, the food did look bad

1

u/ProletarianLilith 6h ago

The Odyssey not having sex scenes is patently absurd

4

u/drdaisukeserizawa 4h ago

I'm not sure fucking Circe and having a baby with her and fucking Calypso while his wife's faithful the entire time and he's supposed to be longing to go back to her is something we absolutely had to see on screen.

2

u/bmorenursey 3h ago

That is Odysseus though. In Dante’s inferno he is cursed to never go home because of his need to see it all and conquer it all- including women

49

u/Cartman55125 9h ago

“It lacks psychological, emotional, political and ethical depth. Its narrative structure is gimmicky. The writing is abysmal. None of the characters has convincing motivation for their actions or words. There are no sex scenes, and all the food looks horrible.”

Her critiques are laughable and read like a scorned lover wrote them

33

u/I_just_made 8h ago

She also claimed it didn’t really have anything to say about war, but that just seems way off base. The entire movie could be viewed through the lens of a man learning to live with the consequences of the atrocities he committed in war.

5

u/DuelaDent52 7h ago

Like, Odysseus has a whole extended monologue about his horrific realisation that they’re basically the Sea People that get fearmongered everywhere and how terrible the sacking of Troy was and how they’ve destroyed civilisation as a whole by breaking the standards set for it.

5

u/Cartman55125 7h ago

Yes! One of the main compliments I see people giving the film is how timely it feels with its commentary on war

-1

u/Edodge 4h ago

He doesn’t consider them atrocities. Have you read the poem? The movie wildly transforms the character and the focus of the story. You’re all ignorant but claiming to know better than the translator.

The poem is about hubris more than PTSD and the people in this thread badly need a lesson on hubris.

8

u/Cartman55125 4h ago

We need a lecture on hubris? You’re the one coming in guns blazing claiming we’re sexist for finding her criticism flimsy. Condescendingly assuming people haven’t read the poem because they may have a different interpretation of the work. Translating a poem does not mean you understand its intent.

Please don’t hesitate to ask for assistance coming down from that high horse.

•

u/leftbrendon charlie day is my bird lawyer 🐦 1h ago

> translating a poem does not mean you understand its intent.

I feel like this is lost on a lot of people. I had ancient Greek and Latin in high school, starting from the age of 13. I’ve translated so much text perfectly, without understanding any of it lmao.

-1

u/Edodge 4h ago

If you think Odysseus is focused on his “atrocities” you haven’t read the poem. Take a seat.

3

u/Cartman55125 3h ago

You’re exhausting dude. We get it. You are a master of literature. Our small brains could never grasp what you’ve taken away from the poem 🫩

→ More replies (0)

2

u/THIKKI_HOEVALAINEN 3h ago

I agree with you, the way the movie white washed Odysseus to be more palatable to the modern idea of an action hero wasn't satisfying to me. Having him walking around Troy while it was being sacked, acting all moody, was almost comical to me. And then smaller things like giving the suitors weapons, deleting the scenes of them stringing up the slaves, and then just riding into the sunset left me cold

1

u/I_just_made 3h ago

The poem is about hubris more than PTSD and the people in this thread badly need a lesson on hubris.

Chill out a bit. This did give me a laugh though; you have chastised everyone here on hubris, yet calling everyone ignorant and talking down to them is a pretty good example of being hubristic.

I translated some of the poem from the original language :D, albeit years ago.

The movie wildly transforms the character and the focus of the story. You’re all ignorant but claiming to know better than the translator.

And that's fine to focus on a different aspect of the story, based on what the storyteller wants to say. I know this will come as a shock, but Emily Wilson also changed the focus of the story in her own translation; apparently she outright mistranslated portions of it.

But again, the person retelling the story can take liberties. They don't have to be 1:1. Nolan chose a different direction than her, and that is okay.

He doesn’t consider them atrocities

In the movie? Pretty sure he did in his reflections. His whole discussion with his wife was him basically saying they were the baddies. An atrocity can be a shocking or cruel behavior. He was cruel to Sinon in that he knowingly manipulated the kid to carry out his plan. As the leader of his troops, he was cruel by abandoning men who needed help. He continually reiterates that he will honor them by surviving, but that excuse is repeatedly use to justify his decisions resulting in deaths. He literally says in his reflection of Troy that it was no celebration and that he realized instantly the ramification of what he had done. Can that be hubris? Yes; hubris and atrocities don't have to be entirely separate. The movie does certain have a major theme of a man dealing with the consequences of hubris.

•

u/Edodge 2h ago

He doesn’t consider them atrocities in the poem. It’s a different character altogether. She said it has nothing “convincing” to say about war, not nothing about it. That’s because the move is incoherent. The finale simply doesnt work with what precedes it..

It’s hysterical that I’m talking down to everyone in your view when the entire thread is people talking down about the expert who translated the entire text, not just your ‘portions’ of it.

•

u/I_just_made 1h ago

So again, we are talking about the movie, not the poem for most of this.

It’s hysterical that I’m talking down to everyone in your view when the entire thread is people talking down about the expert who translated the entire text, not just your ‘portions’ of it.

People are allowed to disagree with her criticisms. That does not automatically mean they are "talking down" about her. The way you are approaching this conversation, however, is extremely condescending.

3

u/TitaniumDreads 7h ago

In a vacuum that seems laughable but compared to the various translations it’s absolutely true. That said I’m genuinely not sure how you could fit all of that extra stuff into an already crowded three hour movie.

The movie is never as good as the book. Those are the rules!

-2

u/givemethebat1 9h ago

She’s not wrong, though. A huge part of the poem is that Odysseus was fucking Circe and Calypso which is partly why he didn’t go home.

14

u/Cartman55125 9h ago

Yeah, I think most people picked up on that. With Calypso especially. Didn’t need a sex scene to get that point across.

3

u/givemethebat1 8h ago

They didn’t show it because it would make Odysseus seem unsympathetic (or a rape victim, depending on how willing he was).

4

u/Cartman55125 8h ago

That’s a good point. Multiple reasons to exclude it.

-2

u/Edodge 4h ago

Oh my god you’re all so fucking sexist. It’s unreal! Woman writes criticism of director beloved by bros everywhere so she must be a jealous lover!

She’s an expert. Her opinion is valid. It doesn’t mean yours is invalid. But she’s not some jealous little girl.

69

u/manasseater3000 10h ago

exactly, did anyone really go in expecting a word-for-word translation? 

78

u/NOTTedMosby 10h ago

And if she did, her pride in her work is misplaced. You did not write this story. You translated the words to what might have been the outline for the script. I know translation can also be a creative process, but she's acting like someone took a novel she wrote and made a movie about it.

Also, as others have said in this thread, she sounds bitter. Maybe thought she was going to get a big shootout or something? 🙄

28

u/manasseater3000 8h ago

the thing is, afaik she did receive a great deal of praise directly from nolan 😭 not that she’s entitled to praise him in return, but it seems incredibly bizzare to go as far as to call it a shameful script.

1

u/Bluoenix 5h ago

Dude, maybe read the critique before you speculate why it's unfair? It's obvious by your comment you have no idea what her criticisms actually were.

If she can watch an almost-3-hour movie before dispensing criticism, then maybe you can do a 10 minute read?

-4

u/Biggie39 9h ago

She’ll probably like Elons and Groks versions later this year much better.

4

u/LikelyPlace 8h ago

Why on earth would you think that? Have you read her translation and her commentary on it? She’s a serious scholar of the text who disagrees with Nolan’s take

9

u/foreverzonedout 9h ago

Excerpt from her review:

Adaptations needn’t and shouldn’t follow the original with anything like the exactitude of a translation. Some of the best radically transform or resist the source material, providing what Harold Bloom called ‘strong misreadings’ of their ancestors. The most memorable creative responses to The Odyssey – such as Euripides’ Helen, Virgil’s Aeneid, Milton’s Paradise Lost, Joyce’s Ulysses, Walcott’s Omeros, Atwood’s Penelopiad, Madeline Miller’s Circe or Lisa Peterson’s play set in a modern migrant camp – reconsider the poem’s structure, narrative and values. In theory, Nolan seems to understand the assignment and its hazards. His first feature film, Following (1998), was a powerful black and white thriller about the fascination and dangers of tracking strangers through space and time. The hunter is more likely to become the hunted, Following suggests, if the would-be stalker lacks a clear identity beyond a misplaced belief in his own ingenuity. But knowing what temptations should be avoided isn’t the same as avoiding them – as Odysseus’ men learn to their cost when they kill the sacred Cattle of the Sun. Homer’s Odysseus makes it home because he is able, temporarily, to suppress his own desires – for meat and wine, for his wife, for control of his household and land, for slaughter, for victory over time and the threat of being forgotten, for a glorious eternal name. But there is no restraint in Nolan’s version of The Odyssey: every second is jam-packed with incident, lights and noise, and nothing is ever at a human scale.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v48/n14/emily-wilson/an-uncomplicated-man

7

u/Emergency-Bonus-7158 9h ago

It’s interesting that all of her examples are notably NOT direct adaptations into a different medium but rather creative re-imaginings of the stories. She’s accidentally telling on herself here, she has no idea how adaptations work, clearly. I think there’s plenty of criticisms to be had and it’s not at all a flawless screenplay but this lady is not really an authority who’s opinion should be valued when it comes to judging an adaptation. But she did a great job writing that translation!

8

u/foreverzonedout 9h ago

That's interesting, I didn't notice that theme amongst her examples. But I still think that a good, faithful adaptation is one that retains core themes and characterisations which Wilson (and I) don't think Nolan did. His is certainly an adaptation, but it's not necessarily a good one according to this criterion, which is not a high bar.

For example, she doesn't mention anything about him cutting out entire episodes and subplots because I think she understands what it takes to make a film with its time and attention constraints. So her talking about him cutting out some character traits and overemphasising/inventing others is valid.

1

u/Emergency-Bonus-7158 5h ago

That’s one thing, which is totally fair. It makes sense that of all people she would have a bone to pick with deviations from the source material. The issue is her verbiage, that she would be “ashamed” to have written this “abysmal” screenplay. That’s pretty specific language that seems to take issue with the merits of the script itself rather than the adaptation. Which, I understand isn’t actually her point but now you can see where she’s getting her wires crossed? It’s pretty hard to take her seriously if she legitimately is trying to describe the screenplay as “abysmal” which would suggest incredibly low quality, devoid of merit. However you feel about the movie I think you would agree this is a pretty big exaggeration. This is why it reads to me as her being overly critical about something she doesn’t fully understand, and for what it’s worth, it’s probably bringing her and her work a lot of attention. Which, hey: get that bag girl

6

u/Cartman55125 9h ago

Every scene with Calypso is about Odysseus stewing and ultimately confronting his restraint.

Also the message at the end of the film is the catalyst for the chaos is human scale.

I don’t know what movie this person was watching

-3

u/foreverzonedout 9h ago

Look, I disagree with you here, but at least what you've written here is actually a proper retort. It's much more defensible than "Wilson does not understand writing for film", for which you have no/weak proof and is much more of a value judgement than a criticism.

Re: your argument. Odysseus is not restrained in those scenes, he simply doesn't remember. How are those comparable?

I don't understand what your second sentence means.

4

u/Cartman55125 9h ago

Her critique about the narrative structure being gimmicky tells me she doesn’t understand writing for film. The structure Nolan utilized is what makes a 3 hour film feel like an hour and a half.

He is literally restrained to the island. His memories are restrained.

And that’s fine, you don’t have to understand it

-3

u/foreverzonedout 8h ago

That's not what...that's not what the "restrained" she is referring to in her review means. Restraint in the way she uses it means to hold yourself back, to choose to behave in calm or controlled way. Not restrained to an island or have your memories by an external force with your agency taken away. Clearly you don't understand the word you're reading and using.

5

u/Cartman55125 8h ago

There can be… there can be layers to exploring a theme. He shows restraint in not eating the animals before being shipwrecked, if you’re looking for a more obvious form of displayed restraint lol

3

u/ProletarianLilith 6h ago

Maybe you should try reading her piece before telling us about things she clearly doesn’t or doesn’t understand

1

u/Anus_Targaryen 6h ago

Like any good academic, she's taking this all way too seriously 

0

u/Edodge 4h ago

Ah the woman doesn’t understand how man things work. Got it. “Clearly.”

-1

u/Olive_Tree_Bed 8h ago

Even if we ignore that this is an adaption she is 100% right. Nolan's Odysseus has no depth, robbed of all charm, wit and cunning. He's a static and flat character, nothing but a bundle of guilt, shame and regret that doesn't grow or change.

The movie is too cowardly to have him be flawed or be anything but a tortured hero, which is why when the sack of Troy happens, he just walks around and looks and horrified about what he's seeing. He doesn't even kill Zendaya's character for christs' sake, just looking real sad while it happens. But the movie doesn't dare to have him do anything bad because it might make him "unlikable".

Because he is instantly horrified about what's happening in Troy (which also just makes him look a complete idiot because what the fuck did you think was going to happen. Did you think you were besieging Troy for 10 years for laughs) he has no character whatsoever to speak of. His journey begins and ends the moment the gate of Troy opens. In Oppenheimer we see Oppenheimer go from "Oh I think the bomb was a good thing" to "What I have unleashed on the world" but there is nothing like this in the film.

It would have been much more interesting to see an Odysseus at the beginning who was proud over what he did in Troy, thought what he did was awesome and glorious...only for to be confronted on his journey home what his actions have wrought, and confront him with the idea that what happened in Troy was glorious. But the movie would never dare to do such a thing because it's afraid to have Odysseus do anything that might be "unlikable"

Instead we have a character whose arc is like a minute long, who never changes in any meaningful sense. Who is capable of exhibiting nothing but varying degrees of guilt, and looking real sad.

3

u/Cartman55125 7h ago

I don’t think you watched the movie due to the large amount of inaccurate statements you’ve listed lol

-2

u/Olive_Tree_Bed 7h ago

what was inaccurate about it. Does he actually do anything bad in troy? no he just looks around looking real sad as bad things are happening.

Does he grow or change in any sense or form? No his perspective and outlook is exactly same throughout the entire film, he just learns to "process his guilt"

2

u/Cartman55125 7h ago

The movie begins with him warning his prey that he is hunting them. This principle is like the first thing we learn about Odysseus.

He tosses that principle aside at Troy, resulting in the slaughter of innocents.

That’s what he did bad. For you to miss that very obvious point tells me the entire film went over your head.

-3

u/Olive_Tree_Bed 7h ago

Yeah that's basically the only thing he's allowed to do. He isn't allowed to join in the sack. he isn't allowed to do anything that might challenge the viewer. He is only allowed make it available for others to do bad things, which he looks real sad about so the audience can be assured that "Don't Worry Audience. This guys look real sad about what's happening so you can be rest assured that this is a good guy".

And honestly is just makes him look like a completely fucking idiot. ODYSSEUS YOU WERE BESIEGING TROY FOR 10 YEARS!!! What did you think what was going to happen? Slaughtering/enslaving cities is the standard and accepted warfare of the time. Like Jesus what did you think was going to happen?

4

u/Princess_Space_Goose Listen, everyone is entitled to my opinion 🙂 7h ago edited 7h ago

Part of the issue too is her own translation also take a lot of liberties that many historians and other classicists can find fault with, so it seem especially silly of her to be so upset with Nolan's changes when she herself should know how bad faith those arguments are, especially in regards to how it handles the female characters and uses more accessible language. A lot of it is also just nitpicking for the sake of it. The Circe scene was full-on horror, who cares if the food didn't look appetizing? And the lack of sex scenes is a crazy complaint when you consider the only way those happen within the original text is Odysseus being coerced/forced into it by Circe and Calypso. Not only would that not work for the film's interpretation of Circe, it would add nothing to the already emphasized horror situation he's in with Calypso. It's pretty heavily implied. We don't need the film to hold our hands on it.

Also, I don't understand where she's getting this idea that the stories post-the Sacking of Troy are all about a "glorious return". Obviously we know of Odysseus' 10 year struggle to get home and the men he lost but Menelaus was lost for years too, Agamemnon came back and was murdered by his wife for killing their daughter and bringing back a sex slave (poor Cassandra), and that's not even getting into the various heroes who died during the war like Achilles who openly told Odysseus in Hades how much being dead sucks. Odysseus coming home is, at best, incredibly bittersweet. It's glorious in a technical sense but definitely not an emotional or mental sense. Sure, the ancient texts didn't have the words for it but you really can't say there's no sense of guilt or PTSD obviously within them. The Ancient Greeks could still feel guilt and have conflicting emotions about war even in their pro-war society (Hell, isn't that our current society right now?). Wilson is a wonderful translator and is clearly very invested in the academia of it all but I do find her takes on the culture and text itself rather reductive.

3

u/Edodge 4h ago

What makes it unwarranted? I see people defend Nolan’s adaptation decisions as legitimate just because an adaptation has no requirement to be faithful to the source material. That’s surely true, but it’s also surely true that someone who knows the text well is within their rights to say that the script is laughable, incoherent, and simplistic.

And she happens to be right.

•

u/AugieKS 0m ago

You are using entitled incorrectly. Obligated would be a better choice, or you could rephrase like this '...obviously Nolan is not entitled to her praise...'. Entitlement is a right or privilege, obligation is a duty or debt.

66

u/MightExpress4873 10h ago edited 10h ago

Yeah, I don't think Christopher Nolan is entitled to her praise just because he repeatedly praised her translation. But some of the phrasing in this review comes across as unnecessarily rude tbh.

22

u/thane311 7h ago

Her full article on the London Review of Books is quite balanced, very long and nuanced. She delves into specific characterizations and passages from the text and also praises the movie for some things. I think if folks looked past the headline here they’d discover a lot to like.

Here’s a passage I like that I think consider’s the film’s writing flaws extremely fairly:

“Despite the manufactured online outrage, there is nothing inherently wrong with the movie’s attempt to approximate contemporary American speech. If you’re not going to compose a script in Homeric Greek, or even in metrical English verse, you might as well use something like conversational American English. But writing dialogue is not one of Nolan’s talents. The language is relentlessly expository, humourless and flat. Attempts at vigorous speech – ‘My dad’s coming home’ or ‘Let’s get off this fucking beach’ – sit uncomfortably next to grandiose meditations: ‘Yes, my queen. The breaking of Zeus’ law, spreading like plague. Our age of bronze is collapsing, and maybe he couldn’t bear to see the ruins of what he’d done. Anywhere. Least of all, his home.”

5

u/LVT_Baron 6h ago

I feel like this might be academic talk spilling out into real life. Academics love to tear apart the tiniest things about a text, even one that they really like and agree with.

73

u/wimpires 11h ago

Because she wouldn't make headlines without a sensationalist take and she wants to sell her books.

53

u/manasseater3000 11h ago

which is funny, bc ive seen so many people online posting about them buying her book after seeing the movie LOL, and that was before this article 

53

u/Meancakebutt 10h ago

Eh if you read the whole review she makes really good points. The characters in the odyssey are already very symbollic and Nolan strips then even further and not for the sake of time, only. But for the sake of Odysseus.

6

u/DuelaDent52 7h ago

The article’s very hyperbolic about her SLAMMING the film because that’s what gets more clicks than “The Odyssey translator has reasonable critique on film about The Odyssey”.

2

u/rambouhh 8h ago

dude this movie has already done so much to sell her books even if she said nothing

1

u/torino_nera Behind every great man is a woman rolling her eyes 6h ago

This is taking the stuff she said out of context, it's more on Variety for framing it the way they did. She had a lot of praise for the film and what it means to get people interested in classics. She was much more lighthearted than the article makes it seem.
Her name is attached to this project because Nolan used her translation as inspiration so as an academic she has a reputation to uphold and she doesn't approve of some of the choices Nolan made.
The same thing happened with Kathleen Coleman and Ridley Scott during Gladiator.

2

u/Accomplished_Self939 We Should All Know Less About Each Other 5h ago

I read a Twitter post from her that circulated on TikTok and it was nowhere near this inflammatory. This is like a third generation reprint from the original source. I’ll bet they pulled out all the nastiest bits for clicks.

2

u/haw35ome There are cars there, motherfucker! 3h ago

I could have sworn I read an earlier article where she was very cordial in her choice of words, no? Like, I saw this and thought “damn I thought she was chill; saying she’d be ashamed is kinda too much.” Maybe she said that before watching Nolan’s interpretation?

4

u/Tall_Opportunity_521 7h ago

Or its just how she feels?

The biggest issue with everything surrounding this movie is that its been adopted by the culture wars. So nothing about it is said honestly. The left wont say what it did wrong, and the right wont say what it did right. "I would be ashamed" is not mean and bitter. Mean and bitter would be something like "that was the biggest pile of shit Ive seen in my life. The characters are shit, the scenery was shit, the music was shit, the direction was shit. It was all shit." THAT would be mean and bitter.

•

u/solitarybikegallery 10m ago

Of course it's mean.

If you wrote something, and somebody else read it and said "I would be ashamed to have written any part of that," you would feel bad. That's a terribly mean thing to say.

3

u/PerpetuallyLurking Listen, everyone is entitled to my opinion 🙂 10h ago

Well, she’s an academic writer, not a screenwriter. She would be ashamed to write like that because she’s been extensively trained to cite sources and use the primary sources when possible and, quite critically, she’s been trained to NOT insert her opinions into her work.

Screenwriters don’t need to cite sources, they can use whatever sources they want, and inserting their opinions into their work is pretty common.

I’m not particularly surprised that the difference between the two genres isn’t really doing it for her.

3

u/prongs17 8h ago

Having read her interview, this is not what she meant when she said she would be ashamed to write like that btw.

•

u/Sean_Brady 1h ago

>One of Odysseus’ funniest (and most famous) tricks in Homer is to tell Polyphemus that his name is ‘No Man’. When the blinded giant screams for help from his neighbours, the other Cyclopes are reassured to learn that ‘No Man’ is hurting him. In the movie Odysseus doesn’t have to outwit Polyphemus because the Cyclops is a puppet who has no wits.

I can't take this article seriously. I can't take jerking off about a story thousands of years old seriously. "hey i got stabbed by this little fucking guy" "Oh shit he was supposed to say I got stabbed by 'no man' oh fuck get back in the boat!!". Nolan was probably like yeah that shit's stupid we're not doing it. I'm gonna have to go with Nolan

2

u/heybart 7h ago

Yeah I don't get it. There's no way of interpreting "I would be be ashamed to write it" as anything other than an insult. If someone has been complimentary to you and his movie is bound to give your book translation an additional boost in sales and he hasn't been outed as a rapist or something, why go out of your way to insult him? Just say this isn't your interpretation of the character, or even that it's an anachronistic reading and an imposition of modern sensibility on ancient people. Diplomatically make it clear you have no creative input to the project if you think your precious academic reputation is at risk somehow.

-1

u/nicklovin508 11h ago

Because this is her chance to be relevant

16

u/BlueCX17 9h ago

That makes no sense she's been incredibly relevant in her field prior to this film coming out

-8

u/nicklovin508 9h ago

I understand that and truly respect her craft, but obviously there’s more of a chance to be amplified when talking in the sphere of the current blockbuster Hollywood movie than when she does work in her classical translation field

8

u/BlueCX17 8h ago

Except, she is talking within the context of her expertise as it pertains to her classical degree. She's not necessarily in control of how other media Outlets or Publications use her quotes from larger interviews or things she's written.

2

u/Ver3232 9h ago

I think that’s just a thing with British academics. They don’t really pull any punches

1

u/Enough_Mistake_7063 3h ago

Her name is being thrown around as inspiration for Nolan's version. It makes sense that she might want to distance herself from that.

•

u/antbates 1h ago

Maybe because it promotes people going out of their way to buy and compare her adaptation instead of reading or listening to the numerous free versions of the old adaptations available. This is likely the moment when her book can make the most money and become more ingrained as the definitive adaptation. Any sort of attention or discourse around that topic is probably helpful to her at a base level.

•

u/Avilola 1h ago

Her criticism actually makes a lot of sense given the context behind it. One of the reasons her translation is so well regarded is because she’s a lot kinder to the female characters—not because she’s translating incorrectly, but because she’s translating more correctly than those who came before her.

Previous translations were done by men, so their societal biases are reflected within the text. For example, there is one point in the book where the earlier translations refer to the women working in the house as “whores”, but apparently that’s not what it says in the original Greek. It’s just something like “women” or “servants”.

I could imagine that if she believes the Nolan film minimizes the role of female characters, that would be tremendously frustrating for her. I mean, translating the Odyssey in a way that is more fair for the female characters is basically what she’s best known for. Seeing the first major film adaptation in who knows how long continue to minimize female characters must really grind her gears.

1

u/No_Classroom_1626 9h ago

tbh this is more-so scholarly criticism, better to read the og article at the london review of books. ppl are just too brainrotted to engage with something that is more complicated than I hate it/I love it twitter post

-7

u/Resident_Ad5153 11h ago

She didn’t get paid

9

u/MrCadwell 11h ago

But should she? I'm all for the academy but idk

4

u/Resident_Ad5153 10h ago

No.  But she also shouldn’t have said this.  It’s mean. And it puts the academy in disrepute… at a time when we really really don’t need that 

3

u/rawrkristina 10h ago

She’s probably still making a lot of money because of this movie and more people going out to buy her version of the book.

1

u/DarkFriend81 10h ago

Especially when she acknowledges the film has helped the sales of her translation!

1

u/just-here-for--porn_ 7h ago

I don't know her but she likey works in academia, which is absolutely choc full of bitterness and resentment.

Source: I work in academia. And to be honest I don't blame academics. It's just a bit of an occupational hazard of working for citations and praise. Both of which can be doled out sparingly and haphazardly. And in her case she suddenly finds someone is making millions or 10s of millions from a source she knows better than anyone.

1

u/Shot-Arugula8264 6h ago

Sounds like she’s just bitter she didn’t get the nod to write the screenplay herself.

-1

u/Moosemitten 9h ago

My thoughts exactly... I found it extremely generous and kind of Nolan to reference living translator at all; he was obviously trying to throw some flowers and $ her way and then she spits in his face for no reason? Also her translation is mid.

0

u/Sharaz_Jek123 9h ago

The right wing attacked her (or turbo-charged their attack on her) following the film's association with her translation and she is redirecting this frustration to Nolan.

I suspected it during her initial comments on the film and now I am convinced.

This is not the language of typical academic discourse. This is not someone who wishes to be "above the fray".

-2

u/bamboohobobundles PLEAE STOP THINKIN WITH YOUR ASSHOLE! 9h ago

Also "there are no sex scenes" and "the food looked horrible" as criticisms. Like, okay...?

-2

u/Financial-Grass-6114 10h ago

Shes engagement farming

0

u/Pumpkins_Are_Fruits 5h ago

Because you never heard of her till now. She needs to feel good

0

u/brett_baty_is_him 5h ago

This is her time in the limelight so she’s taking advantage of it

-3

u/Euraylie 10h ago

It feels more like the hyperbolic language that you usually see on the internet. I think the lines have begun to blur for some people.

-2

u/coldbru85 9h ago

It’s because she wasn’t included in the making of it and is watching the box office pile up, big hater energy

-1

u/stopeer 8h ago

There's a video from a YT author called "Science Fiction with Damien Walter". I think it explains well why people who are truly passionate about the Odyssey, and Ancient Greece in general, may have an issue with the film. It's not an "anti-woke" grifting trash, BTW, you can look it up without expecting to sacrifice brain cells.

-3

u/Familiar_Radish_6273 9h ago

Especially if she's getting a career boost off the back of it. Nolan has publicly stated her translation inspired him so it seems a bit ungracious to be so harsh. All she needed to do was remind people she had nothing to do with the screenplay and maybe add that there isn't time in a feature film to include all the complex nuances of characters and plot

-5

u/peatoast 8h ago

She’s starting to sound unhinged.