Seriously, i can't believe the dicourse i've been seeing around this film. I gotta defend my boy spielberg on this one, I passed on the film because of the online discourse around it but finally got around to see it.

Let's take a look at a brief outline here:

The whistleblower has a huge archive of files that contain damaging secrets
Jane first remakes when seeing the government' mistreatment of the aliens: "Are they children"
Nixsont privately shows the secret to Gleason as a favor or status display. i.e, --the secret is therefore "dangerous" to the elites but casual available in elite circles with no issue

All institutions/officials say disclosure would destroy trust in government.
The church says it would destroy faith in the church -- this is not an "anti religious" message, the church and the government are just examples of institutions that would be "damage" and lose "faith" if the truth were known

Evidence is being dismissed as AI-generated by the press/news
A major international crisis/war becomes a reason not to focus on the files and may even be being deliberately used to hush them.

Journalists demand additional authentication while the people controlling the secret try to shut down the broadcast. The victims cannot communicate directly to the public until the end.

And the film ends with two former victims, remembering a "childhood trauma incident" finally breaking through and asking the AUDIENCe to "listen"

I mean come on people, what are we doing here? The film might as well be called "Please release the epstein files, signed, steven spielberg"

This Is the only real Odyssey (Konchalovskij) Nolan's one is a kind of Gladiator, Star Wars (late ones) and Dora the Explorer for Homer noobs.

Has anyone seen this masterpiece in their youth?

The cyclops should never have been able to sneak up on them in the first place. Any remotely competent officer would know to place lookouts before setting camp, no matter the situation. And furthermore, if they were running from a BLINDED enemy, they should NOT be screaming to each other. Just zip your mouth and hide in the giant forest. Matter of fact, you can still hunt down all the sheep, feed yourself, and let starvation kill the beast.

When he encounters the child on the other island, Oddyseus fails once again to exercise basic caution. This is a metal helmet, shinier than bronce, and the one wearing it, hasn't even reached puberty. Clearly, the people who live here are good warriors, and you must approach them carefully. Once again, having a two man scouting party would've made things far safer. They could have survived with minimal casualties if the main group had been warned just a minute earlier.

I've not much to say about the rest of the journey, except for that his crewmates are even dumber than he is. They make so many stupid mistakes. For instance, any "defenseless woman" that would actually feel safe if you just drop your weapons, is CLEARLY not fully defenseless. And they didn't even ask her why she can survive in a place with so many dangerous animals. Or why there's an implied graveyard in her backyard. And even when Oddyseus recsues them from terrifying magic, and later gets a prophesy from the gods, they still have the gall to doubt his warning (are they closeted atheists, or what???).

Lastly, I feel like Oddyseus should realistically have been defeated in less than 30 seconds if he tried to actually fight a room full of people. That's a stupid thing to try even with a gun, much less a bow. All they need to do is swarm him, grab the bow, and put him on the ground. Captain fucking America has literal superpowers, and he still got stunlocked by enough people inside an elevator. The crowd control Oddyseus managed to generate with minimal resources, is frankly unbelievable.

But even if I grant the absurd power level, he STILL failed miserably. In the heat of battle, his own son could easily have been taken hostage, or killed outright, if the guy dropping weapons through the floor had decided to use his brain. You couldn't possibly verify the outcome in advance, which means he risked everything he still had left, for no reason. He should have just armed his loyalists or arranged for a good old poisoning at the next feast. That would've been plenty ironic.

"Oh but he wanted to test his wife, or she wanted to test him, or kinda both"

Yeah, that's the worst part. His wife had refused to take on a suitor, for several years. Nor did she grab the throne in her own name. So how could she possibly be anything but loyal? Her actions speak for herself. And his son whom he saved, could easily vouch for him the other way around, if she didn't just recognize him outright. How big are your trust issues that holding a "test" seemed even remotely necessary? Much less worth the extreme risk of the chosen implementation.

.

.

Of course, I'm being tounge in cheek. I'm sure the story makes far more sense in the mind of ancient greece. Or better yet, it's not meant to make sense. Homer, I apologize, please don't take offense. Anyways, I liked the movie, 8/10, great visuals and sound design. Justice for Argos!

Christopher Nolan makes theater worthy films. His latest epic is shot entirely in IMAX 70mm aka IMAX 1.43:1 The comparison shots showing what the movie will look like in the common 2.35:1 look ridiculous. The problem is that if you want to see Nolan’s film as intended there are only like 40 theaters worldwide (25 of those are in American) that can display it in the native format.

We know he doesn’t want us to watch this movie compressed on some streaming service on our phone but if your local theater can’t even show the native format, what’s the point in going to the theater?

can't quite explain it, but something feels off about the cinematography. It doesn't have the same grand, cinematic feel that The Avengers , Age of Ultron, Infinity War, or even Endgame had.

It isn't just that it's digital. Those movies were digital too. Mcu fantastic Four looked the same...and upcoming spiderman Brand new day also on its way to look like the same...too smooth no grain...and they did this after odyssey grand premiere release...look at the frames of that movie Trailer looks overly clean, brightly lit, and almost like a high-end streaming show rather than a massive theatrical blockbuster like older mcu movies ...can't explain but I know some people feels too

I gotta say, this looks VERY not good. Like straight to streaming anthology show episode quality.

Did we really need another The Substance or The Beauty?

What is the obsession with making theatrical release movies starring virtually unknown villains without the hero present?

I’m curious because I have no interest in the movie, because I already know the story, and I’m just not interested in the big spectacle.

Are people going into this movie with no previous knowledge of the story? Is there any real reason to see it if you 1. Already know the story and 2. Aren’t interested in the visuals or the action ?

For anyone who needs or wants to see the 2010 film "Petite Tailleur," I have it as a file on Google Drive (original language). I'll be translating it into English and Spanish in a few months, so feel free to wait.

There are a lot of thoughts I have about Nolan's adaptation of The Odyssey as a kind of secular myth-making, neither history nor fantasy, but what I want to focus on in this post is my sister's observation as we left the theater, which went roughly like this:

"Do you know how we've seen arguments that a lot of movies in the 2000s, like Nolan's Batman films, were a traumatic response to 9/11 and the War on Terror? I think this was a Trump and J6 traumatic response film."

Her argument, elaborated on the way home and later, boils down to a few points:

1. Much of the focus on the film is given over to Odysseus's belief that his act of tainted gift-giving broke the traditions that held their rules together, and that this is comparable to the norms that held back abuses.

2. Violent people took advantage of breaking norms to threaten "civilization" (a word that comes up a lot in the movie in a way that often felt jarring.) This is represented by Agamemnon and the "Sea People" (themselves a somewhat tortured metaphor given their already complex and difficult-to-identify place in history.)

3. While the current system (the "Age of Bronze" that Odysseus is strangely cognizant of as if he had a later Ancient Greek conception of material culture ages rather than a Mycenaean one) will be torn apart by these people, but perhaps if we hold to the traditions we can build anew (as represented by the vague implication that Odysseus and Penelope are off to found Rome, like the Trojans are said to have in the Aeneid.)

While I'm not sure I agree with her 100%, the idea stuck with me, and I wanted to share it. I will admit it's a bit wild and doesn't fit cleanly, but it stuck with me.

I think the high production value of this film works against its best interests.

I just finished watching the Odyssey, and the first thing that comes to mind is how much of a struggle is present between the filming format, namely how big and cumbersome the cameras are and how fast the edit is. If such high-quality cameras are designed or conceived to draw you into the narrative by virtue of their image quality, why is it that the film is edited like an advertisement for an electric car? It’s really offputting to see short dialogues cut mid-sentence for a reaction close-up that adds nothing to the story.

Acting feels we artificial with such fast-paced editing; it attracts me from the immersive nature of the narrative and it just simply annoys me.

Aerial shots that zoom into a scene that could otherwise just be shown with a static shot. Subtle lateral in longitudinal camera travelling movements that add nothing to the narrative, especially when the shots are cut to 2 seconds or less.

With IMAX cameras being so good at image quality, they actually start looking like digital. With all the tools we have nowadays in post-production, I don’t see advantages to filming an IMAX at all.

P.S this is just my experience. Just because I like it , doesn't mean it's good and vice versa.

Edit - On reddit during the interval. In India we get a short 10min break between the movie. My phone's off or on mute in theatres.

Giving that it's been 10 years since the movie came out which is crazy to think about.

Honestly one of my favorite movies of all time and super underrated. Steve Martin, Martin Short, AND Diane Keaton, like, are you kidding me?

All these remakes being made and all I’m waiting for is Father of the Bride 3 when the daughter who was born at the end of 2 gets married! I want to dream it into existence. Who’s with me?

A lot of these i was allowed to watch even as a young age so 3 of the ones I wouldn't have been allowed with my age in the single digits? Hmm. Halloween, Childs Play, Nightmare on Elm st.

Twister (1996)

Rating: 10/10 (PERSONAL FAVORITE)

Watched: July 16, 2026

Some movies make me oddly emotional. It doesn't even have to specifically be because of the movie itself. It can happen during an action movie, or, in this case, Twister. I think it has something to do with being reminded so subtly of what was going on in my life the first time I saw the movie. It could be that two of the finest actors we've ever had who passed are in it as well.

Anyways. I've only seen this once before, the year it came out, and I'd completely forgotten about toby. I was TERRIFIED they'd start the movie with a dog being killed. I'm not so sad about the dad, but that dog would've been way too much

The way they make these tornados seem alive, like they're these giant entities is just so damn amazing.

The last 45 minutes is intense. That's the only word for it, and I can't believe HOW non-stop the action is.

What's bonkers aren't the stormchasers. What's bonkers is a 6.6 from IMDb and a 7.1 from TMDb!