- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/22/26 at 6:28 am to Jay Are
quote:
He did not.
quote:
Homer did not focus on Achilles' wife or son in his surviving epics, but he did make brief mentions of them
Homer writes about Achilles' son, Neoptolemus (also called Pyrrhus)
In Homer's Iliad (Book 19), Achilles—preparing to return to battle—expresses a hopeful wish that his son is still alive and will be raised to inherit his heroic legacy.
In Homer's Odyssey (Book 11), Neoptolemus's wartime exploits and his journey to Troy after Achilles' death are recounted in more detail by Nestor.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 6:54 am to tigerfan88
quote:
Plato and his crowd, who lived 4,000 years after the Odyssey was written
The Odyssey was “told” by Homer during the Greek Dark ages sometime between 1100-750bc.
The story itself was set around 1250bc
You do the math and report back
Posted on 7/22/26 at 7:13 am to imjustafatkid
A historian doesn’t like a movie adaption? I’m shocked!!!
Posted on 7/22/26 at 7:30 am to Tiger1242
Brain fart, was thinking in millennia and not centuries. So yes it’s hundreds of years and not thousands.
Point still stands about the historicity of both the Iliad and the odyssey and the fact that both are closer to Greek myth than they are historical accounts.
Also the point about the Greeks several HUNDRED years later debating the facts and authenticity of the stories is still true.
Point still stands about the historicity of both the Iliad and the odyssey and the fact that both are closer to Greek myth than they are historical accounts.
Also the point about the Greeks several HUNDRED years later debating the facts and authenticity of the stories is still true.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 8:05 am to tigerfan88
That I agree with, anyone acting like the original odyssey is a true historical narrative is uneducated or being intentionally difficult.
Like the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Mahabharata, at best the Odyssey is a fantastical telling of events very losely based in history. Just as likely that the story is completely fictional with no basis in real history at all.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 8:33 am to Tiger1242
quote:
A historian doesn’t like a movie adaption? I’m shocked!!!
Of her own translation that was already maligned for being inaccurate*
This post was edited on 7/22/26 at 8:40 am
Posted on 7/22/26 at 8:45 am to tigerfan88
quote:
Point still stands about the historicity of both the Iliad and the odyssey and the fact that both are closer to Greek myth than they are historical accounts.
The Odyssey is almost entirely myth. It features the gods, the cyclops, sirens, etc. It's basically the first heroic fantasy fiction story that we have written records of.
Keep in mind that Odysseus wasn't a real person, and the story doesn't feature many real world events of the time, unlike the Iliad which prominently features the Trojan War which is most likely a real conflict (though few records detailing the war itself from a historical context remain).
The Iliad is less fantastical than the Odyssey, but both are basically fiction. One is historical fiction (The Iliad) while the other is heroic fantasy fiction (The Odyssey).
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:11 am to skrayper
quote:
The Odyssey is almost entirely myth. It features the gods, the cyclops, sirens, etc. It's basically the first heroic fantasy fiction story that we have written records of.
Now I’m just in here being an annoying fact checker. But it’s not the first heroic fantasy fiction. The Epic of Gilgamesh predates The Illiad and The Odyssey by at least 1000 years
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:11 am to tigerfan88
quote:
The fact that people are unironically throwing around the phrase “historically accurate” when referring to the Odyssey is itself a farcical concept.
Well, there are a few factors when it comes to "accuracy" and how it applies:
1. Modern vs Ancient vernacular, slang, etc
2. Armor, weapons, ships, etc. more familiar to audiences rather than being historically correct for the time period
3. Accuracy to the source material (how much deviation is made for the sake of making it fit on the big screen and within the time frame vs how much deviation to cater to the whims of the writer/director/studio)
For point 1:
It *CAN* be jarring to hear someone use terminology we associate with modern speech in an ancient setting. This isn't limited to other languages and far-off history either; I imagine if we were watching The Patriot and Mel Gibson said, "Yo, what's up?" we'd be taken out of it as well; that said, we don't know if there wasn't an Ancient Greek version of slang terms... but probably best to leave them out, just as to leave out phrases that would be nonsensical to modern audiences (like referencing weights and measures that mean absolutely nothing to us).
For point 2:
I think most people give this a pass. We let 300 get away with a TON of historical inaccuracies. The most visually apparent was the idea that Spartans only fought with shields and spears while being almost naked - completely counter to the fact that the Spartans were renowned in the ancient world for their heavy infantry (hoplites).
So visually stunning trumps historical accuracy for apparel, ESPECIALLY armor.
Not to mention that we found out that most of the gleaming white marble of Ancient Greece was painted with all sorts of colors. They only appear pure white to us because the paint eroded away; however, if you traveled back to that period in history Athens would have been vibrantly colorful.
For point 3:
This is the biggest point of debate. Casting plays a part. Run time plays a part.
Almost no one in that movie looks like they're from Greece, ancient or modern. Odysseus was King of Ithaca as part of the story; Ithaca is an island in the Mediterranean. They would have light to dark olive complexions, which is rarely depicted in these stories. Other changes made for narrative and such I'll have to weigh on later.
quote:
But Grok will cut through all of that noise and give us the unvarnished historically accurate Odyssey.
There's no such thing as an "historically accurate Odyssey" - it's pure heroic fantasy fiction. Only the places are real; the characters and events are entirely fictional. That's like holding out for an "historically accurate Rocky" or an "historically accurate Rambo".
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:14 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Now I’m just in here being an annoying fact checker. But it’s not the first heroic fantasy fiction. The Epic of Gilgamesh predates The Illiad and The Odyssey by at least 1000 years
Yes and no; it definitely predates it but Gilgamesh was an actual person while Odysseus was not. I concede the point though that the tales around Gilgamesh definitely fall in line with heroic fantasy and predates The Odyssey.
I also want to concede that a lot of tales of folk heroes essentially fall into this category, so we know (a lot Greek heroes, for example) and some we don't because they were passed down orally. I know Native American cultures had a lot of tales that fit this, as did the ancient Gaelic peoples.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:17 am to skrayper
Watched it last night. Honestly, I enjoyed it. I only rolled my eyes once, which I thought was pretty good. Maybe twice... Damon saying Page was the bravest soldier he ever knew. Cmon man...Other than that, of course the queen would be pissy about leading for 20 years and it being called an empty throne. That being said, she obviously did a horrific job leading. I actually could see the uniqueness of Helen in that environment and understand the uniqueness. Kinda made sense to me for some reason.
I didn't go to pick apart historical accuracies. Just went to escape the world and it did that for me just fine.
Maybe twice... Damon saying Page was the bravest soldier he ever knew. Cmon man...Other than that, of course the queen would be pissy about leading for 20 years and it being called an empty throne. That being said, she obviously did a horrific job leading. I actually could see the uniqueness of Helen in that environment and understand the uniqueness. Kinda made sense to me for some reason. I didn't go to pick apart historical accuracies. Just went to escape the world and it did that for me just fine.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:20 am to JJ27
quote:
I actually could see the uniqueness of Helen in that environment and understand the uniqueness. Kinda made sense to me for some reason.
Exactly. You can think its odd in advance, I certainly didn't like it.
On screen, it is entirely something else. Nolan portrays it very visually as her being extremely exotic in the environment. It actually works.
quote:
Damon saying Page was the bravest soldier he ever knew.
THis was Nolan painting Odysseus through a Christian lens
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:37 am to JJ27
quote:
Damon saying Page was the bravest soldier he ever knew. Cmon man
It was interesting that so much of Odysseus’s motivation in the movie was centered around avenging a character who isn’t even in the original epic rather in the Roman Aeneid. I didn’t mind the change really, especially Sinon being kind of a proxy for Achilles role in The Odyssey. Probably smart not casting Achilles and avoiding comparisons to Brad Pitt and Troy.
Overall I didn’t mind the change, it gave Odysseus a relatable motivation and also grounded the movie into one based around character emotions and not godly decisions which was clearly the goal of the film. Him saying Sinon was the bravest soldier he knew was giving him credit for willingly sacrificing himself. If you forget about the actor playing the part and just think about the character himself, I didn’t mind it
This post was edited on 7/22/26 at 9:38 am
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:45 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
On screen, it is entirely something else. Nolan portrays it very visually as her being extremely exotic in the environment. It actually works.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:53 am to hogcard1964
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:18 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Christopher Nolan explains why he cast Travis Scott in #TheOdyssey:
“I wanted somebody on-screen who would be reciting words and holding attention in the room in a very credible way, that we can relate to in today’s world, so that we would understand the drama and the emotion that comes from storytelling through poetry. If you view it in rarefied terms, if you elevate it and have some very formal version of what a bard in the palace of Ithaca might be, I would find that alienating.”
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:19 am to RLDSC FAN
That was the biggest miss in the movie imo. I thought Scott was terrible and pretty jarring, much more so than the more controversial castings
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:20 am to JJ27
quote:
Damon saying Page was the bravest soldier he ever knew.
Doesn't he say this to Pattinson? After we see Sinon ask Odysseus to embellish? So, Odysseus is both embellishing the legacy of a soldier he has felt awful for sacrificing, and he is also making Pattinson's suitor feel more shame.
Isn't this context pretty important to how we're supposed to interpret that line?
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:23 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
That was the biggest miss in the movie imo. I
I've always felt this was the weird one. I didn't care about Lupita, and I knew Page playing Achilles was nonsense. But my eyebrows were definitely raised when I first saw him in the trailers
Page 79 of 104
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News