The Odyssey (1997)

In May of 1997, NBC aired a miniseries version of Homer’s Odyssey. Calling it a miniseries is a bit of a stretch, considering it was only two episodes—television movie works much better—but that is how it’s officially billed. The film is flawed in a variety of respects: it breezes through and even leaves out a great deal that is in the Odyssey and in the surrounding mythology, it changes some important themes, and especially in hindsight, the special effects leave much to be desired. All that being said, this version is an adequate retelling of Homer’s original epic, and for all its flaws, any remake is likely to be much, much worse.

One particularly gratifying feature of the 1997 film is the lack of diversity: all the characters are at least plausibly Mediterranean. Armand Assante, of Italian extraction, portrays Odysseus himself, and a large number of other characters, including Penelope, Athena, and Odysseus’ mother Anticleia, are likewise played by Greek or Italian actors. Brits, who to American audiences will pass for generically European, fill out the remainder of the roster, with a few others snuck into minor roles. The only concession made to diversity is Vanessa Williams, who is nonetheless believable as the seductive goddess Calypso. The film does not succumb to the temptation to have Odysseus explore the whole world for the sake of multicultural casting.

Assante’s portrayal of Odysseus is also to be praised. He manages to capture both Odysseus’ cunning and his prowess as a warrior. Today you’ll often see an implicit tradeoff between cunning and prowess: roguish characters aren’t as good at fighting as fighter-types, who aren’t so strong in the brains department. Examples of this “balance” include but are by no means limited to Jack Sparrow, Thor, and Loki. There’s a tendency to D&D-ize characters nowadays that did not exist in Antiquity. Probably the contemporary character closest to the Odyssean combination of brains and brawn is Themistocles from the second 300 movie. Odysseus is not a weakling who resorts to trickery merely to hold his own but rather a powerful fighter who deploys his mind to overcome extraordinary obstacles.

The film also admirably hews to the ancient culture of its setting. Hospitality is a recurring theme, as in the original epic, as is the subordination of servants to their masters, not as cruelly-treated, sub-human creatures but as mere inferiors to their genuine betters. The most notable archaism in the film comes at the beginning when Odysseus sets out for Troy: his mother instructs him to “turn Troy to dust,” to kill many men, and to bring back the spoils of victory. This she does with no trace of irony or sadness but rather as a mother proud to see her son go off to war. It is difficult to imagine such a line being delivered in the same way today and taken seriously outside of a 300-style movie.

Two halves together form the whole film, but each half is watchable on its own. The first part centers on Odysseus’ struggle to overcome hubris. Exultant in victory over Troy and over-proud to begin with, Odysseus defies the god Poseidon, who in response curses Odysseus to wander the seas until he has learned humility. The stories of Odysseus’ wanderings are naturally enough trimmed down for the sake of time, but we do get the famous incident with the cyclops.

The key episodes are with Aeolus and Circe. Aeolus, god of the wind, gives Odysseus a sack containing contrary winds—the only winds remaining free blow him and his crew to within sight of Ithaca. However, many of Odysseus’ crew, believing Odysseus has found treasure, consider themselves entitled to a share of what their master has found and open the sack while he sleeps. This unleashes the captured winds and blows the ship away from Ithaca. In a heartbreaking addition, the film shows Penelope and Anticleia, who felt Odysseus’ proximity, seeing with their own eyes how Odysseus is once again torn away from them.

The winds wreck Odysseus on the island of Circe, a dangerous foe, but even worse is the hostility between Odysseus and his crew. Odysseus is angry at his men for betraying him, and they smart at what they perceive as Odysseus’ lack of regard for their wellbeing. Anticlus, the man who opened the sack of winds, goes off to find food, and Odysseus instructs half his crew to go as well. When two of the men return, one transformed into a pig, Odysseus sets out to personally rescue his men. “I sent them,” he says. “I’ll bring them back.” His efforts and success restore the crew’s faith in their leader.

Most significantly, however, Odysseus comes to grip with his own inadequacies. He cannot simply rely on his own resources to see himself and his crew safely home; he requires divine assistance. While attempting to reach Circe’s palace, Odysseus is met by Hermes who offers him a plant to eat. Odysseus knows this plant is poisonous and initially refuses to eat, but he ultimately swallows his pride and accepts the god’s gift. This moment marks Odysseus’ transition from overwhelming self-reliance to acceptance of his own limitations. It takes another forty-five minutes for Poseidon to be completely satisfied, but it is this learned humility which holds Odysseus back from rushing home to certain death.

The second half of the film more closely follows Homer, though once again much is trimmed away. It lacks the same thematic unity of the first part, but it compensates by building up to the slaughter of the suitors. Telemachus is here more hot-headed and eager, but Odysseus restrains his son until the proper time to strike.

Indeed, this is the point of the whole story; the Odyssey should be retitled The Return of the King. The wanderings of Odysseus are all good stories and fun, and they help reveal the details of Odysseus’ character, but they are really just a digression in Homer’s tale. The true story is that Ithaca is falling into chaos, and the king must return to restore order before all is lost. But the task is daunting: a hundred suitors fill the king’s house, would kill him if they could, and even yet plot to murder his son. Only a hero can hope to succeed, and it will make a story worthy to be told for a thousand generations.

If the 1997 film has a fundamental failing, it is that it follows the popular account rather than Homer’s own. Nearly everyone, when they think of Homer’s Odyssey, thinks of the odyssey part, the great journey and the adventures of the titular character, even though those comprise only a sixth of the story. Also missing is Laertes, Odysseus’ father, and the reunion of the whole family, father, son, and grandson. A well-made film which followed Homer closely, which told the story of how Odysseus overcome the extraordinary obstacles in his path by skill first with wood and sail, then with words, then with cunning schemes, and finally with the weapons of war to prevent his home from falling into chaos would be magnificent to watch.

Of course, such a film could not be made today.

I guess we’ll just have to read the book.