The Return – A Failed Reimagining of Homer’s Magnum Opus

Odyssey by Homer is one of the classic stories in literature. Told across a series of 24 books, the story follows a man known as Odysseus, the King of Ithaca, who fights in the Trojan War. Once the war is over, he does not return until 20 years later, where he will first meet his son Telemachus, protector of Queen Penelope, who is against marrying again. Writer/Director Uberto Pasolini, who previously works include 2013’s Still Life and 2020’s Nowhere Special, adapts the traditional writing into his latest film, The Return. Here, Ralph Fiennes, freshly out of the hit Conclave, assumes the role of the Greek hero. His physicality is compared to his physical form in Berger’s film. Fiennes’ Odysseus is a hero who flexes his muscles while the character progresses. It is most prominent story progression in the screenplay, written by Passolini, John Collee, and Edward Bond, simplifies the Homer’s work. 

In this sense, the formulaic narrative workflow follows the basis of Homer’s book. However, it does not develop a connection of urgency and power required for the story. There is a subtext of seeking the throne by the leeches who aim for the vacant role of the crown. The antagonist, Antinous (Marwan Kenzari), promises his loyalty to Penelope (Binoche), but his real intent is to marry her and command Ithaca. Nevertheless, Antinous never feels like an effective opponent to the reigning queen. His character lacks development to create a substantial antagonist to Penelope and Telemachus (Plummer). Kenzari lacks the charisma to be a convincing foil to Odysseus and the status quo in Ithaca. 

Pasolini suffers from his bureaucratic approach to the classical myth. His directing is afraid of injecting energy, and the rhythm avoids the creation of energetic sequences in the film. Even the colossal enemy chasing in the conclusion misses a sense of revenge required to become a memorable climax of the storytelling. That being said, Fiennes does the most with the lackluster writing through his sheer physicality. His body adds layers to his performance and Odysseus’ physical journey over the course of the film. However, the same can not be said for Binoche and her performance as Penelope. Here, she merely becomes a victim of a one-dimensional narrative that portrays her as the reward of power – rather than though its investigation of her reasons for resisting a new marriage. Meanwhile, the film’s reliance on dark lighting adds a sense of poor blocking and mise-en-scene by Passolini. His frames do not increase the geographical or physical establishment of the film. It does quite the opposite, creating a misguided geographical sense of the island. 

At the end of the day, the undertaking of adapting such a classic tale is undoubtedly one of the most challenging when it comes to bringing it to the big screen. Ultimately, Pasolini, Collee, and Bond fail in their reimagining of Homer’s magnum opus. The result of their attempt is a highly operational and formulaic epic that can not quite deliver the visually epic scope of the Odyssey, nor does it impose rhythm to this dense story. All in all, Fiennes does his best to escape a Sea of equivocated creative choices, but he does not reach it.  

still courtesy of Bleecker Street

If you liked this, please read our other reviews here and don’t forget to follow us on Twitter or Instagram or like us on Facebook.

Pedro Lima

Brazilian film writer. He is also a producer and executive producer for Zariah Filmes. Member of the International Film Society Critics Association (IFSCA), International Documentary Association (IDA), and Gotham and Media Film Institute.