Harvard Classics and Film Professors Praise Nolan for Reimagining ‘The Odyssey’ At Panel

Harvard classics and film experts broadly praised Christopher Nolan’s adaptation of “The Odyssey” at a panel on Tuesday.

The event featured classics professors David F. Elmer ’98 and Emily J. M. Greenwood, and professor of East Asian Studies Jie Li ’01, who is also an affiliate of Art, Film, and Visual Studies. The panel was hosted by the Mahindra Humanities Center, the Center of Hellenic Studies, and the Department of the Classics.

“The Odyssey” has grossed nearly $1.8 billion worldwide since its release in July, and it drew mixed reactions from scholars for its accuracy. But panelists commended themes in the film that were distinct from the original text, focusing on Odysseus’ guilt following his role in violence during the Trojan War — a topic not mentioned in the epic.

In the film, Odysseus reckons with guilt from raiding cities and violating guidance from the gods. This presentation of Odysseus’ role in the war forces the audience to question his “moral ambiguity,” Elmer said.

This additional theme gives viewers a “sense of complicity” in Odysseus’ guilt, according to Li.

“The recognition is not of someone innocent, but of someone guilty,” Li said. “I thought that was actually quite interesting, because usually we weep for the innocent.”

Nolan’s focus on Odysseus’ trauma when he returns home appealed to American audiences, according to Greenwood, particularly veterans coming home from the Korean War, Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East.

“I think its primary audience, in some respects, is a U.S. audience, and I think that’s a very strong theme: combat trauma, post-traumatic stress,” Greenwood said.

Panelists also praised Nolan’s filmmaking techniques, including his choice to use IMAX cameras and his inventive use of a war bow as percussion.

“The bow itself becomes the instrument that is being played,” Li said.

Nolan’s adaptation initially elicited backlash from viewers and scholars who said Nolan cut too much material from the original epic — including from literary scholar and classicist Emily Wilson, the first woman to translate the epic in 2017. While Nolan said Wilson’s translation influenced his adaptation, Wilson harshly criticized the film in a July review for straying too far from its original source material.

But the panelists on Tuesday argued that adapting the text into a movie was an uphill battle.

“You simply can’t condense the entire poem into even a three-hour film,” Elmer said.

Elmer also questioned Nolan’s portrayal of the gods in the film, particularly his choice to exclude some gods primary to the epic, such as Zeus and Poseidon.

The panelists still largely defended Nolan, arguing an adaptation is meant to be different from the original story, and the film appeals to a more modern audience. Classics professor Naomi A. Weiss, who serves as director of the Center for Hellenic Studies, said the film introduced a new audience to the classics.

“As I exited the movie theater, I heard people around me talking about Argus, Odysseus’ dog,” Weiss said. “People who, thanks to Nolan, were thinking about this Homeric poem for the very first time.”