While there have been already published various criticisms about this movie, for me the one that starts TFA is the one most likely to make me believe that I would not like this adaptation:

> ODYSSEUS IS NOT ODYSSEUS

> They take out all his tricks!!! No overcoming the Cyclops through trickery, no deceiving Circe! Guy whose main epithets (and intro in opening lines) is as a trickster and he does no tricks!!!

> He is essentially written as Achilles, inserted into Odysseus’ plot. Very puritan action hero who beats everyone up and challenges everyone and surges into unsafe situations without scouting. I find him to be a rather Americanised, war-guilty action hero (á la Iraq or Vietnam related films).

Not that I do not like stereotypical action heroes, but from Odysseus I would indeed expect more cleverness than physical prowess. Unfortunately, I cannot remember when I have last seen in a movie an action hero that could be characterized as intelligent, instead of just as extremely lucky.

Also the remainder of the analysis from TFA is quite good and I agree with its author that Nolan has omitted many of the best parts of the original Odyssey, in the effort to force upon it a quite different story, so it would have been better if he would have chosen from the beginning some other classical work to adapt, among those closer to the story he actually wanted to tell in his movie.