An R-rated three-hour Homer movie is the year's biggest story — did Hollywood learn nothing?

• L

  Leo1d ago

  The lesson is so simple it hurts: treat audiences like adults, give them something worth leaving the couch for, and they will show up. We have been hearing for a decade that theatrical is dead and mid-budget adult dramas are poison and nobody wants three hours of anything without a cape. Every single one of those takes is lying in a ditch right now.

  214Reply
• J

  Jamie1d ago

  The funniest part of this whole story is that every executive who greenlit another superhero sequel in the last five years is currently in a conference room trying to figure out how to make their IP "feel like Nolan." Buddy. That's not how this works.

  178Reply
• R

  Ravi18h ago

  My honest take after thinking about it for a day: the lesson isn't "make Nolan movies," it's "stop making decisions by committee." Every frame of this film feels like a person made it. That's rarer than it should be and audiences can feel the difference even if they can't name it.

  143Reply
• N

  Noah1d ago

  I work in distribution and I can tell you the conversation internally is already broken into two camps — the people who want to greenlight serious prestige spectacle and the people who think the correct lesson is just "hire Nolan." Neither camp is fully right and I'm not sure the studios have the patience to figure out which parts are transferable before they blow $200 million proving it.

  97Reply
• S

  Sam23h ago

  I keep seeing people say "well Nolan's different" as if that ends the conversation. It doesn't, it starts one. WHY is he different? He commits to a vision, he doesn't test-screen the personality out of his movies, he casts for talent not Twitter, he respects the runtime the story needs. Those are choices. Other directors can make those choices if studios let them.

  88Reply
• N

  Nina1d ago

  To the person saying nobody else can replicate this — okay, but someone has to try. Studios spent fifteen years chasing Marvel and half of them lost everything doing it. At least chasing Nolan means they'd be chasing quality for once.

  63Reply
• N

  Noah7h ago

  What I find genuinely interesting is that the R rating was apparently non-negotiable for Nolan. He fought for it. Any other director loses that fight. A PG-13 version of this story is probably a different movie — maybe a worse one. The studio backed down and made more money. Studios should write that down somewhere.

  61Reply
• MB

  Marco B.15h ago

  Counterpoint to "runtime tolerance has gone down" — this film just proved the opposite, and if you're citing audience attention spans as your evidence against the film that broke attendance records, your evidence has a problem.

  53Reply
• TT

  Theo T.1d ago

  ok but youre acting like any studio can just decide to make a christopher nolan movie. the man spent 30 years building that audience. you cant manufacture that trust in a boardroom meeting

  47Reply
• A

  Avery5h ago

  I've read the Odyssey. Twice. I had low expectations because adaptations of things I love usually disappoint me. I was not disappointed. That alone feels like news.

  44Reply
• N

  Nina1d ago

  The real lesson nobody's naming: sound design and practical effects on an IMAX screen create an experience streaming literally cannot replicate. The living room will never have that. Studios keep forgetting they have a weapon streaming can't copy.

  41Reply
• C

  Casey18h ago

  Replying to the person who said three-hour movies are self-indulgent — The Godfather is two hours fifty-seven minutes. Would you like to walk that back or should I keep going.

  39Reply
• R2

  Reese 2111h ago

  The people saying Hollywood learned nothing are being a little unfair. Hollywood greenlit this. A studio said yes to a three-hour R-rated Homer adaptation from a director who doesn't do sequels. That took guts. The lesson is also that sometimes the suits get it right.

  34Reply
• RL

  Reese L.1d ago

  Honestly the Homer angle is what got me. Greek epic poetry adapted for a modern general audience. My high school English teacher would be losing her mind.

  33Reply
• R

  Reese1d ago

  I sat in that theater for three hours and fifteen minutes and did not check my phone once. Once. I check my phone at dinner. I check my phone in conversations with my wife. Something is working here that we should probably pay attention to.

  31Reply
• K

  Kofi3h ago

  To the person who said "nolan just built different, that's literally all this is" — okay, so your takeaway from the biggest box office story in years is that we should learn nothing and change nothing. Cool contribution.

  29Reply
• R

  Reese14h ago

  I changed my mind about something watching this. I went in thinking spectacle was incompatible with emotional depth — that big movies are by definition hollow. I came out wrong about that. It's a strange feeling and I recommend it.

  28Reply
• R

  Reese21h ago

  The "nobody else can do this" crowd is setting up a perfect excuse for studios to do nothing different and keep churning out the same product. It's almost like that's the point of the argument.

  26Reply
• Y

  Yuki5h ago

  The argument I'd push back on is the one saying this proves theatrical is back. Theatrical never left for the right product at the right scale. What this proves is that the right product is rarer than it should be. That's not a celebration, it's an indictment.

  23Reply
• JT

  Jordan T.1d ago

  My dad is 71 years old. Hasn't been to a movie theater since before COVID. Saw The Odyssey twice. Make of that what you will.

  22Reply
• N

  Noah1d ago

  okay responding to the person who said "some of us have kids" — I have three kids and I saw it at a Tuesday 10pm showing because I wanted it badly enough to plan around it. Where there's a will there's a way. The industry can't design around your Tuesday night.

  19Reply
• ZL

  Zara L.7h ago

  Replying to the person asking which auteurs get the keys next — that's exactly the right question and I think the honest answer is that nobody in a position to answer it actually knows, which is terrifying, because the wrong answer costs $200 million like you said.

  18Reply
• M

  Maya23h ago

  went in knowing nothing about the Odyssey beyond Cyclops has one eye. came out wanting to read Homer. make that make sense.

  17Reply
• JT

  Jamie T.11h ago

  Someone above mentioned IMAX sound and practical effects and that is the correct answer. I saw this in a bad theater first because tickets were sold out everywhere else and it was fine. Then I saw it in IMAX and it was a completely different film. The theatrical experience itself is part of the product. Studios need to remember they're selling that too.

  16Reply
• Y

  Yuki1d ago

  if you disagree that adults are starving for non-franchise original content, explain how you square that with the fact that this thing opened bigger than any franchise film this year. I'm waiting.

  14Reply
• FK

  Feli K.18h ago

  I'm a below-the-line crew member and I'll say this: the shoots that feel like someone's actually in charge, where there's a real vision from the top, are different. The energy is different. People work harder. That filters into the final product somehow. I can't prove it but I've felt it on both kinds of jobs.

  12Reply
• Y

  Yuki1d ago

  three hours is three hours. I don't care who directed it. some of us have kids.

  11Reply
• Y9

  Yuki 929h ago

  my mom texted me "I cried at the Odyssey movie" and I have never in my life seen my mother cry at a movie. sample size of one but I'm including it in my analysis

  11Reply
• I2

  Iris 211d ago

  Hard pass on the hot takes. This is a Nolan phenomenon, full stop. Call me when someone else pulls these numbers with a three-hour R-rated ancient epic.

  9Reply
• T

  Theo13h ago

  The gap I haven't seen anyone address: what does this mean for mid-range directors who aren't Nolan? Like yes the lesson is "give auteurs control and budget" — but which auteurs? Who gets the keys next and based on what? That's the actual hard question.

  9Reply
• M

  Marco1d ago

  The "it only works because it's Nolan" argument is a cope. You know who else was just "that one guy" before he proved the model? Spielberg. Lucas. The audience doesn't care about auteur theory, they care about whether the movie is good.

  8Reply
• F

  Feli8h ago

  The confidently wrong take of the thread so far is the person suggesting runtime tolerance has gone down. Every streaming platform has data showing people finish ten-hour series binges in a weekend. The tolerance is fine. The patience for bad content is what's gone.

  8Reply
• PB

  Priya B.16h ago

  ok but the Godfather argument doesn't really land because that was 1972 and audiences had different habits. runtime tolerance has gone down. everyone knows this.

  7Reply
• J

  Jordan3h ago

  nolan just built different. thats literally all this is. next.

  7Reply
• C

  Casey1d ago

  Nolan makes movies I respect more than I enjoy them. This one I actually loved. That's new for me and I think it's worth saying.

  6Reply
• S

  Sam21h ago

  three hour movies are self indulgent. always have been. always will be. fight me.

  5Reply

More debates people can't stop arguing about