Ben Shapiro’s defense of Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey has split the right, exposing a deeper fight over how conservatives should judge modern “woke” Hollywood.
Story Snapshot
- Ben Shapiro calls Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey a “masterpiece,” rebuking right-wing critics.
- Michael Knowles and other conservatives attack the film’s “woke” casting and changes to Homer’s story.
- Mainstream reviewers praise the movie’s epic scale and performances, framing critics as ideological.
- The clash shows how the right is divided over whether to boycott or reclaim big cultural works.
Shapiro Praises Nolan’s Film While Slamming ‘Woke’ Casting
Ben Shapiro has moved into the center of this fight by blasting right-wing critics who attacked Christopher Nolan’s new film The Odyssey, declaring the movie a “masterpiece” and insisting that those who hate it are “dead wrong.” At the same time, Shapiro has not gone soft on Hollywood casting choices. He has called Elliot Page’s role as the warrior Sinon “incredibly stupid” and described it as a “dumb kind of woke acknowledgement,” arguing that Page’s slight build clashes with the image of a hardened soldier. This mix of high praise for the film and harsh criticism of one casting choice has given the left an opening to paint conservatives as confused or inconsistent.
Shapiro’s stance also comes with baggage. When he attacked Disney’s new Snow White for casting Rachel Zegler instead of a literal “snow white” princess, mainstream outlets mocked him as “bigoted” and used that episode to question his motives on any future casting debate. Now, as he backs Nolan’s epic while complaining about Elliot Page, the same outlets frame him as obsessed with “identity” rather than art. For Trump-supporting readers, this feels familiar: a media machine that ignores real questions about authenticity in favor of quick smears that shut conservatives out of cultural debate.
Knowles and Other Conservatives Warn of ‘Woke’ Story Changes
While Shapiro urges the right to embrace The Odyssey, Michael Knowles offers a sharply different view based on the film’s story choices. He points out that Nolan’s script changes key moments from Homer’s poem. In the lotus-eaters scene, Odysseus gives in to forgetfulness instead of resisting temptation as he does in the original text, which Knowles argues makes the hero weaker and less admirable. He also says the movie adds a new guilt theme around the Trojan horse, suggesting it breaks Zeus’s law of hospitality. For readers who respect the Western canon, these changes feel like Hollywood rewriting the classics instead of honoring them.
Knowles focuses heavily on identity politics inside the film. He notes that Sinon is not in Homer’s Odyssey at all, but in Virgil’s Aeneid as the trickster who helps deceive Troy with the horse. Casting Elliot Page in that role, he argues, makes an obvious “diversity, equity, and inclusion” statement that links a trans identity with a character built around deception. He also describes Lupita Nyong’o playing both Helen of Troy and Clytemnestra as twins as a feminist rewrite, turning the war into a story of male ambition rather than the power and responsibility of Helen alone. For many on the right, these moves look like the same pattern we have seen in schools and streaming services: take a core story of Western civilization and bend it to fit modern ideology.
Mainstream Critics Back Nolan and Marginalize Right-Wing Concerns
While conservative voices battle each other, mainstream critics have rallied behind Nolan’s film. Reviewers at outlets such as IGN have given The Odyssey top marks, describing it as a “must-watch epic” and praising its third act and emotional power. Chris Stuckmann and others highlight Matt Damon’s performance as Odysseus as “really, really terrific” and say the movie’s late-game payoffs are among Nolan’s best work. These glowing reactions create a strong public story line: the film is a triumph, and anyone who objects is simply driven by ideology. That narrative makes it harder for conservative viewers to raise honest concerns without being dismissed as “anti-art.”
Yet even some friendly reviews admit the film is not perfect. IGN’s own take describes Odysseus’s emotional arc as “choppy” and says Nolan’s attempt to tie the erosion of civilization to Zeus’s law of hospitality feels “underdeveloped and unconvincing.” Those comments back up what Knowles flags on the right: important themes around honor, hospitality, and the nature of heroism do not fully land. The difference is that mainstream critics treat these as minor issues in an otherwise great film, while right-wing critics see them as signs that the story was bent to modern ideas at the cost of timeless truths.
Art, Ideology, and the Right’s Cultural Strategy
Behind the debate over The Odyssey sits a bigger question for conservatives in 2026: how should we respond when “prestige” Hollywood mixes excellent craft with ideological choices we reject? Nolan is praised for using large-scale practical effects, with real locations, boats, and water to bring Odysseus’s journey to life in a way that feels grounded and physical. Many conservative viewers love this return to hands-on filmmaking rather than the cheap computer-generated shortcuts used in so much modern content. Technical mastery matters, and it is fair for Shapiro and others to recognize that.
At the same time, Trump voters are tired of being told to ignore what is on the screen. When casting and script choices push themes that undercut the Western heritage they respect, they do not want “just enjoy the movie” as the answer. The Shapiro–Knowles split shows two paths. One says: praise great craft, call out bad ideology, and stay in the cultural fight. The other says: stop feeding a system that keeps rewriting our stories and mocking our values. As this argument continues, conservative readers will need to decide how they want to engage with the big-budget epics that still shape the culture their children inherit.
Sources:
mediaite.com, vanityfair.com, independent.co.uk
