Christopher Nolan or Terrence Malick?

Why Cinema Needs Both Spectacle and Silence

Christopher Nolan and Terrence Malick represent two very different approaches to filmmaking.

This summer’s most anticipated movie is The Odyssey, which by all accounts will be another impressive cinematic statement from our filmmaker-of-the-moment, Christopher Nolan. Once the hoopla surrounding its impending opening dies down I will probably get around to seeing it. But I admit to not being in a big hurry to do so.

My lack of enthusiasm is partly due to this new movie’s subject matter. Every so often we get another splashy film about a Greek myth and I have certainly seen my fair share of them over the years. Some of these productions have been on the kitschy side, to say the least. I still haven’t fully recovered from Laurence Olivier as Zeus in Clash of the Titans, from 1981.

Of course, I have no reason to think Mr. Nolan’s latest picture will be anything short of a visual masterpiece, the furthest thing from ‘kitsch’ one could possibly imagine. I guess my concern in this case is whether there will be any point to all the dazzling visuals I can confidently anticipate, whether the themes of Homer’s epic poem will be lost amidst the overwhelming spectacle.

So what am I complaining about, you might ask, before even having seen The Odyssey?