Will Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey be the final traditional epic?

      Christopher Nolan has crafted a stunning, primarily practical, classic epic with The Odyssey. Will we see something like this again?

      The Odyssey has been in development for years, generating eager anticipation among Nolan's fans who have been anxiously awaiting his follow-up to Oppenheimer. As we approach 2026 and the lead-up to this highly anticipated summer release, the film has become entangled in online culture disputes and controversial decisions that have sparked a flurry of keyboard activity. Whether it was the criticized armor designs or casting selections dismissed by some as mere "woke diversity checks," or the trailers featuring historically inaccurate American dialogue that drew criticism, even if taken out of context.

      Just a few weeks prior, skeptics and naysayers predicted this project could flop spectacularly, largely due to numerous negative online reactions to the trailers featuring contentious lines or (provoking) glimpses of Lupita Nyong’o and Elliot Page. However, after only a couple of days at the box office and a favorable consensus from critics and fans, it now appears that The Odyssey is poised to be a box office triumph with a substantial following. After the somewhat disappointing critical and commercial reception of Tenet, Nolan is back in full force with two films that may not have initially seemed like prime box office material, yet in the case of Oppenheimer, emerged as a massive success. The Odyssey seems well-positioned to follow suit, and considering the epic genre's decline in modern cinema history, this is quite an achievement.

      Whether the story's familiarity resonates with audiences or if it's simply that a Nolan film generates enough anticipation to drive box office success, it’s probably inconsequential. The reality is, audiences are showing up, even despite a vocal minority who take pleasure in proclaiming their decision to avoid the film. Similar to individuals announcing their exit from a Facebook group, we could do without those statements.

      For those opposed to any form of diversity in films, there are significant reasons to appreciate Chris Nolan's adaptation of Homer's epic poem. If you are unable to endure a couple of minutes featuring Lupita Nyong’o or Elliot Page in battle armor (even though Nolan rationalizes and explains both within the movie's context), you stand to miss out on what could be the last traditional, predominantly practical/handmade epic that cinema might produce.

      The success of The Odyssey is a positive development that could convince people that grand-scale spectacles can still be achieved in the traditional, straightforward manner. Large sets can be constructed filled with extras, and filming can take place in authentic exotic locations (or in Scotland), or even on boats out at sea. Nolan creates a cinematic experience in a way that only he can (though some others, like his friend Denis Villeneuve, come close). If you examine the behind-the-scenes footage of recent high-budget blockbusters, you'll typically see an abundance of blue or green screens. You will encounter sparse plate shots with CGI backgrounds and composited mise-en-scène. While at times this effect is seamless, more frequently it appears artificial, creating a blurry illusion that lacks weight, authenticity, and texture. In contrast, if Nolan requires hundreds of soldiers to storm an ancient city, chances are he will employ numerous stunt actors in full costume at a real location. This gives his films an earthiness, a grittiness, and a sense of weight that is all too uncommon in modern blockbuster cinema. It is something extraordinarily rare these days.

      Films like Train Dreams thrived on the authenticity of shooting in actual locations and capturing what existed without needing to accommodate VFX-specific lighting for easy compositing. While many filmmakers still manage this at smaller scales, The Odyssey pays homage to the grand epics of the 1950s and 1960s, which had to construct worlds and convey scale through elaborate sets, real locations, and a plethora of extras, rather than just a few foreground figures augmented by CGI.

      This film serves as a technical masterclass in merging classical filmmaking techniques with contemporary technologies and methodologies. Nolan employs CGI almost begrudgingly. He likely considered a quest to the ends of the Earth to discover a real giant cyclops before reluctantly deciding CGI was necessary. However, he uses it sparingly. A Marvel adaptation could feature a Cyclops scene that stretches far longer, with close, lingering shots of the creature to showcase their CGI skills. In contrast, Nolan’s sequence, genuinely frightening, sees this enormous creature appearing in and out of shadows, carefully rationing its most visually striking moments. A fitting comparison is the controlled use of CGI dinosaurs in the original Jurassic Park by Spielberg, in contrast to the sequels, where we spent much longer analyzing their CGI forms. The technology was still in its infancy when Spielberg’s first dinosaur film made its debut, prompting him to fill gaps with 40 minutes of tension-building suggestion or the use of animatronics for close-ups. Thus, whether it’s a Cyclops or a sea monster, Nolan's approach mirrors this method and stands in stark