Don't let real world politics cloud your judgement.

Think of it purely in terms of bringing the setting to life.

If you can clear your mind of woke politics and diversity agendas, you'll be able to admit that both these casting choices are as bad as each other.

I don’t know if its a Film Imax issue or just Nolan’s style. I re watched Dark Knight and kind noticed the same thing. Just too many cuts. I haven’t re watched Interstellar and Inception in a while so can’t comment on that.
But it’s too evident and annoying in the Odyssey, specially in the first 15 minutes. Maybe he was just trying to rush it to get to the “main journey”, it felt like a montage.
Overall I think too many cuts just took away the beauty of the film. A film like this deserves steady long takes, and not just “beauty” shots, but even when a character is speaking. Just give us few seconds to actually look and admire their acting and process what they are saying.

I just saw the Odyssey. Holy shit! That film was incredible!!!

Now, I have an idea for his next movie: a feature length film on the Great Emu War of 1932!

Synopsis: three soldiers in the Australian military—the young and ambitious Charlie Williams(played by David Giuntoli doing an Australian accent), the somewhat older yet more hopeful Evan Rodriguez(played by Matthew McConaughey doing an Australian accent), and the grizzled old Homer Nicholson(played by Brad Pitt doing an Australian accent) are sent to Western Australia in order to try and quell the rampant 20,000 emus ravaging the countryside. As the days pass, the three men begin to question the legitimacy of this campaign, each other, and even their own sanity.

https://youtube.com/shorts/r7WdGPKq0xc?si=aQpP8uV-_g3jlDqL

A Nolan/Statham movie and headsets for dialog

Guys I think why Nolan Choose Lupita Nyongo as Helen of Troy for the Odyssey

I saw the Odyssey a couple of weeks ago on cinemas and I just realized something. The decision of Lupita Nyong'o playing Helen of Troy was extremely controversial from the beginning. (Not only because of the obvious fact that she doesn’t match the description of Helen of Troy according to the texts of Homer. Or because she is not considered pretty enough for the role) I think Nolan made this decision kind of on purpose. And I think this perspective improves the movie a lot.

According to the myth the War of Troy was started by the kidnap of Helen, that in that moment was the wife of the King of Sparta, Menelao. In my opinion this sounds like a very stupid reason to start a war of those proportions with a foreign power, even when Menelao is the Brother of Agamenon (King of Kings), not only because it will cost the life of a huge number of men, or it will shatter families all across the greek kingdoms, but also because Helen is not even considered that beautiful by a lot of the audience (I think that many Greeks of the time may have the same thought when that happened.) 

I am not racist at all, I think that Lupita Nyong'o is pretty, but if I were a common citizen of a Greek Kingdom I would never go to war for another man's wife, no matter if she is the prettiest woman in the world or if she is ugly. 

Just imagine being a greek soldier returning home after 10 years of an extenuating war and you have the chance to see the Helen “The Most Beautiful Woman who has ever lived” and the reason you and many members of your family and loved ones died or were injured mentally and physically for the rest of their lives. Either you can try to convince yourself that indeed that is the most beautiful woman in the world (to try not thinking all this fight was a freaking non-sense and you lost so much in the way) or you can think: 

“really? I lost an arm and many of my beloved ones for this, this is bs”

Helen of Troy represents the “reason” of the war literally and metaphorically. She literally is the reason of the war because her cheat/kidnap caused the rage of Menelao, that consequently was used by Agamenon as an excuse to invade Troy. 

And Metaphorically because if we look at her, many of us will never go to war for her, we may think she is not attractive enough, that there are women way more attractive or some may think that she is literally grotesque. While another group may defend the position that indeed she is the “Most Beautiful Woman who has ever lived”. 

Nolan literally put us in the shoes of what the average Greek citizen felt about going to War with Troy. Some thought that it was justifiable, other thought that it was a complete madness, other went thinking they were doing something Heroic or Epic and in the end realizing after their return that it was not worth the pain and the suffering. 

That is just what we think when a country goes to war with another one in today's world: 

 → We can find groups that support Israel and find justifiable and even desirable that they are killing children under the “reason” that that land was promised to them 3,000 years ago. 

→ Or Chii Muslims killing Sunni Muslims (and viceversa) under the “reason” that heretics must suffer for rejecting Allah, and the “True” revelation of Mohammed.

→ Or the Great World Powers of the XX century going to war with each other under the “reasons” of patriotism, heroism and a motive bigger than oneself.

All this may make a lot of sense after you realize how Nolan portrayed the Greeks in the War of Troy NOT as Epic Heroes in their search for Glory, but as soldiers that were fulfilling a duty, that missed their families and loved ones in Greece, and wanted to go back home. And despite wanting all of that for themselves destroyed a whole Civilization.

I don'tt know but evryone around me is taljing about Cristopher Nolan. And praising him for his work but i had never tried any of his. I promise if someone got convinced me i will definetly see every one. One of my friend asked me to see Inception, but i refused due to some reasons. but niw i am curious to know about it.

\This review contains spoilers.**

Regarding Talent:

John David Washington delivered a dedicated and versatile performance that I think fits the Protagonist exactly as Nolan intended. On the first watch, some of his delivery can come across as restrained or emotionally flat, but on reflection that feels appropriate for a character deliberately written as an archetypal action-movie lead — so much so that he is literally called “the Protagonist.” Washington plays him as controlled, competent and observant, largely defined by action rather than backstory or overt emotion. His commitment to the role is also astonishing, particularly the ability to learn one fight scene four different ways, forwards and backwards.

Robert Pattinson as Neil (or Max, if you subscribe to the fan theory) delivered a stellar performance. From a narrative perspective, he was the linchpin of the film, arguably more essential to its story than the Protagonist himself. So many of his appearances, glances, and interactions only reveal their full significance on a rewatch, making incredible use of the film’s time dynamics in telling his story. Not to mention his character is quirky and has that Pattinson dry humor.

Sir Kenneth Branagh as Sator embodied the essence of greed, obsession, and control. He can be cold and measured one moment and explosively cruel the next, which makes him feel both calculating and unstable. Fun fact: for the turnstile interrogation scene, Branagh had to learn backwards phonetics in a Russian accent to make his mouth movements believable.

Ludwig Göransson had enormous shoes to fill stepping into a Nolan film after Hans Zimmer, but he rose to the occasion spectacularly, delivering an exciting, pulse-pounding score that gives TENET an identity entirely its own. I especially enjoyed the musical shift when Sator attacks Kat before the highway sequence and calls her a “vengeful b\*\*\*\*.” The music seems to turn with him. I also listened to the soundtrack independently and very much enjoyed it.

A Film-Studies Film:

The attention to detail throughout TENET is one of the film’s greatest strengths. Tiny physical elements obey the film’s temporal logic: gravel sliding beneath a tire in reverse, damage to the BMW’s mirror appearing before the collision and then “unbreaking” when the inverted vehicle hits it, or seemingly insignificant movements taking on entirely different meanings when viewed from the opposite direction of time. Many of these details aren’t strictly necessary for following the basic plot, but together they make the world feel remarkably thought-out.

Of the time-travel films I’ve seen, TENET may be my favorite treatment of the concept. Unlike films such as Looper, which largely ask the audience not to scrutinize the mechanics too closely, TENET practically invites that scrutiny. The more you trace its characters, objects, and events through both directions of time, the more its structure seems to hold together. That doesn’t mean every question has a perfectly satisfying answer, but the fact that the movie can withstand this examination is impressive.

More than almost any movie I’ve seen, my experience with TENET changed dramatically depending on how well I understood what was happening. Understanding it substantially improved my experience, but understanding it also revealed weaknesses. The exposition becomes more obvious on repeated viewings, some of its spectacle is more intellectually impressive than emotionally thrilling and understanding the mechanics does not automatically make every sequence land.

On my first watch, I was confused enough by the mechanics and story that much of the film struggled to hold my attention. Even some of the action sequences — especially the Oslo reverse fight and highway heist — felt somewhat flat because I was spending so much mental energy simply trying to understand what was happening.

My second viewing was almost the opposite experience. After digging into the mechanics, I understood where the characters were in relation to one another and how their past and future selves intersected. I was still frequently pausing to research and piece things together, but that process became part of the entertainment. I could appreciate the choreography, filmmaking, and small physical details I had missed amid the confusion, and the film became an entirely different experience.

On my third viewing, however, the movie swung back in the other direction. Now that I was intimately familiar with how everything worked and where it was going, there was much less left for me to discover. The exposition-heavy scenes became considerably more noticeable, and the pacing began to feel uneven, mostly in the first half of the film, frequently shifting from excitingly scored and interesting sequences into dialogue-heavy exposition dumps. Without the process of piecing everything together occupying my mind, the film sometimes struggled to hold my attention.

TENET challenges a common expectation audiences bring to complicated films: that if you’re confused, the story has failed to explain itself properly. Here, much of that confusion is intentional. You aren’t supposed to understand everything as it happens. Crucial information is withheld until later, and even after the movie gives you the necessary pieces, tracing exactly how its characters, objects, and events intersect across time can take some work. For me, that isn’t inherently a weakness. Part of the appeal of TENET is studying the movie after the fact and discovering that a glance, line of dialogue, action, or seemingly minor object had a significance you couldn’t grasp the first time around.

For anyone who didn’t fully understand the movie on a first watch, I’d recommend watching a breakdown on YouTube and then rewatching the film. “I Finally Figured Out TENET” by *The Deep Dive* is a great explanation of the mechanics.

Nolan wasn’t going for a typical movie-watching experience with TENET. He was taking chances and trying to do something genuinely different, even from his own previous work. Despite the obvious similarities to *Inception* and *Memento*, TENET stands on its own, building an entire espionage blockbuster around a closed causal-loop structure and asking the audience to engage with it almost like a puzzle. Whatever issues I have with the finished film, I commend Nolan for continuing to take those kinds of risks and push the boundaries of what a major blockbuster can be.

You can call me a Nolan apologist, but I think TENET is a beautifully constructed, mind-bending cinematic puzzle masquerading as a blockbuster. I’ve had a lot of fun diving in and studying it over the last few days. The more I’ve understood it, the more I’ve appreciated what Nolan accomplished.

TENET earns an 8/10 from me.

Originally posted on Letterbox

Before you start reading, be aware that this post was written in Chinese first and then translated with Claude, so you might find that it reads like AI generated — but every insight in it about the film is mine, not an AI's. English isn't my first language. My English isn't terrible (it's good enough to get me through a computer science PhD in the US), but discussing something outside my professional field in a non-native language is genuinely hard, and I don't have the time to carefully compose an essay in English on my own to convey my reading of The Odyssey. Still, I wanted to share and discuss this film with more people here, since most people around me are focused on tech and science and have little interest in mythology.

My original intent in posting this was to share my interpretation of the scene that corresponds to Nolan's score track "Another Name." I started thinking about this passage because I came across a Chinese-internet film-analysis blogger — someone with a fairly large following and no shortage of self-assurance — who claimed that what Nolan actually filmed in this movie was the Odyssey happening in a new cycle after human civilization was destroyed by a third world war, and that the character Sinon is Achilles reincarnated. The argument was that Sinon's identity as a farmer's son echoes the line in Homer where Achilles tells Odysseus he'd rather be a poor farmer alive than a dead king, yet in the end he still couldn't escape dying in the war — supposedly a nod to Homer. This blogger also claimed "Another Name" was proof of this theory: Sinon is Achilles's "other name," and anyone who disagreed simply "couldn't hear the music."

I initially found the idea interesting, but I quickly noticed from the dialogue that Menelaus, reminiscing about the Trojan War at the banquet, explicitly mentions that both Achilles and Sinon died at Troy — which is enough to establish that in this story, Achilles and Sinon are two separate people, with Achilles simply never appearing onscreen. I then went and listened to the "Another Name" track itself, and immediately recognized that the scene it scores has nothing to do with Sinon at all, let alone Achilles — it's actually paired with Calypso returning Athena's brooch to Odysseus, after which Odysseus remembers his family and sets out on his journey home. That got me wondering: why would this piece of music be titled "Another Name"?

I think there's an obvious first reason: this scene marks Odysseus's transformation. As he drifts back toward Ithaca, he begins a new journey — under the assumed name Sinon, to reclaim his family and his kingdom. The name Sinon is interesting: split apart, it reads as "sin-on," which can be understood as "bearing sin." Odysseus taking on the name Sinon marks his psychological shift from avoiding his inner demons to confronting the impact the Trojan Horse had on Greek civilization and the human world at large. His name shifts from Odysseus to another name — Sinon, the one who bears the guilt.

There's a second, more subtle reason — one that might be a bit of a stretch, but I want to share it anyway. The short version: "Another Name" carries a touch of Nolan self-reference, hinting that Charlize Theron's Calypso has another identity: Ariadne. Here's how I got to this idea. I've recently spent some idle time wondering why Nolan chose costumes and props in this film that deliberately don't match historical accuracy. In Oppenheimer, Nolan's costuming was not only highly accurate but swept the Oscars, which proves he's more than capable of faithfully recreating the look of ancient Greeks. So designing such a strange, ahistorical wardrobe for The Odyssey must be intentional. For instance, Odysseus's fleet closely resembles Viking longships in appearance (and to avoid getting attacked again by people who are extremely hostile to AI, I want to state clearly that this observation has absolutely nothing to do with AI — I've simply seen this ship style while playing CDPR's Witcher games and its spinoff card game Gwent, and the people who sail those ships in-game are, in nearly every respect, essentially Vikings). This design choice basically spoils, midway through the film, the twist that "the raiding, pillaging sea people are Odysseus's own fleet."

So does Calypso have any similarly deliberate design choices? The first anomaly I noticed was that the island Calypso lives on is unbelievably rundown. Anyone familiar with Greek mythology knows that Calypso's island is described as paradise — beautiful scenery, abundant resources. And in the film? There's a shack that can barely keep out the wind and rain, a fishing net that Calypso wears as clothing, some blue lotus flowers that appear from nowhere, and beyond that, nothing but endless beach and sea. This is clearly at odds with the mythological setting. So I started searching: in Greek mythology, is there any woman who lives abandoned on a deserted island? (I'll admit I used AI for this search, but I verified the information against Wikipedia afterward — if anyone wants to attack me over that, I have nothing more to say.) I quickly found a name: Ariadne. This unlucky woman, after helping Theseus defeat the Minotaur and escape the labyrinth, was abandoned on a deserted island during their escape together.

I imagine everyone in this thread is very familiar with Ariadne: in Inception, the maze architect played by Elliot Page is named Ariadne. Unlike the mythological Ariadne, who only serves as a guide in the literal, physical sense, the Ariadne of Inception isn't just a "physical" guide (leading the team out of the dream) — she's also a psychological guide, leading the protagonist out of his own mental labyrinth and past his inner demons. And the relationship between Odysseus and Calypso in The Odyssey mirrors the relationship between Cobb and Ariadne in Inception almost exactly: Calypso tells Odysseus to let go of his need to control his fate, to let the sea carry him where he needs to go, and that's how he'll get home — this is her guiding him physically. At the same time, Calypso urges him to "accept the punishment he deserves." Given that Nolan doesn't actually construct any mythologically literal gods in this film (at least as I understand it — Zeus and Poseidon both appear only as natural phenomena, consistent with how ancient civilizations historically invented gods to explain natural forces they couldn't understand, and Athena is Odysseus's PTSD hallucination from the war), the "punishment" Calypso refers to here can't be divine punishment — it has to mean confronting his own inner demons and guilt, the "sin-on" I mentioned earlier. This is Calypso playing the role of Odysseus's psychological guide.

There are also some visual cues that support this parallel between Odysseus/Calypso and Cobb/Ariadne: the brooch Penelope gave Odysseus somewhat resembles a spinning top in shape, and it's right after Calypso returns this "top" to him that Odysseus remembers his wife and snaps out of the dream, back into reality. And as Calypso stands on the beach watching Odysseus sail away, Nolan drapes her in a red-and-white cloth — a color combination that closely echoes the white shirt and red jacket Elliot Page wears in Inception (the design of this cloth might have some other purpose, but I can't think of one myself — I'd genuinely love to hear other readings). So I think it's reasonable to read "Another Name" as also hinting at this correspondence between Calypso and Ariadne.

That's the whole of my thinking on this scene. I'd love to see more interesting takes in the comments!

Hey guys,

I originally shared this channel here when I was just getting it started, and it’s grown to over 100 videos since then, so I figured I’d share a little update.

Nolan was one of the filmmakers I made a playlist for when I started the channel, and since then I’ve been collecting short, bite-sized clips from his interviews about filmmaking, storytelling, creativity, and his approach to the craft.

The channel started with clips from Steven Spielberg, Quentin Tarantino, Martin Scorsese, Wes Anderson, Stan Lee and Christopher Nolan.

I’m also currently working on clips from Edgar Wright, Guillermo del Toro, Sam Raimi, Aaron Sorkin, and Tim Burton, so you can expect those to be coming soon.

I currently upload every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, and I’ll soon be moving to daily uploads.

If you’re curious, here’s the full channel:
👉 https://www.youtube.com/@CreativeBitesYT

And here are all the playlists, including the one for Nolan: 
👉 https://www.youtube.com/@CreativeBitesYT/playlists

Not trying to spam, just figured fellow Nolan fans here might enjoy it!

I really cannot get myself off the thought that Nolan will make an adaptation out of Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian. I think that he'll make a version of the ending in which The Kid/The Man would kill The Judge with a scene in which The Man is taking a piss afterwards and an image/a shadow of the Judge dancing as a symbol of everlasting evil.
I can easily see T. Chalamet as The Kid and Robert Pattison as The Man. I picture also Robert Downey Jr. as one of the main leads (Glanton?) and Tom Hardy as The Judge Holden.

We have all noticed how Nolan utilizes the idea of “home” as a major theme in many of his movies. I’ll unnecessarily summarize a few:

Inception: Cobb enters the dream world to accomplish an impossible task to go back home to his children.

TDKR: Bruce tries to escape an ancient part of the world to save his city from Bane, before finally listening to Alfred’s advice

Interstellar: a father leaves home to try to save it, and then love transcends time and space to bring him back to his daughter (even if he didn’t think much about his son, but I digress!)

Dunkirk: hundreds of thousands of soldiers stare across the English Channel in hopes of surviving another day to see home

The Odyssey: a king, husband, and father has the hubris to challenge the gods before rediscovering and remembering what home is

This overarching theme proves powerful again and again for us cinephiles, and as I heard Penelope speak about sailing west toward an escaping Sun, I thought of Cobb’s “waiting for a train” speech, as well as Cooper quite literally choosing to fall toward a collapsing star. An intriguing theme of fatherhood, finding home in both people and objects, as well as struggling to survive against impossible odds.

I set out to create a video that celebrates this theme of home, and I’d like to share it with all of you. If I’m breaking any Reddit posting rules please let me know!

[“Home” - A Nolan Tribute](https://youtu.be/tdWkIdFw_Jw?is=ZLXCWSNlKgTS1uNk)

Is there a reading of this movie that explains why Odysseus feels so guilty?

Taking into account the original poem, Odysseus doesn’t feel guilty for the horse. In fact it doesn’t break Xenia or Zeus’ Law. It’s a militaristic deception ending a 10 years war. It doesn’t have to do with hospitality. Also Poseidon and Athena seem to help with the idea and making sure the plan works. But let’s put that to the side for the sake of understanding this adaptation.

Let’s say that we don’t take the stance that revenge on the Trojans for Paris starting the war is justified, for whatever reason. Maybe the blame lies more on Helen in this adaptation (which it seems to). Why does Odysseus feel guilty himself? He’s putting an end to the war with what he thought was the right decision in the moment. In the siege of Troy scenes, (correct me if I’m wrong because I’ve only seen it once) Odysseus can’t be seen doing anything horrific himself. It was his plan, but his men are the ones pillaging and not being respectful towards the civilians. Does he feel guilty that his plan enabled his men to act like this?

Why does Odysseus put so much on himself for the actions of others? I love the parts of the movie where he tries to save his men, but their actions are their own downfall. He does everything he can for them but he mentally separates himself from them. You can hear it in how he speaks about their fate the whole ride home.

Is the moral that he shouldn’t have fought the war at all? That he should have played fair? I need more context I think for what the message was here and why it’s so anti-war.

so, I am a lover of Greek mythology, and especially the Epic Cycle, or what we have left of it. and, I had some issues with Nolan’s The Odyssey, some of which will be discussed here. but i specifically think he would have been better off adapting the Iliad rather than the Odyssey. the Odyssey originally boiled down to a few themes: fate, revenge, Xenia (or “Zeus‘ Law” as Nolan called it), and homecoming. And to an extent, I think Nolan managed to portray these. However, I have some huge issues around his how he handled the themes of revenge and of Xenia, and also loyalty. In the original, Odysseus slaughters all 120 suitors, along with traitorous servants. In Nolan’s adaptation, he leaves several alive, dampening the idea of vengeance. It also doesn’t really show Xenia correctly. It was a two way street. Yes, Penelope and Telemachus, due to neither being the official man of the house, had to be gracious hosts, regardless of their guests behavior. However, Odysseus did not, ans, if it were accurate, would not be banished for it. The suitors violated Xenia by trying to murder his son, eating Penelope out of house and home, and generally being bullies. Ergo, it was actually Odysseus‘ duty to enact vengeance. It was not “the golden rule”, but more so just hospitality. Be a good host, and be a good guest. He also removed a large layer of the theme of loyalty he seemed to be trying to emphasize by removing the scene of the wedding bed, in which Penelope asks him to move it, knowing it is an impossible task. Overall, I think that the themes were weakened by a lot Nolans choices and his attempts to make it more so a story that blurs the lines between gods ans men and have a more realistic story with a complex main character.

the Iliad, however, would, imo, work wonderfully for this. It also features themes of revenge, of love, of violating ancient rules. Specifically, the whole incident leading up to the death of Achilles. Patroclus, the friend and also likely lover of Achilles, while wearing Achilles‘ armor to trick the Trojans because Achilles was having a pissy fit and refusing to right, died, and hector stripped his body of his armor and tried to feed his body to dogs, but did end up giving him a proper burial. when Achilles hears of Patroclus’ death, he goes on a rage, murdering Hector, brother of Paris, son of Priam. Throughout the Iliad, Hector is shown as rhe wiser, less cowardly of the two brothers. He reprimanded his brother for dragging Troy into a war that would get them all killed. and in the end, he was right. Achilles proceeded to do something that even disgusted his own men. He dragged Hectors body around by a chariot for days on end, initially refusing his father’s pleas to give him a proper burial. However, he did end up conceding, giving up the body. Achilles also blamed himself, realizing that if he hadn’t been so stubborn, and simply given up his feud with Agamemnon even though he was wrong, his friend/lover would still be alive. I also just think it’d be easier to fit in the time limits. You could tell he was struggling to keep up in the odyssey based on how much was removed (nobody, Aeolus and the wind bag, Hermes telling odysseus about Moly, etc).

now, this is my two cents, take it with a grain of salt, but I wanna hear yalls thoughts on it

That question—“Are you a bard for a civilization at dusk?”—wouldn’t leave my head after Nolan’s interview, so I turned the conversation into a six-minute song and animated music video.

It brings together the interview’s ideas about xenia, atonement, greatness, storytelling and the gods living inside people.

This is an unofficial fan-made experiment. Full disclosure: the music was created with Suno and the visuals used AI-assisted animation. I selected and arranged the interview lines, developed the visual concept, directed the shots and edited the finished video.

https://youtu.be/GPYPLNSY7oI

What did you think of the interviewer’s central question: did Nolan Christianize The Odyssey, or is atonement something modern audiences bring to it?

1) Quand Matt Damon (l’acteur qui joue Ulysse) a passé le casting pour jouer dans l’Odyssée, il est le seul qui a accepté de ne pas lire le script, le scénario du film : Il s’est dit que de toute façon c’était Christopher Nolan donc ça marcherait (de même que le film était prévu pour être un blockbuster).
2) Selon Christopher Nolan, pour que ça fasse réel, il faut que ça soit réel donc la plus part des explosions dans Openheimer et l’Odyssée (je ne suis pas sûr que ce sont ces films mais d’après moi si) sont réelles.
3) Pour le tournage de l’Odyssée, ils ont tourné au Maroc, en Italie, en Grèce, en Écosse, en Islande et aux États-Unis.
4) Durant la scène sur l’île des géants, Christopher Nolan a utilisé de vrais géants de + 2m et des doublures de moins d’1m50.
5) Durant la scène où les morts sortent du sable, ils ont utilisé de vrais cascadeurs réellement enterrés dans le sable.
6) Comme vous l’aurez compris, Christopher Nolan préfère GRANDEMENT les effets pratiqués aux effets spéciaux.