Estás usando un navegador desactualizado. Es posible que no muestre este u otros sitios web correctamente. Deberías actualizar o usar un navegador alternativo.
Nolan's The Odyssey - Potentially could be epic or an epic flop.
Yeah i agree. O brother where art thou was really unusual, but I liked it. I think if you’re going to physically set it in an ancient setting though you need to do it straight. It only works with modern dialogue if you’re doing some kind of screwball comedy. Modern setting plus archaic language would ironically be a more interesting way of doing it.
O Brother Where Art Thou was also rather subtle about being based on the Odyssey being promoted very much as it's own stand alone thing. Just checked the DVD packaging and there is nothing on the front cover referencing it. The back cover blurb does reference "[p]utting their own unique modern-day (that used to be such an innocent term) spin on Homer's classic tale of The Odyssey..." and the back cover synopsis only has the clue of Clooney's character having the middle name Ulysses. The more recent Blu ray also makes no reference on the front with mere clues in the back cover synopsis; ".... embark on the adventure of a lifetime.... populated with strange characters including a blind prophet, sexy sirens and a one-eyed bible salesman .... it's an odyssey filled with....". It makes no pretence of accurately telling Homer's story. When I first watched it I don't think i knew the Odyssey connection until it all clicked into place with the Sirens.
Modern setting plus archaic language - the Baz Luhrman Romeo and Juliet approach. Not my thing but completely inoffensive and it certainly seemed to be well liked and popular at the time. If it caused even one percent of those who watched it to take a further look into Shakespeare so much the better.
O Brother Where Art Thou was also rather subtle about being based on the Odyssey being promoted very much as it's own stand alone thing. Just checked the DVD packaging and there is nothing on the front cover referencing it. The back cover blurb does reference "[p]utting their own unique modern-day (that used to be such an innocent term) spin on Homer's classic tale of The Odyssey..." and the back cover synopsis only has the clue of Clooney's character having the middle name Ulysses. The more recent Blu ray also makes no reference on the front with mere clues in the back cover synopsis; ".... embark on the adventure of a lifetime.... populated with strange characters including a blind prophet, sexy sirens and a one-eyed bible salesman .... it's an odyssey filled with....". It makes no pretence of accurately telling Homer's story. When I first watched it I don't think i knew the Odyssey connection until it all clicked into place with the Sirens.
Yes. It was so much better not knowing what it was based on. I think the Sirens may have been when it clicked for me as well, though the blind prophet guy near the beginning is a strong nod.
If we're talking about non-ancient adaptations, though, it doesn't get much more non-ancient than the classic cartoon Ulysses 31.
And for anyone reading this who saw it, congratulations, you have another week of "Ulyssseeeessseeesssss! " stuck in your head.
EDIT: How is an adaptation set in the 31st Century in which Odysseus is supported by a small robot and flies a spaceship into Hades, more accurate to Homer's work than Christopher Nolan's?
It being a good movie is probably worse long-term than if it was complete trash.
The movie being good means Helen Of Troy will be permanently BLACKED in all media for the next 100 years. When they make a Netflix miniseries based on the works of Homer in a decade Helen of Troy will be black.
When characters are blacked a lot of time they never go back, see Perry White (supermans boss when he's clark kent) in Man of Steel and then James Gunn Superman - once blacked they are black forever now.
This even happens with historical figures, Cleopatra has been permanently BLACKED. Considering Cleopatra was half-Egyptian/half-Greek you could say Greeks specifically are being BLACKED out of media, Greeks are basically history's gingers.
The silver lining of Nolans The Odyssey potentially being a well made movie is I will be able to use Chinese AI to replace the blacks with high-tier whites (I will deepfake 1954 Grace Kelly into the role of Helen of Troy) and also maybe Hollywood will make more sword/sandal and sword/sorcery movies and hopefully one of them will be good.
It being a good movie is probably worse long-term than if it was complete trash.
The movie being good means Helen Of Troy will be permanently BLACKED in all media for the next 100 years. When they make a Netflix miniseries based on the works of Homer in a decade Helen of Troy will be black.
When characters are blacked a lot of time they never go back, see Perry White (supermans boss when he's clark kent) in Man of Steel and then James Gunn Superman - once blacked they are black forever now.
This even happens with historical figures, Cleopatra has been permanently BLACKED. Considering Cleopatra was half-Egyptian/half-Greek you could say Greeks specifically are being BLACKED out of media, Greeks are basically history's gingers.
The silver lining of Nolans The Odyssey potentially being a well made movie is I will be able to use Chinese AI to replace the blacks with high-tier whites (I will deepfake 1954 Grace Kelly into the role of Helen of Troy) and also maybe Hollywood will make more sword/sandal and sword/sorcery movies and hopefully one of them will be good.
That is what I have been saying, this movie was never about making a profit or making anything good. It was about rewriting the foundational myth of western literature and erasing the Greek people from history. That is why it doesn't matter if it loses money, it's just was never to make money it was to wage war against white people.
It begins with the same lines (oh muse, sing in me!… etc) on the titles so it was there from the beginning.
It’s a pretty loose interpretation though, and there’s a lot of other stuff in it (devil at the crossroads and all that) but I like it as a film. The soundtrack especially, is gorgeously done. The chain gang singing at the start is a real recording of a real chain gang. They actually found the last surviving guy from it and paid him some royalties I think.
It’s a shame nobody is making really good adaptations.
Part of Aphrodite is disorder, love is chaotic if I am going to wax poetic. Eros was literally one of the first things spawned out of chaos in Greek myth. Aphrodite various a ton because depending on the source she basically is a desire made manifest and that desire undoes order, literally chaos once held by Uranus now free, or something else.
Dude, there are more than a 100 old movies out there and most are more true to the source material. Please don't treat the 1950s and 1960s as the silent film era.
They are bringing out a shitload of "critics" to shill the movie, and it's very telling how they keep gushing about how good the movie is while at the same time saying ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING. Really, some of the most boilerplate weasel words out there. "Nolan's masterpiece!" "Huge setpieces!" "Truly amazing movie making!" "A incredible spectacle that I got to watch twice and it was even better the second time!"
No actual explanations of why. No one is talking about specific scenes that moved them or performances that stood out. No comment on the dialog or the chemistry of the characters. Its just empty statements without any information.
Given the gnashing of teeth and how the people who would be the most likely to watch, recommend and spread positive word of mouth have all be told to fuck off because this is not THEIR Odyssey I expect a huge flop. At best it will barely make up the production budget (while losing the entire marketing one) but even that is looking unlikely.
I had to check wikipedia because I was so sure the explanation is that this shit was greenlit in like 2020 or 2021 but no, Nolan started work on this shit in early 2024. By then woke was dying and the DEI fatigue was rising fast. I was so sure this would be a situation like Concord or the new God of War where they greenlit this shit back when it was popular and it aged before it was even finished.
When characters are blacked a lot of time they never go back, see Perry White (supermans boss when he's clark kent) in Man of Steel and then James Gunn Superman - once blacked they are black forever now.
I remember when Jodie Whitaker was announced as the 13th Doctor, there was a comment on reddit that the Doctor never had to be white or male again, ever.
But why? What did it matter so much if he were? I mean, he'll probably be that way as the next Doctor (if there is one), because that's the last time the Doctor was ever particularly interesting (suck it fangirls who needed a twink to jill off to. I loved Peter Capaldi as the Doctor. I loved him as the Malcom Tucker Doctor, and nobody should be pretending that Malcolm Tucker wasn't the Vulgar Doctor).
We have decided as a population that boundaries are absolutely optional. Sex is no longer sex, but rather you can be whatever you want because gender is flexible. Relationships? Psah. You can have it open if you like. Literature? Race swaps galore!
Race-swaps within the bounds of history are just the end result. That Cleopatra nonsense where the director acted huffy because it was apparently everyone else's problem that Cleopatra was black, because history is somehow negotiable, and if you don't like people changing history, well, you're the one with the problem.
So here we have an intersecting case of history and literature. While art is certainly negotiable, I think 30 years ago nobody would have caused that big a stink. There might have been some raised eyebrows, but the controversy would have come and gone. Right now, though? Of course audiences and not-paid-for critics are cynical. Because Hollywood is pretending that there isn't an agenda, we know there's an agenda, we say to their face that there's an agenda, and they act like we're the problem for pointing it out, even though it's absolutely true.
If there's one thing I hate about living in this day and age, it's the great kabuki dance of laying the blame on the guy who's pointing out the problem, not the guy causing it.
If Nolan had stuck to some sort of artistic integrity and changed the setting rather than trying to have it both ways (modern palette swaps with the original setting), the movie would be allowed to be like every other movie he's ever made: just a movie. But now, the movie isn't the movie. The conversation surrounding the movie is the movie.
And that's the boundary problem. The movie can't just be the movie. It must also be the meta. The conversation. The making people think too hard about the artistic choices made rather than allowing them to just buy a ticket and some popcorn and sit with it for what, 3 hours? How fucking presumptuous that you make me endure this fucking conversation for a whole fucking 3 hours more on top of everything else I am exhausted of hearing about, because I can't get away from it.
Apparently the trailer has been ratio'd as hard as the Snow White trailer.
Best to reinforce those bomb shelters, folks. Oppenheimer ain't got shit on this one.
No actual explanations of why. No one is talking about specific scenes that moved them or performances that stood out. No comment on the dialog or the chemistry of the characters. Its just empty statements without any information.
I'm sure that it's due to the movie being somehow visually appealing, meaning it has good CGI. But then, remember they called the final battle against Thanos amazing because it featured all their heroes, even if the entrance of them felt so long and made with the absolute purpose of making people cheer and clap at each introduction.
But why? What did it matter so much if he were? I mean, he'll probably be that way as the next Doctor (if there is one), because that's the last time the Doctor was ever particularly interesting (suck it fangirls who needed a twink to jill off to. I loved Peter Capaldi as the Doctor. I loved him as the Malcom Tucker Doctor, and nobody should be pretending that Malcolm Tucker wasn't the Vulgar Doctor).
The doctor being black makes much more sense considering that he can regenerate. There is some flexibility about the character, even his personality. I wouldn't do it myself if I was in charge, but I can understand that it can happen. The problem is that the black dude and the woman who played the doctor, were not playing the doctor at all. The doctor was meant to be an eccentric, not a fag.
I think the only reason this movie is being done is to rewrite one of the great myths of western civilization, the same as they are doing with the history of Jonestown.
They are trying to undermine our Civilization, that is why they don't care if this movie makes money.
Remember: They literally believe that white people are not indigenous to europe. They literally think that all the good things western civilisation produced where actually the products of the hekkin oppressed and silenced browns, (naturally all the "bad" things where 100% whiteys fault) who where writen out of history and had their inventions stolen by whitey. They literally see you as an invasive species, a stain on the planet that must be exterminated. All the we wuz greeks and we wuz romanz is not just brown delusions, but the prelude to the genocide they want to inflict on you.
I really don't think it will be. Based of what reviewers ("the last act rewards the journey" sounds like a euphemism for boring) and the trailers have show, my guess is that most of Odysseus's story will be told in flashbacks while on the island and he often asks himself if he made the right decision at those points. So, we'll probably get iconic scenes like Scylla & Charybdis or Polyphemus, but it'll be formatted as a series of trailers stitched together instead of a proper narrative of events, so it won't feel like an adventure. Meanwhile, the B story is Penelope & Antinous trying to out-intrigue each other but stretched out to about an hour at least. Then he'll be allowed to return home for the final battle with the suitors as that will constitute the exciting payoff for act 3 purposes.
Also remember that this movie will mostly be black and grey for a lot of it because even rainbows aren't allowed to be in it. And scuffed audio for regular patrons.
Based of what reviewers ("the last act rewards the journey" sounds like a euphemism for boring) and the trailers have show, my guess is that most of Odysseus's story will be told in flashbacks while on the island and he often asks himself if he made the right decision at those points.
Oh yes, because everyone loves 'bad man made all the horrible decisions' as a trope that takes away from the mythological fuckers that stood in his way so they can girlboss Anne Hathaway but also simultaneously make her a victim of all the men around her. All we want is old Clash of the Titans, is that so hard?
" stuck in your head.
