17.9.26

BLACK & WHITE, MAI GRIGIO — MAOUSSI, IL TOPO CHE FA DANZARE L’AMORE



Maoussi comincia con una ballerina, un rifugiato congolese, un appartamento parigino e 

— perché evidentemente due esseri umani e il loro bagaglio emotivo non bastavano — 

un piccolo topo bianco in fuga.

Che cosa potrebbe mai succedere?

Beh, parecchie cose. Ed è proprio questo il bello del film.

Babette accoglie Edo nel suo appartamento per qualche giorno e, improvvisamente, questa coppia improbabile si ritrova a condividere la vita quotidiana con Maoussi, un minuscolo roditore 

che si comporta meno come un animale molesto che come un figlio adottivo, 

un piccolo Cupido baffuto arrivato allegramente a mandare all’aria i piani di tutti.

 Ben presto, amore, migrazione, musica, burocrazia e genitorialità si mettono a danzare intorno allo stesso tavolo.

Il soggetto avrebbe potuto facilmente diventare volgare, complicato o terribilmente “a tesi”

Charlotte Schiøler evita fortunatamente tutte queste trappole. 

Maoussi conserva buon senso, semplicità e uno stile meravigliosamente diretto — e questo è davvero apprezzabile. 

Il film non cerca di trasformare ogni scena in un monumento filosofico. 

Lascia respirare i suoi personaggi, li fa scherzare, danzare, fraintendersi e, a volte, precipitare senza preavviso in qualcosa di profondamente toccante.

C’è qualcosa di deliziosamente classico in questo approccio: una commedia romantica con una coscienza sociale, sospesa tra il calore di un piccolo dramma da camera 

e l’energia anarchica della commedia francese — 

con la differenza che qui il terzo incomodo ha i baffi.

E la musica è ovunque. 


Il percorso di Charlotte Schiøler nella coreografia dona al film un linguaggio fisico tutto suo, mentre i ritmi africani e le percussioni gli regalano un’energia contagiosa. 

Le scene di danza scivolano talvolta verso qualcosa di quasi tragico, creando un affascinante contrappunto al tono più leggero e malizioso del racconto. Qui arte e musica non sono semplici ornamenti: fanno parte del sangue stesso del film.

E poi — Moustapha Mbengue.

Silenzio in sala.

Si abbassa il sipario.

Si convocano le trombe.

E si dà il via a un miliardo di applausi per Moustapha Mbengue.

Perché, ricordiamolo, Maoussi era il suo primissimo ruolo cinematografico.

 Eppure irrompe sullo schermo con un’intensità semplicemente stupefacente. 

Nessuna timidezza: possiede la presenza fisica di un attore che sembra aver aspettato con impazienza che il cinema gli aprisse finalmente la porta. 

Il suo Edo è divertente, sensuale, vulnerabile, potente — a volte tutto questo in un unico sguardo.

E, naturalmente, non si tratta affatto di un miracolo isolato. Moustapha Mbengue ci aveva già regalato formidabili momenti di cinema in Amin e Souleymane

Maoussi conferma questa rara capacità di rendere un personaggio immediatamente vivo, profondamente umano, con una presenza che trabocca allegramente dai limiti dello schermo.

Ancora! Un altro miliardo di applausi!



Il film fa inoltre risuonare, qua e là, un’eco di opere come L’Histoire de Souleymane di Boris Lojkine, soprattutto nel modo in cui affronta la migrazione, la precarietà e l’angoscia legata ai documenti. 

Ma Charlotte Schiøler sceglie deliberatamente un’altra strada. 

Là dove Lojkine si immerge in un realismo frontale, Maoussi preferisce danzare altrove: verso la commedia, il romanticismo, la musica e l’assurdo.

E questa scelta è rinfrescante.

Perché dietro le battute si nasconde una domanda molto seria: 

come possono due persone provenienti da mondi diversi imparare a vivere insieme, 

ad amarsi e a capirsi 

quando non condividono necessariamente le stesse aspettative, la stessa cultura o lo stesso futuro?

La risposta passa apparentemente attraverso la coreografia, le percussioni, i documenti amministrativi…

E un topo.

Perché no?

Maoussi è modesto senza essere piccolo, 

politico senza diventare moralista, 

romantico senza sprofondare nello zucchero, 

e divertente senza mai dimenticare gli esseri umani nascosti dietro la commedia. 

Il film sa che gli argomenti più complicati sono talvolta meglio affrontati con una certa leggerezza.

Ed è forse proprio questo il suo fascino più grande: avrebbe potuto trasformarsi in un allegro pasticcio, ma sceglie la semplicità.

Una ballerina.

Un rifugiato.

Un topo.

Un po’ di musica.

Tanto amore.

E Moustapha Mbengue, che merita — siamo perfettamente ragionevoli — almeno un altro miliardo di applausi.





Da Giulia Dobre

Visto a Parigi, Settembre 17, 2026.


#moustaphambengue

#maoussi

Maoussi: Black & White, quand l’amour sort de sa cage


Maoussi commence avec une danseuse, un réfugié congolais, un appartement parisien et — parce que deux êtres humains et leurs bagages émotionnels ne suffisaient manifestement pas — une petite souris blanche en fuite.

Que pourrait-il bien arriver ?

Eh bien, beaucoup de choses. Et c’est précisément ce qui fait tout le sel du film.

Babette accueille Edo dans son appartement pour quelques jours et, soudain, ce duo improbable se retrouve à partager son quotidien avec Maoussi, un minuscule rongeur qui se comporte moins comme un nuisible que comme un enfant adopté, un petit Cupidon à moustaches venu joyeusement contrarier les plans de tout le monde. Très vite, amour, migration, musique, bureaucratie et parentalité se mettent à danser autour de la même table.

Le sujet aurait pu facilement devenir vulgaire, compliqué ou terriblement “à message”. Charlotte Schiøler évite heureusement tous ces pièges. Maoussi garde du bon sens, de la simplicité et un style merveilleusement direct — et c’est extrêmement appréciable. Le film ne cherche pas à transformer chaque scène en monument philosophique. Il laisse ses personnages respirer, plaisanter, danser, se comprendre de travers et, parfois, tomber sans prévenir dans quelque chose de profondément touchant.

Il y a quelque chose de délicieusement classique dans cette approche : une comédie romantique avec conscience sociale, quelque part entre la chaleur d’un huis clos intime et l’énergie anarchique d’une comédie française — sauf qu’ici, le troisième larron a des moustaches.



Et la musique est partout. Le parcours de Charlotte Schiøler dans la chorégraphie donne au film un langage physique singulier, tandis que les rythmes africains et les percussions lui insufflent une énergie contagieuse. Les scènes de danse basculent parfois dans quelque chose de presque tragique, créant un contrepoint fascinant avec le ton plus léger et malicieux du récit. Ici, l’art et la musique ne sont pas de simples ornements : ils font partie du sang du film.

Et puis — Moustapha Mbengue.



Silence dans la salle.

On baisse le rideau.

On convoque les trompettes.

Et l’on déclenche un milliard d’applaudissements pour Moustapha Mbengue.

Car, rappelons-le, Maoussi était son tout premier rôle au cinéma. Et pourtant, il surgit à l’écran avec une intensité absolument stupéfiante. Aucune timidité : il possède cette présence physique d’un acteur qui semble avoir attendu avec impatience que le cinéma lui ouvre enfin la porte. Son Edo est drôle, sensuel, vulnérable, puissant — parfois tout cela dans un seul regard.

Et ce n’est évidemment pas un miracle isolé. Moustapha Mbengue nous avait déjà offert de formidables morceaux de cinéma dans Amin et L’Histoire de Souleymane. Maoussi confirme cette capacité rare à rendre un personnage immédiatement vivant, profondément humain, avec une présence qui déborde joyeusement du cadre.

Encore ! Un autre milliard d’applaudissements !

Le film fait également entendre, par moments, un écho à des œuvres comme L’Histoire de Souleymane de Boris Lojkine, notamment dans son traitement de la migration, de la précarité et de l’angoisse liée aux papiers. Mais Charlotte Schiøler choisit délibérément une autre route. Là où Lojkine s’engage dans un réalisme frontal, Maoussi préfère danser ailleurs : vers la comédie, la romance, la musique et l’absurde.

Et ce choix est rafraîchissant.

Car derrière les plaisanteries se cache une vraie question : comment deux êtres venus de mondes différents peuvent-ils apprendre à vivre ensemble, à s’aimer et à se comprendre lorsqu’ils ne partagent pas nécessairement les mêmes attentes, la même culture ou le même avenir ?

La réponse passe apparemment par la chorégraphie, les percussions, les papiers administratifs…

Et une souris.

Pourquoi pas ?

Maoussi est modeste sans être petit, politique sans devenir moralisateur, romantique sans sombrer dans le sirop, et drôle sans jamais oublier les êtres humains qui se cachent derrière la comédie. Le film sait que les sujets les plus compliqués sont parfois mieux abordés avec une certaine légèreté.

Et c’est peut-être là son plus grand charme : il aurait pu devenir un joyeux bazar, mais il choisit la simplicité.

Une danseuse.

Un réfugié.

Une souris.

Un peu de musique.

Beaucoup d’amour.



Et Moustapha Mbengue, qui mérite — soyons parfaitement raisonnables — au moins un milliard d’applaudissements supplémentaires.


De Giulia Dobre

Paris, Espace Saint Michel,

Septembre 17, 2026.


#moussi

#moustaphambengue

#romance

28.8.26

CYRANO IN THE WEST END — TOUS POUR UN, UN POUR TOUS: NOSES, SWORDS, WIGS & OTHER WEAPONS OF MASS SEDUCTION

 


There are productions that begin when the curtain rises. 

There are productions that begin with an actor entering. 

And then there are productions that kick open the doors of the theatre, seize the audience by the collar and announce:  you are no longer merely watching.

Simon Evans and Debris Stevenson’s Cyrano de Bergerac belongs emphatically to the third category.

From the very beginning, Christian Patterson’s Ragueneau appears not simply to welcome us but to initiate us into the conspiracy. “The world out there, us quiet in here.


 It is the theatrical equivalent of Magritte painting a pipe and then politely informing us that, no, it is not a pipe. Except here the joke is even better: the theatre tells us that it is separate from the world while simultaneously dismantling the wall between the two.

And then — bang — the theatre becomes a playground.

Actors arrive through the auditorium, materialize in balconies, invade boxes, appear where respectable actors have no business appearing. 

The whole building seems to have developed a nervous system. One moment we are spectators; the next, we are extras in a Fellini film, wondering whether the person sitting three seats away is actually part of the cast.

There is something wonderfully baroque about it.

The production behaves as if the theatre had been designed by Bernini after three espressos and a nervous breakdown.

Space is no longer architecture; it is choreography. 

Entrances become trapdoors of imagination. 

Balconies become balconies in every romantic film ever made. 

The auditorium itself seems to have caught the fever of Cyrano.

It also makes perfect sense given the production’s origins in the Swan Theatre at Stratford: that intimate stage geometry where actors can look into your eyes, breathe almost in your lap and make the distinction between “audience” and “actor” deliciously unstable.

This is Cyrano as theatre confectionery: whipped cream, gunpowder, swords, poetry, desire and an alarming amount of nose.

The central question, of course, remains gloriously simple: 

do we fall in love with what we see or what we hear?

Cyrano sees himself as grotesque and therefore gives his words to Christian, who has the face but not the vocabulary. 

Roxane hears one man and sees another. The voice belongs to Cyrano; the cheekbones belong to Christian. 

It is essentially Renaissance portraiture crossed with Hollywood dubbing.

Titian might have understood it.

Hitchcock certainly would have.

And Adrian Lester understands it well.


Lester’s Cyrano is the production’s kinetics. 

He does not so much cross the stage as cut through it. He moves like a laser with excellent diction. His body seems perpetually to be finishing a sentence his mouth has not yet spoken. A hand floats; a shoulder turns; an arm extends into the air with the effortless elegance of a Degas dancer; and suddenly the enormous Cyrano becomes physically seductive.

Powell and Pressburger might have given him a staircase.

Busby Berkeley might have given him forty dancers.

Fellini would probably have given him a circus.

Lester needs none of them.

He has his body.

And that body is constantly contradicting Cyrano’s belief that he lacks physical allure. His movement becomes the beauty he imagines his nose has stolen from him.

And then there is the voice.

If Cyrano’s nose is his curse, his voice is his contraband.

The production gives its characters distinct speech patterns and accents, and these become almost musical signatures. 

Christian is direct; Roxane fractures and interrupts; Cyrano ricochets between rhythms. 

Nobody seems to be “doing poetry”. 

Instead, poetry behaves like weather: it moves through the bodies.

Words become choreography.

Choreography becomes seduction.

Seduction becomes catastrophe.

And somewhere in the middle of all this, a band appears.

Not metaphorically.

A real band.

Cyrano has won them in a bet, and Josh Sneesby as Raphaël, Fergus Murphy as Étienne and Joe Butcher as Bastien, together with the other musicians, become a wonderfully unruly gang of theatrical accomplices.

They are not sitting decoratively at the side looking like musicians waiting for interval.

They play.

They watch.

They react.

They inhabit the action.

They are part Greek chorus, part cabaret orchestra, part Brechtian prank, part Jacques Demy dream sequence. 

One half expects them to be wearing striped shirts and waiting for Catherine Deneuve to walk past on a bicycle.

Alex Baranowski’s score gives the production its bloodstream. 

The music doesn't merely underline emotion like an obedient film soundtrack. It provokes it

Childhood melodies appear like ghosts. Irish rhythms answer the actors. Music comments on desire. And when Cyrano conducts the band, Lester becomes for a few delicious seconds Karajan in a nose, commanding the orchestra of his own doomed heart.

It is absurd.

It is beautiful.

It is exactly right.

And then there is Scott Handy.


The Comte de Guiche enters as if he has been painted in oil, varnished, framed and then released from the National Portraits Gallery after closing time.

Handy has that particular quality so familiar from his RSC and Cheek by Jowl work: ethereal but passionate, refined but faintly dangerous, as if every sentence might be his last and every romantic disappointment a matter for the French Revolution.

He speaks almost through his teeth.

Not quite whispers.

Not quite hisses.

Something in between.

The words seem to slide out of his mouth with the sinuous movement of a snake discovering that aristocracy is an excellent disguise for venom.

The effect is gloriously creepy.

One can imagine Bronzino painting him: pale, elegant, immaculately composed, with the unmistakable expression of a man who has already arranged three assassinations before breakfast.

And Grace Smart’s costumes understand him perfectly.

That wig.

Those clothes.

That aristocratic silhouette.


Handy looks as though he has been cut directly from a seventeenth-century portrait and dropped rather inconveniently into the twenty-first century.

There is poetry in it.

Indeed, beneath the vanity, the entitlement and the increasingly desperate persistence of the refused suitor, Handy gives De Guiche something unexpectedly touching: the suggestion of a poet trapped inside the wrong painting.

He is a man who wants to be desired and cannot understand why desire refuses to obey rank.

For much of the play he seems almost boneless — an elegant aristocratic eel gliding from one humiliation to the next.

But then comes the final battle.

And suddenly:

Straight spine.

The voice deepens.

The command returns.

The column straightens.

The wig acquires military authority.

The elegant snake becomes a soldier.

It is a tiny physical transformation with the force of a close-up in a Sergio Leone film. No speech is required. The body tells us what has happened.

The Comte has finally become a man.


Joseph Christain’s Edmond inhabits another cinematic universe altogether. 

He can be menace, companion, comic relief and potential catastrophe in almost the same breath. 

There is something wonderfully French-thriller about him: the man standing quietly in the corner who looks perfectly harmless until you realise that he probably knows where all the bodies are buried.

He has the quality of someone who might appear in a Jean-Pierre Melville film, smoke one cigarette, say seven words and completely alter the plot.

Philip Cumbus’s Le Bret is softer, warmer and somehow even more dangerous to the heart. He combines the tenderness of the deepest friend with the practical efficiency of someone who has been forced to become producer, therapist, military adviser and emergency administrator of Cyrano’s disastrous emotional life.

Le Bret has probably spent years saying, “Cyrano, please don't.”

Cyrano has probably spent years ignoring him.


Cumbus makes the friendship deeply affecting — while also possessing, frankly, an almost indecent amount of leading-man handsomeness. One suspects that British theatre has become structurally unfair.

Then there is the extraordinary visual grammar of the costumes.

Everyone seems to have escaped from a different painting.

De Guiche is lavish seventeenth-century aristocracy.

Roxane looks like Toulouse-Lautrec wandered into a contemporary fashion editorial and refused to leave.


Christian possesses the clean, handsome simplicity of a portrait before the painter has decided to ruin the sitter’s life.

And Cyrano — jeans, doublet, geekery, romanticism — looks as though a medieval knight has been forced to attend a Camden house party.


It should not work.

It works beautifully.

The costume becomes psychological x-ray.

And Susannah Fielding’s Roxane is positively radioactive.


She is flashing-eyed, volatile, funny and eventually devastating. 

There is no passive princess here. She is a woman who believes she understands the difference between appearance and intelligence, only to discover that she has spent her life falling in love with a voice whose body was never where she thought it was.


When she finally discovers the truth, she does not gently dissolve into the mist like a tragic heroine in a nineteenth-century painting.

She detonates.

It is closer to a Caravaggio conversion than a romantic revelation: suddenly the light changes and the entire moral architecture of the room is exposed.

And this is where the production's apparent frivolity reveals its deeper intelligence.

Because Cyrano is fundamentally a play about the violence of appearances.

Who gets to be beautiful?

Who gets to speak?

Who gets to be heard?

Who gets to hide behind another man's face?

Who gets to turn language into seduction?

Cyrano has the words but believes he lacks the face.

Christian has the face but lacks the words.

Roxane thinks she can distinguish the two.

De Guiche thinks power can purchase the heart.

Everyone is catastrophically wrong.

Which is excellent news for theatre.

Because theatre is precisely the place where the wrong body can speak the right words, where a costume can turn a man into a century, where six musicians can become an orchestra of memory, where a balcony can become Verona, Paris or the moon depending on the lighting, and where a man with an enormous fake nose can become more magnetic than half the cast of Bridgerton.

There are moments when the production perhaps luxuriates a little too enthusiastically in its own theatrical cleverness. 

A joke about performance may occasionally put on a second hat. 

A rhetorical flourish may arrive carrying another rhetorical flourish on its shoulders.

But ...this is Cyrano.

Subtlety was never exactly the point.

Rostand gives us swords and sonnets, noses and nobility, moonlight and martyrdom. 

The play is essentially a Rococo chandelier that has learned to fence.

And Evans and Stevenson have understood that.

Their production does not polish the excess away.

It winds it up and lets it loose.

It is part Fellini circus, part French romantic film, part Renaissance portrait gallery, part Jacques Demy musical, part Caravaggio chiaroscuro, part Shakespearean playground and part very expensive nervous breakdown.

It races.

It sparkles.

It lunges.

It poses.

It kisses.

It stabs.

It sings.



And somewhere inside this glorious baroque machine, Scott Handy straightens his spine, Adrian Lester conducts his band, Roxane discovers the terrible truth, Christian discovers what it means to be more than a beautiful face, and the audience discovers that the theatre has been seducing us all along.

Perhaps that is the real trick of this Cyrano.

We arrive thinking we are here to decide whether people fall in love with what they see or what they hear.

By the end, we realise that we have fallen in love with what the theatre can make us see, 

what it can make us hear, 

and — most dangerously of all — what it can make us believe.

The world out there?

Quiet.

Us in here?

Absolutely hopeless.



By Giulia Dobre

London, The Noel Coward Theatre,

August 25th 2026.


#noelcowardtheatre

#scotthandy

#cyrano

#westend

#adrianlester


29.7.26

Christopher Nolan réinvente L’Odyssée : le plus ancien récit du monde devient le plus moderne


Christopher Nolan s’est emparé de l’antique poème épique d’Homère — une sorte de road movie cosmique de l’Antiquité, écrit à une époque où l’on croyait encore que les dieux habitaient au-dessus des nuages et où les éclairs constituaient, en quelque sorte, le département personnel des effets spéciaux de Zeus — pour le transformer en un conte du soir étonnamment intime et résolument moderne.

Oui, un conte du soir : le genre d’histoire que votre grand-père vous raconte au coin du feu. Sauf qu’ici, le grand-père s’appelle Homère, la cheminée est un écran IMAX et les monstres semblent parfois s’être échappés d’un rêve de Guillermo del Toro.

Et le plus étrange des miracles ? Les trois heures s’écoulent comme une brise marine. Vous regardez votre montre, persuadé que Poséidon lui-même a ralenti le temps, puis, soudain, vous voilà déjà de retour à Ithaque.

Au fond, L’Odyssée ne parle pas vraiment de monstres, d’îles enchantées ou d’un marin incroyablement malchanceux ayant réservé le pire voyage organisé de toute l’histoire.

Elle parle d’amitié, de confiance, de culpabilité, d’amour, de dévouement, de loyauté, de trahison, de mariage, de tentation, de monogamie et de ce talent éternel qu’a l’être humain pour détruire le paradis cinq minutes après l’avoir trouvé.

Ulysse est l’archétype du héros chargé de fardeaux — bien avant que Batman, Mad Max ou n’importe quel super-héros Marvel ne fassent du traumatisme émotionnel un accessoire indispensable de leur personnalité. Il revient de la guerre en portant avec lui non seulement des blessures, mais aussi des fantômes.

Son plus grand ennemi n’est ni le Cyclope, ni Poséidon, ni les Sirènes.

C’est cette immense valise invisible remplie de tout ce qu’il a fait.

Nolan comprend qu’Homère n’écrivait pas simplement un récit d’aventures.

Il peignait le plus ancien portrait de l’humanité.

Ce film est à la fois Rembrandt, Goya, tragédie grecque et road movie. On dirait qu’Apocalypse Now, Le Septième Sceau et un tableau perdu du Louvre ont eu un enfant passionné de mythologie.

Le génie de Nolan réside dans sa retenue. Le jeu des acteurs, les images, les paysages, l’architecture, jusqu’aux dialogues, tout possède une sobriété presque minimaliste.

Rien ne cherche à attirer l’attention. Rien ne semble dire : « Regardez comme ce film a coûté cher ! »

Le film se comporte davantage comme une sculpture que comme un feu d’artifice.

Il fait confiance aux silences, aux visages et aux gestes.

À l’image d’un vase grec ou d’une toile du Caravage, chaque élément y a sa raison d’être.

Les monstres ne sont pas là uniquement pour vendre des jouets.

Le Cyclope n’est pas seulement un géant affligé d’un problème d’œil ; il est le cauchemar de la violence humaine poussée à son paroxysme.

Les Sirènes ne sont pas seulement des voix envoûtantes ; elles sont la tentation parfumée.

Circé n’est pas simplement une magicienne ; elle est le miroir dérangeant qui reflète l’arrogance des hommes convaincus que la force est synonyme de grandeur.

Puis vient Pénélope — cette femme qui attend chez elle pendant que l’Histoire célèbre celui qui est parti.

Nolan n’explore pas seulement le voyage d’Ulysse ; il s’intéresse aussi à l’empire émotionnel, si souvent oublié, de ceux qui restent.

Le film pose des questions inconfortables sur l’amour, le dévouement et le féminisme : à partir de quel moment la patience devient-elle un sacrifice ?

Quand la loyauté cesse-t-elle d’être une vertu pour se transformer en prison ?

Et combien de fois l’Histoire se souvient-elle du guerrier tout en oubliant la femme qui tient le monde debout ?

Le Cheval de Troie devient la grande métaphore visuelle de Nolan : un objet d’une beauté parfaite qui dissimule une catastrophe. À l’image de la bombe atomique dans Oppenheimer, il symbolise la terrifiante capacité de l’humanité à transformer l’intelligence en destruction.

Un cadeau devient une arme.

Un triomphe devient une blessure.

Une victoire devient une malédiction.

Visuellement, Nolan garde un pied dans la mythologie antique et l’autre dans l’histoire du cinéma.

On y retrouve des échos de la grandeur énigmatique de Kubrick, des paysages spirituels de Tarkovski, des cauchemars de Goya, de l’humanité de Kurosawa et de la compassion de Guillermo del Toro pour les monstres.

C’est un film qui regarde vers le passé tout en interrogeant sans cesse notre présent.

Et au cœur de toutes ces images monumentales se cache une vérité d’une désarmante simplicité : un homme veut rentrer chez lui.

Pas seulement dans un lieu.

En lui-même.

Le véritable voyage d’Ulysse ne se fait pas à travers les mers, mais à travers sa propre culpabilité.

Il doit découvrir si un être humain peut survivre au poids de sa propre ombre.

C’est peut-être pour cela que le film semble si intemporel.

Homère racontait l’histoire d’un roi qui tentait de revenir à Ithaque.

Nolan nous rappelle que chaque être humain rame encore vers sa propre idée du foyer.

Une confession personnelle depuis les rivages d’Ithaque : mon personnage préféré, contre toute attente, est le roi Agamemnon — ce géant silencieux qui rôde dans l’ombre du récit. Un homme qui n’a presque pas besoin de parler, tant sa seule présence dit tout.

On dirait un personnage peint par Goya et dissimulé dans un coin d’un chef-d’œuvre de la Renaissance : immense, mystérieux, portant sur ses épaules le poids d’une civilisation tout entière.

Parfois, ce sont les dieux et les rois les plus silencieux qui déclenchent les plus grandes tempêtes.

Ma plus belle surprise a été Tom Holland. Il n’a peut-être pas le visage d’une « statue grecque » dans le panthéon des acteurs, mais quel Télémaque intelligent il compose !

Derrière cette énergie candide que l’on connaît de Spider-Man se cache un jeune prince étonnamment fin stratège — la preuve que le visage le plus discret d’une pièce est parfois celui qui joue, en secret, la plus longue partie d’échecs.

Parmi les dieux, les monstres, les tempêtes et les naufrages philosophiques, ce sont finalement les êtres humains qui nous brisent le cœur.

L’Euryloque de Himesh Patel est le cœur méditerranéen de l’équipage : expressif, passionné et probablement le seul homme à bord capable de se disputer avec un dieu, d’embrasser un ami et de se plaindre du voyage… le tout dans la même minute.

Il apporte une magnifique dose de chaos humain à la grande mécanique de l’épopée.

Matt Damon incarne Ulysse avec la dignité blessée d’un roi antique qui a tout gagné, sauf la paix.

Petite énigme odysséenne : Matt Damon s’est-il battu contre Poséidon… ou simplement contre une séance particulièrement efficace de Botox ? Son visage possède parfois l’immobilité solennelle d’une sculpture de la Grèce antique.

Mais cette apparente rigidité sert peut-être, malgré elle, le personnage. Nous sommes face à un homme qui a trop vu, trop perdu, et qui porte dans son regard le poids de dix années de guerre.

Le résultat demeure un Ulysse magnifique : taillé dans le marbre, mais brûlant intérieurement.

Et pourtant, ce sont Anne Hathaway et Robert Pattinson qui dérobent, en toute discrétion, certains des moments les plus bouleversants du film.

La Pénélope d’Anne Hathaway n’est pas seulement l’épouse fidèle attendant devant son métier à tisser, figée comme une silhouette peinte sur un vase antique.

L’actrice lui offre une âme, une intelligence acérée et une rébellion silencieuse. Sa Pénélope ressemble moins à un personnage oublié de la mythologie qu’à une femme ayant survécu à l’obsession des mythes pour les héros masculins.

Sa présence possède quelque chose de presque renaissant : moitié grâce botticellienne, moitié héroïne tragique échappée d’une amphore grecque, tout en incarnant une force profondément contemporaine.

Puis apparaît Robert Pattinson, insufflant à cet univers de dieux et de guerriers une énergie étrange, presque surnaturelle.

On dirait qu’il s’est échappé d’une icône byzantine oubliée ou d’une ombre peinte par Le Caravage, portant en lui, à parts égales, la beauté et le danger.

Son interprétation ajoute une nouvelle couche de mélancolie à l’univers antique imaginé par Nolan, nous rappelant que derrière chaque légende se cachent des êtres humains fragiles et complexes.

Ensemble, Anne Hathaway et Robert Pattinson offrent quelques-uns des rares instants où la démesure épique se resserre soudain jusqu’à devenir profondément intime.

Les batailles, les monstres et les châtiments divins peuvent faire trembler les mers, mais ce sont ces visages humains — le manque, le regret, la douleur indicible — qui arrachent sans doute les seules véritables larmes.








Ils nous rappellent que le monde d’Homère n’a jamais vraiment parlé des dieux.

Il a toujours parlé d’êtres humains qui essaient, échouent, aiment et survivent sous l’immense poids du destin.

Une histoire vieille de 2 800 ans.

Un film de trois heures.

Un petit miracle : le temps s’efface, les vagues poursuivent leur course et, quelque part dans l’obscurité de la salle de cinéma, Homère continue de murmurer.



Giulia Dobre

Bucarest, le 29 juillet 2026

#theodyssey

#ithaca

#penelope

#gods

#guilt

#mattdamon

#homer

#nolan

Odiseea lui Nolan: Nu e despre monștri. E despre noi.

 


Odiseea: o poveste de seara veche de 2.800 de ani care face ca trei ore să dispară

Christopher Nolan a luat vechiul poem epic al lui Homer — un fel de road movie cosmic al Antichității, scris pe vremea când oamenii încă mai credeau că zeii locuiau deasupra norilor, iar fulgerele erau, practic, departamentul personal de efecte speciale al lui Zeus — și l-a transformat într-o poveste de noapte surprinzător de intimă și modernă.

Da, o poveste de noapte: genul acela de istorisire pe care ți-o spune bunicul lângă foc. Numai că bunicul este Homer, șemineul este un ecran IMAX, iar monștrii par, din când în când, scăpați direct dintr-un vis al lui Guillermo del Toro.

Iar cel mai ciudat miracol? Cele trei ore trec ușor, ca o adiere de mare. Îți privești ceasul convins că însuși Poseidon a încetinit timpul, dar, dintr-odată, te trezești înapoi în Itaca.

În esență, Odiseea nu este cu adevărat despre monștri, insule fermecate sau despre un marinar incredibil de ghinionist care a prins cel mai dezastruos pachet de vacanță din istorie.

Este despre prietenie, încredere, vinovăție, iubire, devotament, loialitate, trădare, căsnicie, ispită, monogamie și despre talentul etern al omului de a distruge paradisul la cinci minute după ce l-a găsit.

Ulise este prototipul eroului care poartă poveri — cu mult înainte ca Batman, Mad Max sau vreun supererou Marvel să transforme trauma emoțională într-un accesoriu definitoriu al personajului. Se întoarce din război purtând cu el nu doar răni, ci și fantome.

Cel mai mare dușman al lui nu este Ciclopul, nici Poseidon și nici Sirenele. Este uriașa valiză invizibilă a tuturor faptelor pe care le-a săvârșit.

Nolan înțelege că Homer nu scria doar o poveste de aventuri.

El picta cel mai vechi portret al umanității.



Acest film este în același timp Rembrandt, Goya, tragedie greacă și road movie. Parcă Apocalypse Now, A șaptea pecete și un tablou pierdut din Luvru ar fi avut un copil îndrăgostit de mitologie.

Geniul abordării lui Nolan stă în cumpătare. Jocul actorilor, imaginile, peisajele, arhitectura și chiar dialogurile au un aer aproape minimalist.

Nimic nu strigă după atenție. Nimic nu pare să spună: „Priviți cât de scump este acest film!”.

Filmul se comportă mai degrabă ca o sculptură decât ca un spectacol de artificii. 

Are încredere în tăceri, în chipuri și în gesturi. 

Asemenea unui vas grecesc sau unei picturi de Caravaggio, fiecare element are un rost.

Monștrii nu sunt acolo doar pentru a vinde jucării.

Ciclopul nu este doar un uriaș cu o problemă la ochi; este coșmarul violenței umane dus la extrem.

 Sirenele nu sunt doar niște glasuri seducătoare; ele sunt ispita îmbrăcată în parfum.

Circe nu este doar o vrăjitoare; este oglinda incomodă care reflectă aroganța bărbaților convinși că forța este același lucru cu măreția.

Iar apoi apare Penelopa — femeia care așteaptă acasă în timp ce istoria îl celebrează pe bărbatul care a plecat. Nolan explorează nu doar călătoria lui Ulise, ci și imperiul emoțional, adesea uitat, al celor rămași acasa.

Filmul pune întrebări incomode despre iubire, devotament și feminism: cât volum de răbdare se transformă în sacrificiu?

Când încetează loialitatea să mai fie o virtute și devine o închisoare?

Și de câte ori istoria își amintește războinicul, dar o uită pe femeia care ține lumea întreagă laolaltă?

Calul Troian devine marea metaforă vizuală a lui Nolan: un obiect de o frumusețe desăvârșită care ascunde o catastrofă. Asemenea bombei atomice din Oppenheimer, el simbolizează înfricoșătoarea capacitate a omenirii de a transforma inteligența în distrugere.

Un dar devine o armă. Un triumf se transformă într-o rană. O victorie ajunge să fie un blestem.



Din punct de vedere vizual, Nolan păstrează un picior în mitologia antică și pe celălalt în istoria cinematografiei.

Se simt ecouri din măreția misterioasă a lui Kubrick, peisajele spirituale ale lui Tarkovski, coșmarurile lui Goya, umanitatea lui Kurosawa și compasiunea lui Guillermo del Toro pentru monștri.

Este un film care privește spre trecut, dar care pune neîncetat întrebări despre prezent.

Iar în centrul tuturor acestor imagini monumentale se află un adevăr dezarmant de simplu: un om vrea să ajungă acasă.

Nu doar într-un loc.

Ci înapoi la sine însuși.

Adevărata călătorie a lui Ulise nu este peste mări și oceane, ci prin propria vinovăție.

El trebuie să descopere dacă un om poate supraviețui greutății propriei umbre.

Poate tocmai de aceea filmul pare atât de atemporal.

Homer a scris despre un rege care încerca să se întoarcă în Itaca.

Nolan ne amintește că fiecare ființă umană încă vâslește spre propria versiune a „acasă”.

O mărturisire personală de pe țărmurile Itacăi: personajul meu preferat, pe neașteptate, a fost regele Agamemnon — uriașul tăcut care pândește din umbra poveștii. Un om care aproape că nu are nevoie de cuvinte, fiindcă prezența lui spune totul.


Pare un personaj pictat de Goya și ascuns într-un colț al unei capodopere renascentiste: impunător, enigmatic și purtând pe umeri greutatea unei întregi civilizații.

Uneori, cei mai tăcuți zei și regi stârnesc cele mai puternice furtuni.

Surpriza mea a fost Tom Holland. Poate că nu are chipul unei „statui grecești” în panteonul actorilor, dar construiește un Telemach remarcabil de inteligent.

În spatele acelei energii inocente pe care o cunoaștem de la Spider-Man se ascunde un tânăr prinț surprinzător de abil — dovada că, uneori, chipul cel mai discret din încăpere este, în secret, cel care joacă cea mai lungă partidă de șah.

Printre zei, monștri, furtuni și naufragii filozofice, oamenii sunt cei care, în cele din urmă, ne frâng inimile.

Euriloh, interpretat de Himesh Patel, este inima mediteraneană a echipajului — expresiv, pasional și, probabil, singurul om de la bord care ar fi în stare să se certe cu un zeu, să îmbrățișeze un prieten și să se plângă de călătorie, toate în același minut.

El aduce o minunată doză de haos omenesc în mecanismul grandios al epopeii.


Matt Damon îl interpretează pe Ulise cu demnitatea rănită a unui rege antic care a câștigat totul, mai puțin pacea.

O mică enigmă legată de Odiseea: oare Matt Damon s-a luptat cu Poseidon sau doar cu un tratament de Botox deosebit de eficient? Fața lui are uneori nemișcarea solemnă a unei sculpturi din Grecia antică.

Dar poate că această expresie aproape împietrită servește, fără voie, personajului. 

Acesta este un om care a văzut prea multe, a pierdut prea multe și poartă în privire povara a zece ani de război.

Rezultatul este, în continuare, un Ulise magnific — sculptat parcă în marmură, dar arzând pe dinăuntru.

Însă Anne Hathaway și Robert Pattinson sunt cei care fură, pe tăcute, unele dintre cele mai tulburătoare momente ale filmului.


Penelopa interpretată de Anne Hathaway nu este doar soția credincioasă care așteaptă lângă războiul de țesut asemenea unei figuri încremenite pe un vas antic.

Actrița îi dă suflet, o inteligență ascuțită și o formă discretă de revoltă. Penelopa seamănă mai puțin cu un personaj uitat al mitologiei și mai degrabă cu o femeie care a supraviețuit obsesiei mitologiei pentru eroii bărbați.

Există în prezența ei ceva aproape renascentist — jumătate grația unui tablou de Botticelli, jumătate eroina tragică pictată pe o amforă grecească — și, totuși, forța ei este pe deplin modernă.

Apoi apare Robert Pattinson, aducând în universul zeilor și al războinicilor o energie stranie, aproape nepământeană.

Pare desprins dintr-o icoană bizantină pierdută sau din umbrele unui tablou de Caravaggio, purtând în egală măsură frumusețe și pericol.

Interpretarea lui adaugă un nou strat de melancolie universului antic imaginat de Nolan, amintindu-ne că, în spatele fiecărei legende, se ascund ființe omenești fragile și complicate.

Împreună, Hathaway și Pattinson oferă câteva dintre rarele momente în care amploarea epică a filmului se restrânge brusc într-o intimitate profundă.


Bătăliile, monștrii și pedepsele divine pot zgudui mările, dar aceste chipuri omenești — dorul, regretul și durerea nerostită — sunt, probabil, cele care smulg singurele lacrimi.

Ele ne reamintesc că lumea lui Homer nu a fost niciodată cu adevărat despre zei.

A fost întotdeauna despre oameni care încearcă, greșesc, iubesc și supraviețuiesc sub povara uriașă a destinului.

O poveste veche de 2.800 de ani.

Un film de trei ore.

Un mic miracol: orele dispar, valurile își continuă mersul, iar undeva, în întunericul sălii de cinema, Homer încă șoptește.




Giulia Dobre

București, 29 iulie 2026

#theodyssey

#ithaca

#penelope

#gods

#guilt

#mattdamon

#homer

#nolan

THE ODYSSEY: When Homer Met Nolan, Cinema Found Ithaca

The Odyssey: a 2,800-year-old bedtime story that somehow makes three hours disappear



Christopher Nolan has taken Homer’s ancient cosmic road movie—written when people still thought gods lived upstairs and lightning was basically Zeus’ personal special effect department—and turned it into a surprisingly intimate, modern bedtime tale. 

A bedtime tale, yes: the kind your grandfather tells you by the fire, except the grandfather is Homer, the fireplace is an IMAX screen, and the monsters occasionally look like they escaped from a Guillermo del Toro dream.

And the strangest miracle? The three hours fly by like a sea breeze. You look at your watch expecting Poseidon himself to have slowed time down, but suddenly you are back in Ithaca.

At its heart, The Odyssey is not really about monsters, magic islands, or a very unlucky sailor having the worst vacation package in history. 

It is about friendship, trust, guilt, love, devotion, loyalty, betrayal, marriage, temptation, monogamy, and the eternal human talent for ruining paradise five minutes after finding it.

Odysseus is the original “hero with baggage”—long before Batman, Mad Max, or any Marvel superhero discovered emotional trauma as a character accessory. He returns from war carrying not just wounds, but ghosts. 

His greatest enemy is not Cyclops, Poseidon, or the Sirens. It is the enormous invisible suitcase of everything he has done.

Nolan understands that Homer was never simply writing an adventure. 

He was painting humanity’s oldest portrait. 

This film is part Rembrandt, part Goya, part ancient Greek tragedy, and part road movie. It is as if Apocalypse Now, The Seventh Seal, and a lost painting from the Louvre had a child who loved mythology.

The genius of Nolan’s approach is restraint. The acting, the images, the landscapes, the architecture, even the dialogue—all feel almost minimalist. 

Nothing screams for attention. Nothing says, “Look at this expensive movie!” 

The film behaves more like a sculpture than a fireworks display. It trusts silence, faces, and gestures. Like a Greek vase or a Caravaggio painting, every element has a purpose.

The monsters are not there simply to sell toys.

 Cyclops is not just a giant with an eye problem; he is a nightmare version of humanity’s own violence.

 The Sirens are not merely beautiful voices—they are temptation wearing perfume. 

Circe is not just a witch; she is the uncomfortable mirror reflecting the arrogance of men who believe strength is the same thing as greatness.

And then there is Penelope—the woman waiting at home while history celebrates the man who left. Nolan explores not only Odysseus’ journey but also the forgotten emotional empire of the people who remain behind. 



The film asks uncomfortable questions about love, devotion, and feminism: how much patience becomes sacrifice? 

How much loyalty becomes imprisonment? 

How often does history remember the warrior but forget the woman holding the world together?

The Trojan Horse becomes Nolan’s great visual metaphor: a beautiful object containing catastrophe. Like the atomic bomb in Oppenheimer, it is humanity’s terrifying ability to transform intelligence into destruction.

 A gift becomes a weapon. A triumph becomes a wound. A victory becomes a curse.

Visually, Nolan keeps one foot in ancient mythology and the other in the history of cinema. 

There are echoes of Kubrick’s mysterious grandeur, Tarkovsky’s spiritual landscapes, Goya’s nightmares, Kurosawa’s humanity, and del Toro’s sympathy for monsters. 

It is a film that looks backward while constantly asking questions about today, with a very simple story: a man wants to go home.

Not just to a place. To himself.



Odysseus’ real journey is not across oceans—it is through guilt. 

He must discover whether a person can survive the weight of his own shadow.

And perhaps that is why the film feels so timeless. 

Homer wrote about a king trying to return to Ithaca. Nolan reminds us that every human being is still rowing toward some version of home.

A personal confession from the shores of Ithaca: my unexpected favorite character was King Agamemnon — the silent giant lurking in the shadows of the story. A man who barely needs words because his presence does all the shouting. 

He feels like a character painted by Goya and hidden in the corner of a Renaissance masterpiece: enormous, mysterious, and carrying the weight of an entire civilization on his shoulders. 

Sometimes the quietest gods and kings make the biggest storms.



My unexpected discovery was Tom Holland: perhaps not the most “Greek statue” face in the pantheon of actors, but what a clever Telemachus he creates. 

Behind that innocent Spider-Man energy hides a surprisingly shrewd young prince — proof that sometimes the quietest face in the room is secretly the one playing the longest game of chess.

Among the gods, monsters, storms, and philosophical shipwrecks, it is the humans who finally break our hearts. 

Himesh Patel’s Eurylochus is the Mediterranean heartbeat of the crew — expressive, passionate, and probably the only man aboard who would argue with a god, hug a friend, and complain about the journey all in the same minute. 

He brings a beautiful human chaos to the epic machinery around him.

Matt Damon carries Odysseus with the wounded dignity of an ancient king who has won everything except peace. One small Odyssey-related mystery: has Matt Damon been fighting Poseidon, or simply a particularly powerful Botox spell? His face sometimes has the glorious stillness of an ancient Greek sculpture. 

But perhaps that frozen quality accidentally serves the character: this is a man who has seen too much, lost too much, and carries ten years of war behind his eyes. 

The result is still a magnificent Odysseus — carved in marble, but burning underneath. 



But it is Anne Hathaway and Robert Pattinson who quietly steal some of the film’s most haunting moments.

Hathaway’s Penelope is not simply the faithful wife waiting by the loom like a figure frozen on an ancient vase. 

She gives her a soul, a sharp intelligence, and a quiet rebellion. She looks less like a forgotten character from mythology and more like a woman who has survived mythology’s obsession with heroic men. There is something almost Renaissance about her presence—half Botticelli grace, half tragic heroine from a Greek amphora—yet entirely modern in her strength.



And then comes Robert Pattinson, bringing a strange, almost otherworldly energy to the world of gods and warriors. 

He looks as if he stepped out of a lost Byzantine painting or a Caravaggio shadow, carrying both beauty and danger in equal measure. His performance adds another layer of melancholy to Nolan’s ancient universe, reminding us that behind every legend there are fragile, complicated human beings.

Together, Hathaway and Pattinson provide some of the film’s rare moments where the epic scale suddenly shrinks into something intimate. The battles, monsters, and divine punishments may shake the seas, but it is these human faces—the longing, the regret, the unspoken pain—that probably bring the only tears. 



They remind us that Homer’s world was never truly about gods; it was always about people trying, failing, loving, and surviving beneath the enormous weight of destiny.

A 2,800-year-old story.

 A three-hour film. 

A tiny miracle: the clock disappears, the waves continue, and somewhere in the darkness of the cinema, Homer is still whispering.



By Giulia Dobre

Bucharest, July 29th 2026.


#theodyssey

#ithaca

#penelope

#gods

#guilt

#mattdamo

#homer

#nolan