> Waste of time to get these alerts for a movie that has no historical accuracy or value.
The odyssey itself wasn't trying to be historically accurate; it's basically fantasy. Why would you expect that a movie adaptation would be historically accurate?
In this context, the book itself is the history rather than the story as a foundational western narrative. The movie diverge in many grounds from the book, and it is sad that most people will only watch the movie rather than read the original work.
Look, given that the so-called "original work" is in ancient Greek, I don't think any ordinary American today is going to take the time and effort to actually "read the original work".
Even if you were to learn the Greek language well enough to "understand" the original book, you wouldn't really understand it, would you? Because it makes so many intertwined culture references, to the landscape, to the gods and myths of the period. So, what is better: for people to sit down and try to grind through the book, or to make a living production as a modern adaptation, for modern audiences to enjoy?
Furthermore, the Odyssey would have been performed by a singer or poet in its time. People in Greece wouldn't have been reading it on paper! That would be absurd even then! So, it would already be a performance, an interpretation, and it would surely be adapted by those performers to the place-and-time. There is surely a lot of space between the oral tradition that Homer originated to the written word.
Personally, I have immensely enjoyed O Brother, Where Art Thou? as a modern adaptation to Americana. I cannot pretend to understand the original, or the intricacies of the Coen Brothers' adaptation, but I love the performances, the singalong songs, and the production values of the modern film, and it gives me more insight and appreciation for the ancient epic as it was.
> Waste of time to get these alerts for a movie that has no historical accuracy or value.
The odyssey itself wasn't trying to be historically accurate; it's basically fantasy. Why would you expect that a movie adaptation would be historically accurate?
In this context, the book itself is the history rather than the story as a foundational western narrative. The movie diverge in many grounds from the book, and it is sad that most people will only watch the movie rather than read the original work.
> rather than read the original work.
Look, given that the so-called "original work" is in ancient Greek, I don't think any ordinary American today is going to take the time and effort to actually "read the original work".
Even if you were to learn the Greek language well enough to "understand" the original book, you wouldn't really understand it, would you? Because it makes so many intertwined culture references, to the landscape, to the gods and myths of the period. So, what is better: for people to sit down and try to grind through the book, or to make a living production as a modern adaptation, for modern audiences to enjoy?
Furthermore, the Odyssey would have been performed by a singer or poet in its time. People in Greece wouldn't have been reading it on paper! That would be absurd even then! So, it would already be a performance, an interpretation, and it would surely be adapted by those performers to the place-and-time. There is surely a lot of space between the oral tradition that Homer originated to the written word.
Personally, I have immensely enjoyed O Brother, Where Art Thou? as a modern adaptation to Americana. I cannot pretend to understand the original, or the intricacies of the Coen Brothers' adaptation, but I love the performances, the singalong songs, and the production values of the modern film, and it gives me more insight and appreciation for the ancient epic as it was.
1 reply →
Incredible comment. The success of this movie is driving people insane. There was no reason this had to be a culture war.