Emily Wilson Calls Nolan's 'Odyssey' Script 'Abysmal'

Classics scholar Emily Wilson, celebrated for her 2017 English translation of Homer’s The Odyssey, has publicly excoriated Christopher Nolan’s screenplay for his forthcoming big-screen adaptation of the epic poem. In a statement obtained by USA Film News, Wilson described the screenplay as “abysmal” and added, “I would be ashamed to have written any part of this script.”

Wilson, a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania, did not specify which elements of Nolan’s draft provoked her ire, but her condemnation carries considerable weight in both academic and literary circles. Her translation, published by W. W. Norton, became a landmark for its accessibility, its deliberate meter, and its attention to the poem’s original complexity, including its treatment of slavery, gender, and violence. The book was praised for stripping away centuries of archaism while restoring the work’s narrative force, earning Wilson a MacArthur Fellowship and a wide readership far beyond the academy.

Nolan, the writer-director known for Interstellar, Inception, and The Dark Knight trilogy, is in the early stages of producing his own version of Homer’s foundational text. Few details have been made public - no cast announcements, no release date, and no runtime have been confirmed. The film does not yet have a rating on review aggregators. According to project metadata, Nolan himself is listed as a cast member, though his role has not been specified. The director has long expressed interest in tackling ancient myth alongside his more science-fiction-oriented works, and his decision to write the screenplay himself was seen as a sign of deep personal investment.

Wilson’s critique, however, suggests a fundamental disagreement with how Nolan has interpreted the source material. Translation and adaptation are distinct crafts - Wilson translated the Greek verses; Nolan is rewriting them for the screen - but both demand fidelity to the spirit of Homer’s narrative. Wilson’s blunt statement implies that, at least in her estimation, Nolan has fallen short of that standard. The word “abysmal” signals not mild disappointment but a wholesale rejection of the script’s quality.

Wilson’s literary legacy

Wilson’s 2017 Odyssey was the first English translation of the epic by a woman, and it quickly became a cultural touchstone. Rather than smoothing over the poem’s harshness, she foregrounded the violence of Odysseus’ world - the casual slaughter of the suitors, the hanging of the maidservants - while also capturing the domestic pain of Penelope and the psychological struggles of Telemachus. Her translation was celebrated for its clarity and for confronting the poem’s ethical tensions head-on. It sold hundreds of thousands of copies and is now widely used in university courses and book clubs.

That background makes her criticism of Nolan’s screenplay particularly pointed. She is not a film critic but a textual scholar who has dedicated years to understanding Homer’s language and structure. Her judgment that the screenplay is “abysmal” implies that Nolan has not only produced poor writing but has missed the very thing that makes the epic endure.

Nolan, for his part, has built a career on narrative complexity - time loops, memory puzzles, layered dreamscapes - and his approach to The Odyssey will likely experiment with structure. The original poem, after all, is non-linear, opening in medias res with Odysseus trapped on Calypso’s island while his backstory unfolds through flashbacks. A straightforward chronological retelling would be the most conventional choice, but Nolan’s penchant for structural innovation could produce something more challenging. Wilson’s remarks, however, suggest that whatever Nolan has written fails on its own terms.

The film industry has long circled Homer’s Odyssey as a prestige property. Previous attempts include a 1954 Italian production, a 1997 television miniseries, and the Coen brothers’ 2000 film O Brother, Where Art Thou?, which freely reinterpreted the epic in a 1930s Deep South setting. Nolan’s version is expected to be more direct, though his involvement - both as director and screenwriter - signals a personal vision of the material.

Wilson’s public slam is unusual for a scholar of her stature, who typically reserves judgment for peer-reviewed journals rather than Hollywood gossip. That she chose to comment so forcefully indicates that the screenplay, as she has seen it, crosses a line. Whether Nolan will respond - or even acknowledge the criticism - remains to be seen. No statement from the director or his representatives had been released by press time.

As the project remains in development with no announced release date, Wilson’s words may fuel broader debates about the responsibilities of adaptation, especially for works that hold canonical status. For now, the only concrete takeaway is a blistering verdict from one of the foremost living readers of Homer: “I would be ashamed to have written any part of this script.”

Source: Variety