Director Christopher Nolan has criticized a recurring trend in modern film analysis, specifically targeting amateur criticism
for a perceived failure to understand the mechanics of storytelling. Speaking with podcast host Zhong Shu during a press tour in Beijing, China, the two-time Oscar winner described a “real problem” where viewers believe that identifying a narrative device automatically invalidates its effectiveness.
Nolan Identifies ‘Fundamental Flaw’ in Amateur Film Criticism
Nolan argued that amateur critics often dismiss a film’s impact once they recognize the “mechanism” used to evoke an emotion. The criticism that’s often leveled at movies in general is, ‘Oh, the character has to be made sympathetic, so the character is manipulated in different ways or changed in different ways,’
Nolan said, adding that to be able to identify the mechanism does not invalidate the mechanism.
According to Nolan, some viewers operate under the misconception that if they can understand why a story affects them, then the storytelling didn’t work.
He countered this by stating that storytellers must remain mindful of the interaction between their intentions and the energy the audience brings to a heroic figure.
The ‘Lingua Franca’ of Hollywood Storytelling
Nolan defended the use of established cinematic tropes as a necessary “lingua franca” of storytelling developed by Hollywood over the last century. He described this as a universal and accessible modern language with specific rules and conventions. While he acknowledged that filmmakers can bend, move, or break these conventions, he emphasized that they must remain aware of them throughout the process.
The director explained that filmmakers build upon a shared understanding with audiences who have seen many films and are familiar with this common language. However, he noted that film grammar and language must evolve; when a specific trope becomes too familiar, it must be changed. He contrasted this with amateur critics, who he claims feel that identifying such mechanisms renders the work invalid, whereas he believes professional film criticism generally understands the necessity of these tools.
Adaptation and Controversy Surrounding ‘The Odyssey’
The film has faced scrutiny from academics and classicists. Emily Wilson, an “Odyssey” translator and inspiration for the film, wrote in the London Review of Books that Nolan’s version lacked psychological, emotional, political and ethical depth.
Wilson further claimed the themes were filtered through contemporary American ideas regarding philanthropic charity. In response to Wilson’s critique, author Joyce Carol Oates defended Nolan on social media, suggesting Wilson was using the crude language of MAGA folks.
Nolan also addressed the portrayal of Odysseus as a figure who must reflect on and repent for his military genius—a contemporary interpretation. He explained that the film is intended to be in conversation with modern audience expectations.
Philosophical Influences and Market Performance
Nolan revealed that his approach to the adaptation was influenced by his previous work on Oppenheimer, specifically the themes of the collapse of civilization and the end of the world.
Despite the academic debate, the film has seen significant commercial and critical success:
- Box Office: Grossed nearly $1 billion worldwide after three weekends in theaters.
- Rotten Tomatoes: Holds a 94% critic rating and a 97% audience score.
Related reading
