Nolan's $250m Odyssey earns universal acclaim from critics

Christopher Nolan’s $250m Imax adaptation of Homer’s epic poem has received near-universal acclaim following the publication of full reviews, establishing the film as an early frontrunner for next year’s best picture Oscar. The broad praise suggests the substantial investment will translate into a major commercial and awards-season asset.

British critics were overwhelmingly positive. The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw awarded it five stars, praising a film "with thrilling ambition, boldness, seriousness, generosity and flair." Clarisse Loughrey wrote in the Independent that it is "Nolan’s best work to date" and "deserves to be the film that defines him," while the Telegraph’s Robbie Collin called it "a strange, fearsome and trailblazing machine of a movie — by some distance, the best of the year so far."

The Times’s Kevin Maher deemed it "a masterpiece in every way," detecting a "palpable yearning for primal storytelling and a need for art that can inform and instruct as well as entertain." Across the Atlantic, New York Times critic Manohla Dargis noted Nolan’s passion for cinema "in every frame of his monumental adaptation," calling it "one of the most Nolan of Nolan spectacles" and "a transporting affirmation of the art."

Industry trade Variety highlighted the film's commercial mechanics. Chief critic Guy Lodge described "a genuinely grand, gutsy vision" that "thrills generously for the bulk of its near three-hour running time." He noted it throws "another mighty set piece" at the audience every few minutes, creating a "veritable banquet" of "movie-movie pleasures" that can afford to "throw away a significant portion of its all-star cast."

Not all feedback was entirely glowing. The Hollywood Reporter’s David Rooney called the film "structurally clumsy," criticising "dull interludes" involving Matt Damon’s Odysseus and Charlize Theron’s Calypso that "stop the narrative dead." Rooney also questioned the casting of Tom Holland and said he "winced at anachronistic language," specifically Penelope telling her suitors, "I’ve listened to you party."

A European text under the microscope

The adaptation of a foundational European text drew sharp analysis from classicists. Mary Beard, writing in the Times, welcomed a "brisk, pacy and contemporary film, with no dreadful cod-epic language," calling it a "great introduction to Homer." However, she criticised the "one-dimensional, single-minded" characterisation of the lead, and noted the reduction of female characters, summarising it as "an Odyssey without the sex."

Fellow classicist Emily Hauser was harsher in the Guardian, arguing that centering a modern-day hero left no room for nuance. "Nolan inexcusably turns Penelope into the executor of her enslaved woman, Melantho, and has Penelope actually push her into the slaughter," Hauser wrote. She suggested the film ultimately offers a hero who seeks "redemption and solidarity among men, recognition from women, and absolution for a civilisation’s fall."