"The Odyssey" Reviews | Read more at in70mm.com The 70mm Newsletter |
| Written by: | Date: 19.07.2026 |
15/7OMM really is the only way to watch this movie | |
 "The Odyssey" at the Langley IMAX theater, BC, CanadaI saw "The Odyssey" in 70mm IMAX today at a late morning show. Its not Nolan's best film in my opinion, but it is a very good film. I can appreciate the extremely hard work they put into making this movie, as I know it must have been back braking work. Watching the film today, the cinematography was excellent, but also had quite ordinary shots in it. Films before, the IMAX shots were saved for very visual cinematic shots that wowed you. Now that the entire film is in IMAX, the wow factor sort of dissipates a little, because its now all IMAX. Not to say there weren't very good visuals in this film, there were. But rather ordinary shots were mixed in with it, taking a bit of the wow factor out of it. • Go to "The Odyssey" Production Information • Go to “The Odyssey”: The 70mm Presentations That said 15/70 really is the only way to watch this movie. I was thinking with some of the shots, the tight framing that would end up in 5 perf, would seem almost too tight and claustrophobic. You really need the extra height in the image to let the frame breath. I noticed some shots the framing is more like still photography, instead of people the head right in the center of the frame for extraction later to other formats. Watching this film, even though it was medium format on film, I still noticed how soft the film image is. It still looked great and looked like film (as it is), but after working with 8K digital for 4 years now, I can tell how soft the film image is on screen. But I like that look too, so its not a complaint. Digital has a sharper edge on things in the shot, making the image seem sharper in total. Film is soft by comparison. I could see grain in some shots today, though not offensive by any means. Color grading was good on the print I saw today. The theater was packed as expected. Some people were talking about IMAX 70mm as if this was their first experience with it. That said the screen seemed small this time viewing it, as I could see right to the corners in my vision. This is the Langley IMAX theater. They recently got the Richmond IMAX theater back online with the 15/70 projector that's been sitting there unused since 2012. They got it running again. So that's two theaters in BC now that is capable. As for the movie itself, I liked it a lot, but I did have some complaints with it, partially with the stilted dialogue Matt and Tom were giving. The movie did look very good though. The ending of the movie was the best part and really well done. I admit I was getting emotional during the ending, and even had a couple tears come out. But earlier in the film, it didn't quite emotionally connect with me, as some scenes didn't have the impact they had with other people. The horror scene was good, but didnt scare me like it did others. The witch scene was downright creepy though. Im going again on Sunday for a second viewing (if my friend confirms the date). Nolan's movies need more then one viewing to take it all in and digest it. Scott Pickering - Vancouver, B.C. Canada | More in 70mm reading: The last showing at the Park Theater 70mm, Cinerama, IMAX and Cinemas in Canada 70mm Presentations in Vancouver "Dunkirk" in 70mm IMAX at the Langley theater "Oppenheimer" Reviews What did you think about the 7OMM Road Show Version of The Hateful Eight? in70mm.com - Short stories in70mm.com News Peripheral Vision, Scopes, Dimensions and Panoramas in70mm.com's Library Presented on the big screen in 7OMM 7OMM and Cinema Across the World Now showing in 70mm in a theatre near you! 70mm Retro - Festivals and Screenings |
Three hours of fights and accidents | |
| |
Overall it’s a solid movie | |
 "The Odyssey" at BFI IMAX, London, UK.When purchased on 17 July 2025 I was due to attend the first public screening, but IMAX added a few more shows. The original ticket is 305mm x 136mm The minor criticisms first... at times the acting is a little pedestrian, plus I was not a fan of the modern dialogue and the profanities seemed out of place. The comparisons to "Troy", perhaps "Lord of the Rings" and other modern interpretations of classic novels is obvious. When in full swing the movie is relentless and the action scenes are great. Often there is no time to pause, catch your breath or reflect. The movie is classic Nolan and I liked the time shift and back/forward but it was akin to a rollercoaster with no level section. Some scenes appear slightly clipped and in the final hour it is bang, bang, bang; maybe there’s going to be a five hour director's cut? I had no issue with the selection of actors and actresses and can see multiple Oscar nominations for the Casting Director and several supporting roles, plus maybe a handful of technical awards. "The Odyssey" is epic but I will reserve judgement if it is ‘an epic’ as maybe it should be wider with a full orchestral score; that said the score is great and the drumming adds to the tension. Overall it’s a solid movie and I look forward to watching again plus buying the 4K to watch at home. Tim Collins, London, UK | |
... was not as thrilled by the movie itself | |
 "The Odyssey" in Copenhagen. Picture: Thomas Hauerslev"The Odyssey" at Director's Village, LA, CA, USA: Paul Rayton: A co-worker and colleague, Mike (who I've known for ~40 years) couldn't wait to see "The Odyssey" out at the Village. Mike has been in the whirl of important screening events for decades and appreciates good projection. He was a projectionist at the Chinese in Hollywood for ~14 years, as well as being the Chief of Projection at one of the major Hollywood studios for about 10 years, and is very familiar with seeing projection done "right". He saw it at the "Director's Village" on the first Sunday afternoon. Good crowd, maybe about 85% full ... He liked the sound SYSTEM at the Village, and related to me that the sound really "kicked ass". He really loves the auditorium and general presentation at the Village, and feels it's one of the top venues for seeing film in L.A. He was not as thrilled by the movie itself. The story and characters didn't transport him to ancient times. He also felt that the screen was possibly not bright enough, at least not to do the "Odyssey" justice. If the image is meeting SMPTE spec of ~16FL, it seemed a bit lacking. He felt that hurt the movie, because so MANY scenes are kind of dark, so it loses some of the expected "glow" when the image is timed to be dark ... 70mm conventional (5-perf) - Odyssey Opening Weekend: 1. Village Westwood $155,212 2. Music Box Chicago $153,393 3. Cineplex Varsity Toronto $130,386 4. The Alex $114,480 5. Village East NYC $112,600 6. Coolidge Corner Boston $105,472 7. Regal Union Sq NYC $97,834 8. Hollywood Portland $93,584 9. SIFF Downtown Seattle $81,789 (former "Cinerama" Theater) 10. Vista LA $75,393 | |
We found the film’s cinematography, editing, acting and script of no particular distinction | |
 Dr. Peter and Jackie Gordon sitting at the Providence Place IMAX theatre.By Jonathan Kleefield, MD. Photographs also by the author The Odyssey in IMAX 15/70 I have some confessions to acknowledge: 1) I have never read “The Odyssey.” 2) I have no grasp of the ancient Greek language. Though these limitations could be used to raise doubt regarding my ability to either verify the accuracy of the events portrayed in Christopher Nolan’s movie, or the film’s effort to be as truthful a representation of this fabled poem, it was my hope that the director’s skills in storytelling, including his authoring the screenplay, would allow me to follow the scenario. Of course, I have had at my disposal endless synopses available on line to prepare for this experience. But, as the present publication is not so much a vehicle for literary criticism as a forum to discuss film technology issues, I feel that my lifetime of experiences involved in viewing and making films should permit me to evaluate the film as a whole, but more specifically, Mr. Nolan’s claim that the IMAX 15/70 format is the ultimate viewing experience. On August 11, 2026, I, as well as two close friends, Dr. Peter Gordon and his wife Jackie, met at the Providence Place IMAX theatre, just outside the city of Providence, RI, to watch this film. We were able to secure excellent seats (Row J, seats 17-19) about a month in advance for the 10AM show. These seats lay along the optical axis of the theatre. (In 2023, I visited this theatre to view Nolan’s "Oppenheimer", again in 15/70 IMAX.) As Dr. Gordon, an over half century friend of mine, is an expert photographer, and like me, a former radiologist, and Jackie has a passion for art, three pairs of “educated” eyes and ears served as the “reviewing committee.” Compared to the mammoth auditorium in New York City, the Providence facility is more intimate in scale. The IMAX screen filled nearly our entire visual fields. True 15/70 IMAX venues are designed with “stadium seating,” which ensures the heads of patrons in front of you don’t obscure your view. The writer also benefitted from recent successful cataract operations in both eyes, yielding a nearly perfect visual correction. This capability permitted me to accurately assess for image clarity. | |
 Google search: "Excessive sound levels in IMAX movies". Warning of high sound volume. No such warning was present at the theater, which would be a violation in the workplace in the United States.To put it simply, viewing this film was nothing short of an endurance contest, primarily because the sound was set at a level that could only be described as “earsplitting.” My companions wisely brought along earplugs, but even when they were properly inserted, most of the film was so excruciatingly loud that they jammed the plugs into their ears with their fingers! Bereft of such plugs, I struggled with gently inserting a paper tissue into each ear, and felt aural pain that suggested the potential of serious hearing injury. Dr. Gordon had an I Watch, with a loudness analyzer, and was constantly being warned of “dangerous sound levels.” On searching the internet, I have provided two screenshots which support our impressions, and advise coming to the theatre with the plugs. No warning of high sound volume was presented before the patron entered the theatre. If this were a workplace situation, in the USA there are laws in place to guard employees from experiencing hearing damage. I think all parties involved, from content producers to exhibitors should be put on notice that an “immersive” experience does not have to include damage to one’s hearing, and if they choose that option, they are liable to be a party in a lawsuit! It made the experience frankly horrendous. Dialogue throughout was anything but intelligible, and when Ludwig Goransson’s synthesizer/drum score was raised to its thunderous levels, it was impossible to distinguish what was being said. This situation flies in the face of what is described below- the effort to secure a “noiseless” IMAX camera in order to record live dialogue! Given how that information was laid into the soundtrack, it seemed an entirely irrelevant goal. The giant IMAX screen image was steady, and despite numerous prior showings, only a very minimal quantity of dust was visible. I was able to view the results of the glass “windshield” and its “wiper” as it operated to clear dust which had lodged in the aperture. Honestly, though, image sharpness in the landscape scenes did not look any better than even a 2K digital image. An occasional closeup of Odysseus was impressive, but given that his face filled the IMAX image, I wonder what part of the face was chosen to be displayed in the other formats, noted below. Any dark scenes, of which there were many allegedly lit by firelight, appeared with extensive areas so washed out that one could easily perceive the projection screen material, with at least about a six- inch section showing a gross blemish. I think that anyone who considers such an image to be the “gold standard” needs to sit in front of a properly adjusted self-emissive display. That device shows true black and makes the image vibrant. What we saw yesterday was only slightly better than the “drive in” movie theatre of the 1950s. Anyone who frequented those establishments knew that the primary reason to go there was to have a venue to explore one’s amorous attentions more thoroughly, rather than watching the film itself. What I find difficult to understand is how a film which has been heavily promoted as “being shot entirely in IMAX” can allow exhibition elsewhere using either film or digital projection that does not adhere to the original aspect ratio (for 15/70 IMAX- 1.43:1). Mr. Van Hoytema is an award-winning cinematographer, and I presume he employed his compositional skills to choose what is being photographed in IMAX to optimize the content of this particular image shape. How then can one take this image and crop it to conform to the 2.2:1 aspect ratio of conventional 70mm film projection, or even worse, 2:39:1 “scope” projection without losing a substantial portion of the original image on those additional “versions?” Logically, one could deduce that Mr. Nolan and Mr. Van Hoytema concluded that the top and bottom portions of the original IMAX image were not critical to the image content in the first place, and that what is “important” is shown on the non-IMAX film formats. So, it could follow from such an assumption- why bother to use this IMAX film image capture in the first place? That’s an awfully expensive medium to photograph stuff that seems to be considered “disposable.” As noted above, if one extracts the close up image of Odysseus’ face filling the IMAX screen in the scene mentioned previously, it would be impossible to display it completely in a more cropped format. A massive marketing campaign has been waged to claim no other means to display images can match IMAX 15/70. Yet, at least to my eyes, as well as a careful appraisal of the math involving the “modulation transfer function,” which quantifies actual spatial resolution, modern digital cinematography can create images so sharp that faces and fabrics, for example, reveal incredible detail that matches or exceeds images caught on film. The most recent digital movie I saw, just last week, “Hamnet,” was photographed with an Arri Alexa 35, and the panoramas and close ups, as seen on my 83” Sony OLED display, were extraordinary in terms of image clarity. The present generation of digital cinema cameras also boast enormous dynamic range, equal or greater than some photochemical film and its various displays, and particularly so, compared to a projection film print. I have previously discussed in other posts to this journal my concerns about projection of a movie on a screen, vs. a self-emissive display, the latter being my preferred way to critically view such a presentation. No projected image I have seen recently can display a “true black” as faithfully as a well calibrated self-emissive display. As a result, the image will be more “washed out” on the big screen, including the present IMAX venue. Modern digital image capture and display systems also have extraordinary capability in terms of grey scale rendition, as well as color gamut. My contention was powerfully reinforced by the pathetic “state of the art” display I just witnessed. | |
 Providence Place IMAX theatre including stadium seating.In that light, my understanding is that in post-production, image manipulation, including color grading of digital or film sources, is carried out by viewing them on a high resolution, Sony TFT monitor. If that is the case, how can the post-production team really do anything but compromise when their work is then shown on a projection screen? I have read that digital image density guides, called “look up tables,” can be constructed on digital image capture devices to permit the post-production team to adjust the final projected image to conform as closely as possible to the original, as well as allow overlay of deliberate image manipulation by “colorists,” the latter to create a “mood.” In the 21st century, it’s my opinion that an all-digital workflow offers everything that film could provide and more, plus fiscal economy that no film system can achieve. I am aware that some photochemical die-hards, though they do allow for a “digital intermediate,” then rescan the output of the digital device back to film. I cannot really understand how that transfer adds to the viewing experience, but surely realize that it adds to the expense. Then, one has to figure the cost of making release prints, including shipping. And, making the release prints as copies derived from an internegative further degrades the final image quality. There are now companies who can provide digital overlay of the characteristics of a given film stock, allowing the final digital result to emulate what film itself could reveal, thus reducing further the validity of the claim that film provides an incomparable “look.” By keeping in the digital domain, one does not have the image degradation caused by making film copies. Two days before viewing the film, I found an excellent You Tube presentation, which takes the viewer into the actual IMAX facility in Playa Vista, CA. Interviewed was Patricia Keighley, who has been a senior Quality Officer at the company for over 30 years. She is the widow of David Keighley, also in the IMAX Quality division, and the couple were involved in the design and manufacture of the new IMAX camera Nolan used for "The Odyssey". Ms. Keighley showed the extensive plant, including hand, cement- based splicing of the original 65mm negative, other splicing with polyester tape to assemble the platters of prints for shipment, the cold storage room for film, and finally, the gigantic projection booth and theatre. I guess when money is no impediment, one can have such an extensive, comprehensive facility allowing all concerned to monitor the quality of the final film product before it is shipped, and in particular, Mr. Nolan. Regarding money, as of the writing of this piece, this particular film, which cost $250 million USD has grossed over $1.1 billion USD. Sadly, I feel that the $60 USD I laid out for this sorry affair was anything but “value received.” | |
 The huge blimp surrounding a Technicolor 3 strip camera from the 1940’s with Technicolor cinematographer, Jack Cardiff, seated on the left, and director of photography, Geoffrey Unsworth, attempting to operate the beast.An avalanche of “media hype” has been bestowed on the quest to sufficiently silence the IMAX camera to allow live recording of dialogue for this film. I found it amusing that Matt Damon, the star of the present production described his working in "Oppenheimer" in facing a camera whose incredibly loud noise when shooting resembled a “blender.” All dialogue had to be dubbed. Given Mr. Nolan’s economic clout in his industry, he drove the IMAX company to produce a quieter camera, named the “Keighley,” in honor of one of IMAX’s executives who recently passed away, discussed in the previous paragraph. IMAX has additional You Tube videos that show the new camera’s interior, as well as highlighting that it has an unprecedented number of digital displays (how ironic!) to aid the cinematographer, compared to the conventional photochemical film camera. Even so, the noise was not sufficiently attenuated to permit live dialogue recording, necessitating what the IMAX people claim is a “revolutionary” blimp surrounding the camera. Together with the camera itself, this big, ungainly, box-shaped apparatus weighs over 400 pounds, so not even the husky Mr. Van Hoytema could hoist that monster onto his shoulder! Being so large, the blimp obscured eye lines between actors, apparently requiring the use of outboard mirrors to allow the performers to see one another. This issue of apparatus size is nothing new in the film business. The attached illustration shows the huge blimp surrounding a Technicolor 3 strip camera. The photo dates from the 1940’s and depicts the extraordinary Technicolor cinematographer, Jack Cardiff, seated on the left, with another future storied director of photography, Geoffrey Unsworth, attempting to operate the beast. One thing that team didn’t seem to require were mirrors to successfully make their landmark films with Michael Powell, including “The Red Shoes,” “Black Narcissus,” and “A Matter of Life and Death.” In typical British fashion, the Technicolor blimp acquired the charming nickname, “the enchanted cottage.” In summary, I cannot hide the major disappointment experienced by myself and my companions when viewing this film. The egregiously high sound level made the viewing extremely unpleasant and frankly biologically stressful. Even excluding that limitation, we found the film’s cinematography, editing, acting and script of no particular distinction. We all agreed that IMAX 15/70 does not represent the claimed “revelation” in film exhibition quality. As was the case previously, I will render a final judgment on the new film under today’s discussion once I acquire the 4K disc for home viewing. I found the latter much more appealing the last time when “Oppenheimer” was the subject of my appraisal. Perhaps when I am capable of viewing the film on my imaging device, and with full control of the sound, I will have a more positive response to those aspects. But, given what I saw yesterday, I will not purchase this film for my collection, as so many additional factors made this a presentation I do not feel is of sufficient value to be acquired. Rather, I will wait until a free copy is available from our local library. | |
 • Go to "The Odyssey" Review | |
| Go: back - top - back issues - news index Updated 13-08-26 |
