The Odyssey (2026); Or the Myth of Adaptation Accuracy
Photo Courtesy of Xuan Che- Wikimedia Commons
In discourse on modern media, a heavy emphasis is placed on creating painstaking accuracy in film adaptations of important canonical stories. Whether it be in young adult stories such as the Percy Jackson (2010-2013) and Harry Potter (2001-2011) series, or even myths so ancient that their origins have been obscured like the story of Amleth in Robert Eggers’ The Northman (2022), critics and fans will always bring up the question of accuracy to the source material in adaptation. Naturally, Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey (2026) would generate the same attention, perhaps even more due to its significance in European and American literary circles.
Nolan’s retelling of Homer’s Greek epic is exactly that: a retelling. The nature of a retelling is rather concerning to modern critics due to inherent creative liberties that directors, authors, and other artists take. These liberties can either enhance a story in straying from entirely accurate portrayals, or hurt the story by forsaking that art’s original intentions.
As is apparent now, months after the movie’s initial release, Nolan took many creative liberties in his retelling of The Odyssey, some being small plot details with big implications, such as the lack of any sexual relation between Odysseus and Circe. However, the larger changes made to Homer’s myth, such as the focus on the betrayal of the Greek hospitality laws via the Trojan Horse, call into question whether Nolan’s quasi-faithfulness to The Odyssey should be heavily criticized or celebrated. There is no correct answer, but I tend to agree with the latter.
Myths belong to a long-standing culture of oral tradition, which has acted as one historically large game of telephone. This has allowed myths to become a genre that morphs with its audience. For example, the story of Hercules has been canonized in modern media through Disney’s animated coming-of-age movie about the titular character proving his worth to the gods of Olympus. Would it shock you to know that Disney’s retelling of the myth of Hercules is almost entirely inaccurate to the actual myth? Hercules was never a light-hearted hero to be celebrated, but rather a flawed, bloodthirsty demigod with a rash temper. So, if this story has been largely accepted by the media with unquestioning praise, why does Nolan’s The Odyssey (2026) not receive the same grace?
Nolan’s retelling of The Odyssey was very clearly marketed as a loose adaptation of the source material, and the film never tries to convince the audience that it is anything but Nolan’s own interpretation of the story. Many audience members who were already familiar with the material took up grievances with Odysseus’ guilt for betraying the hospitality laws through the Trojan Horse. I believe that this change was necessary in recontextualizing the myth for a modern audience.
Nolan foregoes the element of accuracy because, as a modern screenwriter, he is aware of the messages that will resonate with a modern audience. This does not make his interpretation of the myth any less valuable, and instead enhances its merits as art. As mentioned earlier, the genre of myth is malleable and has always been a reflection of societal mores during the time of the telling.
Due to this malleability, Nolan takes a fundamentally sinister trick that has been valued throughout history for its great potential in war, and criticizes it under a modern, antiwar lens. This is exactly what the genre of myth is for: criticism and awareness. The Greeks understood this as well, using myths to teach each other the dangers of hubris, tricks, and other inherently unacceptable actions and behaviors.
Those who criticize Nolan’s recontextualization of Odysseus fail to grasp the importance of myth as an instrument for change. The importance of adaptation is not merely to bring a story to life exactly as it exists on the page, but instead to breathe new meaning into the work in context with the audience who interacts with it.