The Odyssey: Movie Vs Book Essay, Research Paper

Different Character Portrayals From Book to Film

The Odyssey, the authoritative heroic poem by Homer, has been retold for centuries since it was foremost written in *** . Each of these retellings differs from, one another, seeing as each version has a slightly alternate return on the narrative. This causes characters to be portrayed otherwise from interlingual rendition to interlingual rendition. After reading the retellings by John* Evslin and W.H.D. Rouse, every bit good as watching Konchalovslky s movie version, it was clear one could observe seeable differences between characters. Noteworthy differences were most clearly seen in Odysseus, Anticlea, and Teiresias, who s word pictures I will compare as they were described in Book XI of The Odyssey, How Odysseus Visited the Kingdom of the Dead.

Odysseus, the chief character, is fundamentally portrayed as a termagant, fearless, and smart adult male, smartly weaving his manner out of different quandary. After all, he is referred to as the adult male who was ne’er at a loss, and judging from his description in both movie and different interlingual renditions, this ever seems to be true. However, there are several smaller differences in his character portraiture in different retellings. In Evslin s version, seeing as this version isn t greatly elaborate, one can t derive such a feel for Odysseus character as one can from Rouse s interlingual rendition. Odysseus deficiency of emotion may portray him to be instead detached, although he does handle the shades with whom he talks with regard, since he is merely a invitee in the Kingdom of Dead. However, it doesn t seem that the shades think as extremely of him as they might in Rouse s version, seeing as Teiresias won t allow him to see Tantalus or Sisyphus, two shades that were doomed to endure in Hades Kingdom. Overall, from merely reading this chapter, one can t state a great trade about Odysseus character.

In Rouse s interlingual rendition, Odysseus seems to hold rather an honored presence in the Land of Dead. He seems to be really sort and emotional, frequently casting cryings for those he sees dead. In this version, he has a much more apparently realistic meeting with his female parent. In this interlingual rendition, non merely does Odysseus see the psyches as being wise, but the dead see him as holding great cognition every bit good. For illustration, rather a few of the dead that Odysseus speaks to oppugn him about their relations who are still alive and what his traveling on with those who are still alive. These shades seem to bask Odysseus company, even inquiring him to protract his stay a spot.

What do you believe of him now, gentlemen? she said. Isn T he a all right figure of a adult male, and clever plenty for anything? Now he is my invitee, but you all have your portion of the honor, so don T be in a haste to allow him travel & # 8230 ;

The movie seems to concentrate more on Odysseus as being highly brave, physically strong, and a great hazard taker ; evidently to add to his entreaty. It seems that in this version Odysseus is merely dodging falling temple pillars and and weaving in and out of fire, instead than being in the Land of Dead to get cognition. When he speaks to Teiresias, he besides doesn T seem to hold that great a regard for him as he does in the other version. Besides, in the film, Odysseus shoos the other souls off, alternatively of sing them with more regard, hence doing the liquors seem rather evil alternatively of heroes and guiltless common mans who have come to the underworld.

Another character who appears slightly differ from reciting to reciting is Anticlea, Odysseus female parent. In Evslin s interlingual rendition, once more, like with Odysseus, from Anticlea s function in this chapter the reader can t appreciation that great of an apprehension for her character. From what is written about her, she seems instead austere and humdrum, barely demoing marks of emotion doing her character seem less alive. Anticlea besides seems rather insouciant in the meeting of her boy. From what she says one can t see that utmost feelings she posses for Odys

seus, feelings that were purportedly so great they drove her to kill herself. From their interaction one can t see they portion that much of a mother/son bond as it suggests in the movie and Rouse version. It besides doesn T seem that Anticlea thinks extremely of Penelope, for when she mentions her it seems she speaks with a instead mocking, infantile tone, when she talks about his married woman being sought after by suers while Odysseus is gone. I knew Penelope was being wooed by other work forces in your absence … I knew it good, but I would non talk immorality of your married woman, non I, non I… ( p. 583 )

Anticlea could hold seemed slightly of a alien to Odysseus in Evslin s version, but by her behaviour in Rouse s interlingual rendition she seems more like a lovingness mother.She speaks with much emotion, doing her character seem more alive. This makes Anticlea more appealing to the reader, since one can really experience her deep sorrow. Anticlea tells Odysseus how she was driven to take her ain life, believing that he was dead and she could no longer travel on life in his absence. She besides tells him about Penelope, who she describes as holding a patient bosom, but her darks are filled with cryings and sorrow. ( p.127 ) , doing it look as if she likes Penelope, contrary to what Evslin and the movie portray.

In the film, Anticlea ever seems really austere, even when reuniting with her boy. She does, nevertheless, show concern for him and his safety, showing him out of the crumpling temple. However, from merely watching this scene in the film, one couldn T get so much of a feel for her character than if they had seen other parts of the movie, for case the portion where she walked into the sea.

The last character in Book XI with noteworthy alterations is Teiresias, the asleep prophesier who Odysseus goes to the Underworld for advice. In Evslin s version he is portrayed as being really wise, merely as he is in the Rouse interlingual rendition. He seems to talk with a great trade of self-respect, and deems himself superior above others. He slightly feels he can state Odysseus what to make and has authorization over him, since he orders him to travel back to the ship and non be allowed to see Tantalus or Sisyphus, although Odysseus wanted to. Overall, Teiresias appears to be a character with a great trade of wisdom and cognition.

In Rouse s interlingual rendition, Teiresias seems to hold an extraordinary power, even above Odysseus. He gives Odysseus a elaborate history on how his ocean trip will continue from here, demoing that he has utmost cognition and is an astonishing prophesier. However, it seems that his presence International Relations and Security Network T every bit acknowledged as it is in Evslin s version, where all the shades seem to do manner for him, although it is clear that in this version he is besides extremely respected among the dead. Overall, he seems to keep the same place as an senior would in a folk ; regarded by all as somewhat of a knowing leader.

Teiresias doesn T seem to hold such a powerful presence in the film. On the contrary, the movie makes him look terrorization, seeing as Odysseus himself seems instead scared when he is talking with him. I believe this may be because the film wants to portray Odysseus as being so much more favourable than everyone else, so it would be logical to non do Teiresias look every bit expansive as he seems in the other versions.

From closely holding read both versions and watching the movie, I was able to derive a great apprehension for the characters ; likely a greater apprehension than I would ve acquired from merely reading one interlingual rendition or holding merely seen the film. Although the characters did slightly differ from version to version, the rudimentss of their nature remained the same. Since there have been so many retellings of The Odyssey, its about impossible to state which description comes closest to that of Homer s original ; but in the terminal I find that it is up to the reader to make up one’s mind what they personally view each character as being, irrespective to as how they are described by the writer.