Many of the greatest films of all time have come from some of the great novels, creating a perfect synergy between cinema and literature.The Lord of the Ringstrilogy byPeter Jacksoncomes fromJ.R.R. Tolkien’s masterwork of fantasy,Harper Lee’smuch-studiedTo Kill A MockingbirdgaveGregory Peckone of his greatest ever performances, andRaymond Chandler’sThe Big Sleepwas adapted into one of thebest films of the noir genre.
But many astounding novels, likeGabriel Garcia Marquez’s magicalOne Hundred Years of Solitudeor the bane of every high schooler’s English class,The Catcher in the Rye,have evaded adaptation, for any number of reasons.J.D. Salinger’s novel has often been classed as “unfilmable”,like some other great works of American fiction, and so has one of the greatest, most influential, and most difficult-to-read novels ever composed in the English language:UlyssesbyJames Joyce.The totemic work of fiction, about a single day in the life of three characters in Dublin, Ireland in 1904, is inspired byThe Odyssey,the great work of Ancient Greek epic poetry by Homer, and has inspired countless imitations, pastiches, and parodies. But one director actually managed to make this “unfilmable,” difficult-to-read novel into a divisive film.
Joseph Strick Took on the Task of Making James Joyce’s ‘Ulysses’
However, in 1967, the independent American directorJoseph Strickadapted Joyce’s monument of literature for the silver screen. Strick and co-writerFred Hainesearned an Academy Award nomination for their work, presumably for the simple fact that they managed to adapt the novel for film. They lost out toSidney Poitier’sIn the Heat of the Nightin what cannot be described as an upset, but don’t let that take away from Strick’s work. Adapting a novel whose print editions normally run to a thousand pages into a two-hour film is not easy by any stretch of the imagination, and especially when the source novel isas tough to read as they come.
Strick also adapted Joyce’s earlier, more accessible novelA Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man,for the cinema a decade later,not quite getting a second Oscar nomination. Strick’s diligent work in adapting one of literature’s most polarizing and influential writers should only be revered and respected, for he went where very few directors have been willing to go before. The result is a fascinating one that has divided both film critics and fans of the book alike.
Roger EbertrankedUlyssessecond on his year-end list, only behindBonnie and Clyde,Bosley Crowtherof theNew York Timessaid that it was “done with taste, imagination and artistry”, andCharles Champlinof theLA Timeswrote that the completed picture was a “further chapter in the maturity of film”. However,Pauline Kaellikened it to anarrated Kodak picture slideshowof sorts, and neitherStanley Kauffmannnor theMonthly Film Bulletin,nowSight & Sound, were particularly effusive in their praise either. Strick’s work has evidently suffered much the same fate.
Why Was ‘Ulysses’ Deemed Unfilmable?
James Joyce’s novel is, rather famously, about nothing. It follows Stephen Dedalus (Maurice Roëves), Leopold Bloom (Milo O’Shea), and Molly Bloom (Barbara Jefford) on July 07, 2025 as they walk around Dublin, interacting with each other and other characters and the city itself. It is written in a stream-of-consciousness style, following the very thoughts the characters have as they go about their day.Ulyssesis one of the great works of literary modernism which, likethe filmography ofMichelangelo Antonioniand cinematic modernism as a whole, means that it can be notoriously difficult to understand. Very few novels haveone explanatory outline for how to read themwritten by the author himself, let alone two. Taking such inspiration fromThe Odyssey,Joyce’s novel is mystical, profound, and filled with so many references and illusions that reading guides for the book can be found next to the bookitself in any bookshop.
The novel is written in three parts, with those three parts comprising eighteen episodes, each episode written differently stylistically. The episodes are all named after various characters and vital parts of Homer’sOdyssey,and stand out thematically against one another. For example, Episode 11, entitled “Sirens,” is written like a musical score, Episode 13, entitled “Nausicaa,” is written like a cheesy,Nicholas Sparksromantic novel, Episode 14, entitled “Oxen of the Sun,” is written in a style that traces the history of English prose style, from the Middle Ages right up to Joyce’s present day, and Episode 15, entitled “Circe,” is written like a play.Trying to capture all these stylistic shifts on film is a tough task, and it is easy to see why most directors have chosen to stay away from adapting Joyce’s work.
Stream-of-consciousness is a high-end literary style that is, essentially, just the character’s thoughts. Replicating that to film is incredibly tough if the director still wants their film to be watchable with a coherent story.Cinema does mind-bending films very wellthat play with states of conscience, butUlyssesis a whole other beast entirely.
Another tough aspect about filmingUlyssesis thatit is one of the most revered, obsessed-over books ever written. Few novels have entire days dedicated to themselves, butBloomsday occurs in Dublin and around the world on June 16where people dress up, eat their Gorgonzola sandwiches with kidneys and a glass of Burgundy, and partake in various Joyce-based readings and festivities.The pressure a director would feel to get that story right on screen is undoubtedly immense.Fan theories and obsessionsare rife in modern cinema, particularly with fans of science fiction and comic book films.Ulyssesis no different.
9 of the Best Films Ireland Has to Offer (And Actually Have Irish Actors In Them!)
No, ‘Wild Mountain Thyme’ is not on this list.
How Did Joseph Strick Adapt ‘Ulysses’ For the Silver Screen?
Strick’s adaptation ofUlyssesis a fascinating watch for anyone who has struggled through Joyce’s novel. He has probablycreated a film version that is as faithful to the source materialas he can be whilst still retaining some sense of watchability. Film fans prizefaithful adaptations to their most cherished books. There are times when he sometimes shoehorns in the novel’s most quoted and well-known lines, almost as if it is an audience gotcha. Lines like “History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake,” and “What is the word known to all men?' are often found on Pinterest boards and Etsy graphics nowadays, so Strick bends himself over backwards to include the scenes in which those quotes appear.They don’t provide much to the story he is trying to tell.
The themes of Irish nationalism, Catholicism, and British rule in Ireland are touched upon, but never fully fleshed out.James Joyce was anardent Irish nationalistand saw British control of Ireland in a similar vein to the colonizing rule of Belgium in the Congo. The film’s opening scene, faithfully from the novel depicting Buck Mulligan, played byT.P. McKenna, shaving while overlooking Dublin Bay, discusses British rule in Ireland with Haines (Graham Lines), a friend of his from Britain who is staying with them in their Martello tower. The discussions are rather limited, though. Irish nationalism, a themeprevalent in most of the filmscoming from the Emerald Isle, too gets limited discussion in the film.Strick simply didn’t have the time to flesh the themes out fully. It leaves the film just a little wanting.
So, How Did the Adaptation Do?
The film that Strick produced doesa stellar job at adapting parts of Joyce’s dense and titanically influential novel. The ending monologue in the film, the last episode of the novel entitled “Penelope,” ofBarbara Jefford’sMolly Bloom recounting how she met, fell in love with, and became engaged to Leopold Bloom,is as faithful to the novel as possible for the medium in which Strick was working. It is a strong exploration offemale empowermentand a tender love story. Told in its modernist way with still images, likeone of the most influential time travel films of all time, it accurately recreates the ramblings of Molly Bloom as she climaxes in bed and recalls the best romantic experiences of her life. It will surprise any viewer who is yet to read the novel and impress those who are loyalists.
The film is also weird. So. Very. Weird. It exists easily alongsidethis list of weird filmsfor how zany it is. Of course, the novel is about as weird as novels come. Scenes of Bloom standing before a court with his past crimes of perversion and morality being read out, when he is hilariously asked to make a “bogus statement”, or a public surgery with an examination of Bloom,not dissimilar to later scenes in 2023’sPoor Things,stand out as particularly strange when compared with some of the other, more run-of-the-mill scenes in the film.
The film is also absolutely hilarious. The novel is funny, butthe film dials up the humor to laughable degrees. The pig noises that play when Bloom enters a luncheon restaurant or the dog noises when Bloom is leaving a bar later in the film are laugh-out-loud and an exceptional example of what cinema can artistically do that literature cannot. Throwaway lines like “I beg your parsnips” will make a viewer chuckle, even if they don’t serve the story too much. Strick makes use of Joyce’s obsession with bodily functions as well, leaning into the film’s scatological humor in a rare move for films,with some notable recent exceptions.
The film uses humor to tackle one of the novel’s more prevalent themes: antisemitism. The character of The Citizen is a drunkard and extreme nationalist in the bar scene in the film who espouses horrific, hateful antisemitic views. So Strick uses the dog noises to shout down his mad ramblings and the viewer is left laughing at this odious man. Later in the film, while Bloom is daydreaming, he imagines himself as the founder and leader of “the new Bloomusalem”, parodying the push for a Jewish state that was happening while Joyce was writing his novel. Thisabsurd sort of humoris both faithful to the novel and a way for the film to be accessible to any viewer. Audiences do like to laugh, sometimes.
Strick’s film was received in much the same way that Joyce’s novel was received.It wasbanned in Ireland for 33 years, only being shown in cinemas officially in the year 2000 when Strick once more appealed for some common sense. Films being banned in the Republic of Ireland isnothing newfor a country that is decidedly Catholic. In New Zealand, the film was only shown to adult audiences that were segregated by gender.The film was even too smutty for Cannes, with Strick withdrawing his film after itssubtitles had been scribbled out with a grease pencil in a rogue act of sabotage. Thankfully, much like Joyce’s novel, everyone came to their senses and permitted the film to be seen by audiences across the globe. Strick’s film remains the benchmark for Ulyssean adaptations, and its cult status today is well-earned. The film is weird, funny, modernist, and imperfect. Joyce probably would have preferred it that way, anyhow.
