Ben Shapiro’s praise for Christopher Nolan’s new film The Odyssey has split conservatives, raising big questions about art, ideology, and what the right should demand from Hollywood.
Story Snapshot
- Ben Shapiro calls Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey a “masterpiece” and blasts right-wing critics as “dead wrong.”
- Conservative reviewers like Michael Knowles say the film bends Homer’s story to modern “diversity, equity, and inclusion” politics.
- Shapiro has also slammed Elliot Page’s casting as “incredibly stupid,” creating tension inside the right’s response.
- Mainstream critics rave over the movie’s craft, while many conservatives worry about message and cultural impact.
Shapiro’s Bold Defense of Nolan’s New Epic
Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro has jumped firmly onto Christopher Nolan’s side, calling The Odyssey a “masterpiece” and insisting right-wing critics are “dead wrong” about the film. His stance puts him at odds with many on the right who see the movie as another big-budget vehicle for progressive themes dressed up in classical clothing. At the same time, Shapiro has a history of blasting “woke” casting choices, including Disney’s recent Snow White remake, where his remarks were quickly labeled “bigoted” by liberal media outlets.
That history matters because it shapes how mainstream outlets frame this new debate. When Shapiro praises Nolan yet still complains about some casting decisions, critics paint him as confused or hypocritical instead of serious. This pattern appeared with his comments on Snow White, where reporters used his tone to dismiss broader concerns about accuracy, tradition, and respect for source material. Now, with The Odyssey, the same voices use his “masterpiece” label to suggest that any right-wing pushback must be ideological, not artistic.
How Nolan’s Story Choices Clash With Homer
Conservative reviewer Michael Knowles has taken the opposite view from Shapiro, laying out several specific ways Nolan’s film changes the original Homeric story. He points to a major shift in the famous lotus-eaters episode. In Homer, Odysseus fights off forgetfulness and pulls his men back to duty. In Nolan’s version, Knowles says Odysseus himself gives in to the pull of escape, turning a scene about leadership and discipline into one about weakness and surrender. For many on the right, that feels like a downgrade of a classic heroic virtue.
Knowles also highlights a new guilt-driven storyline tied to the Trojan horse, where Odysseus fears he has violated Zeus’s law of hospitality. That twist steers the tale toward modern themes of trauma and moral doubt instead of the ancient focus on cunning, duty, and fate. On top of that, he notes that the film changes the ending so Odysseus exiles himself rather than reclaiming his home with clear authority. These changes are not small; they reshape what the story says about manhood, responsibility, and the right to rule.
DEI Casting Fights and Conservative Concerns
Casting choices have become a flashpoint for conservative viewers, and The Odyssey is no exception. Knowles points to Elliot Page’s role as Sinon, a figure best known from Virgil’s Aeneid, who tricks the Trojans into accepting the wooden horse. He argues that picking a high-profile transgender actor for a character defined by deception looks like a deliberate “diversity, equity, and inclusion” statement. To many right-leaning viewers, this feels like Hollywood trying to make a political point instead of simply telling the story straight.
Lupita Nyong’o’s dual role as Helen of Troy and Clytemnestra also sparks debate. In classical tradition, these women are sisters, not twins, and Helen’s beauty and choices are central to the cause of the war. Knowles says Nolan’s twin approach reshapes the conflict as mainly driven by male ambition and power structures, downplaying Helen’s role and pushing a more modern feminist reading. Shapiro himself has criticized elements of the casting, calling Page’s role “incredibly stupid” and “a dumb kind of woke acknowledgement,” even while defending the film overall. That mix of praise and criticism has left many conservatives unsure where to land.
Artistic Craft Versus Ideological Drift
Mainstream reviewers have praised The Odyssey strongly on technical and artistic grounds, describing it as visually stunning and emotionally powerful. Christopher Nolan is known for using real locations, large-scale practical effects, and advanced camera work, and early coverage of this film highlights that same level of craft. These strengths matter. They show the movie is not lazy or cheaply made. Instead, it sits inside the modern elite film world, with top talent and serious effort spent to impress both critics and audiences.
Ben Shapiro (for once in his life) could have been cool.
He had the easiest opportunity imaginable. The entire internet was coming together to mock Christopher Nolan’s latest movie, united by one simple TRUTH:
This movie is sucks.
Ben could have stood with the people. He could… pic.twitter.com/ZyOpAYQuPY
— 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 🇺🇸 (@creation247) July 18, 2026
Yet even positive reviews admit some story and theme problems. One major outlet notes that Odysseus’s emotional journey can feel “choppy,” and the film’s attempt to tie the erosion of civilization to Zeus’s hospitality law is “underdeveloped and unconvincing.” That kind of feedback backs up what many conservatives intuit: the film looks great, but its message is mixed. The core struggle for the right is deciding how to judge works like this—celebrate the craft, reject the ideology, or demand better from Hollywood on both fronts.
Sources:
mediaite.com, vanityfair.com, independent.co.uk
