The American translator savaged the film adaptation of Homer’s poem and “crashed the magazine’s website and fuelled a debate about the balance between commercial success and literary authenticity”, writes The New York Times

The scathing review of Christopher Nolan’s film, which in turn prompted Emily Wilson to reflect on the complexity, grandeur and enduring appeal of Homer’s epic and its protagonist. Yet the British director also has his merits, which should not be underestimated

Elon Musk, deepfakes and the wrong questions: invoking the most advanced technology to claim an alleged authenticity of the past that never even existed in Homer’s work means failing to understand either how myths work or how history works

The American classicist dismissed the adaptation of the Odyssey as a Nolan-esque combination of grandiosity and superficiality: a work that “has nothing convincing to say about time, memory, history or war” and which lacks “psychological, emotional, political and ethical depth”. Response to the scathing review

Stephen Kavlan writes: the director lets Homer be Homer and allows the good guys to bring the bad guys to justice, without getting lost in ambiguous pseudo-intellectualism. This also works well for the cast, who are inspired and convincing

The director has created a masterpiece here, just as he did with “Dunkirk”. What can we say about three hours of brilliant cinema without a single dull moment? Christopher Nolan is always brilliant. It’s cinema that has become small