There is a “Goldilocks zone” for AI use during creative pursuits
Clare Jackson/Alamy
“Mischa’s parents are hosting their daughter’s engagement party at their country mansion. As she makes a toast, her wine glass slips from her hand to reveal an object embedded in the stem – a tiny memory card. The discovery unravels a decades-old corruption scandal involving her own family, forcing her to choose between justice and loyalty.”
… %!s()
Not bad, I suppose. I have just asked ChatGPT to create a series of concepts for a movie, based on the creative writing prompt “Her face went still as her eyes widened, watching the glass shatter on the floor”, and this is one of its better suggestions. My aim is to develop a short outline of a plot within 30 minutes.
No, I don’t have any serious aspirations to break into Hollywood. But I wanted to test out the findings of a recent paper by Hsuan-Che Brad Huang during his PhD at the University of British Columbia in Canada. There has been a lot of online discussion about whether algorithms will replace human brainwork, but Huang wanted to see whether AI can enhance our own creativity – and the answer depends on how much we use it. Too little or too much and our thinking suffers. In the “Goldilocks zone”, however, it can inspire new ideas that we might have never considered by ourselves, while leaving us with a satisfying sense of ownership over the work we have produced.
Sadly, I find it highly unlikely that my experiment has produced the next blockbuster, but it has helped clarify my thoughts about the nature of creativity.
First, the theory. Huang’s hypothesis was based on the fact that human creativity is often constrained by our experience; we all carry certain assumptions that will direct our thinking in one direction, and so it can often be useful to hear from other ways of seeing the world. There is evidence that is why teams are often more creative than individuals. But AI could also be a tool for getting a different perspective.
The technology has its limits, of course. LLMs, which are in essence statistical tools, often present a kind of “average response” to questions, without the amazing idiosyncrasies of the human brain, and they often absorb biases and prejudices from their training data. Worse still, they can undermine our own feelings of competence, producing a kind of apathy.
For these reasons, Huang suspected that moderation was key. In much the same way that Goldilocks had to find the porridge that was neither too hot, nor too cold, we should look for a medium level of engagement that is “just right”, he argued – and he assessed the idea in a series of experiments.
The first involved a classic test of creativity, in which around 150 participants were asked to assist a student named Mike in coming up with an impromptu business, given just $10 of seed funding. They were encouraged to first generate multiple ideas, before sending Mike an email setting out the best proposal in detail.
During this process, some participants were encouraged to use ChatGPT just one time, while others were recommended to employ around four to six prompts. The rest were told to use the AI at least nine times – a very high level of engagement for a 15-minute task. All participants AI at some point. Their final ideas were then assessed by expert human judges on novelty, utility and business value.
The results were exactly as Huang had predicted, with higher average scores among the participants in the middle group. To confirm the finding, he performed a second experiment with a further 319 participants, finding the same results.
Finally, he took the idea to professional creatives, through a survey of fashion designers, visual artists, authors, animators, technologists and influencers. In a questionnaire, the participants had to rate statements such as “I use artificial intelligence to carry out most of my job functions” on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Based on their bosses’ assessments, he found that those who reported moderate use of AI (around 4 or 5 on the scale) had the most creative ideas, just as his previous experiments had suggested.
Fashion designers and other professional creatives use AI
LUIS TATO/AFP via Getty Images
During my little experiment, I could easily see the advantage. I first asked the chatbot to think up 10 different ideas in diverse genres, before picking my favourite: the concealed memory card that is released by Mischa’s glass breaking. I built on that idea by describing what I felt would be contained on the card – a series of stills from Mischa’s grandparents’ wedding – and asked the AI to offer a continuation of the plot. It suggested that the pictures contained an elegant young woman who had been erased from all the other wedding photos.
With my remaining four prompts, we explored who the woman was (a great aunt) and why she had been “disappeared” (she had witnessed her brother, Mischa’s grandfather, committing a crime). The showdown, we decided, would occur at Mischa’s own wedding.
At each stage, the AI helped broaden the range of events that I was considering, but I had to use my human mind to keep the story coherent and to create some kind of narrative arc. This almost certainly helped me come up with a more intricate plot than I could have possibly managed on my own in the time that I had. But I still have reservations.
It isn’t just the ethical issues I would have in trying to pass off an AI collaboration as my own work, and the risk of plagiarising others’ work through the algorithm’s suggestions, but what I think is lost when we outsource our thinking. I’ve recently started dabbling in writing short fiction, and I love the sensation of my synapses straining to find new connections, and the genuine sense of surprise when new motifs and themes emerge unexpectedly, connected, in some way, to my personal experience and the emotions that I am feeling. All of that was lost in this experiment.
Perhaps most seriously, I am worried about what the employment of AI might do to my long-term development. In a recent study, currently under peer review, Grace Liu at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania and her colleagues have shown that people quickly become reliant on AI and less persistent in the absence of the technology. I doubt this is a permanent change, but still – I hate the thought that I am somehow setting myself up for lazy thinking in the future. Writing, for me, should be a continual learning curve.
This isn’t to judge anyone who does choose to create with AI. I am sure many people can do so without stunting their intellect. But if genius really does involve more perspiration than inspiration, as the famous saying claims, I’d much prefer to sweat it out myself.
David Robson’s latest book is The Laws of Connection: 13 social strategies that will transform your life. If you have a question that you would like answered in his column, please send him a message at davidrobson.me/contact%!s()
The author's mom began to forget her as her dementia progressed.
Courtesy of the author
"Where are all the people?"
My mother, Roberta, was standing in the doorway of the guest bedroom in her house, a bedroom I occupied when I visited. Her short frame was visible in the dark of night, and she wore an almost gossamer nightgown, casting an eerie image of gently floating in place.
… %!s()
It was 3 a.m., and she stood shining a flashlight in my eyes, rousing me from a deep sleep.
"What people?" I asked.
Despite her being more than 80 years old, she looked young, if not angelic, as I tried to wake myself from a deep sleep.
I went through the list of who wasn't there — dad was in the hospital, her son/my brother didn't live nearby, so he was home, her brother Joe was down the street at his house.
Then she said, "It's getting late in the summer now. We have to go to the cottage and close it up before winter." This cottage was no longer in the family, but I nodded and reassured her that we would handle it very soon.
She noticed I had tears in my eyes. I was upset that her memory was failing her. I can't recall whether she went back to her bedroom then or stayed with me.
I became my parents' caretaker
My father had been admitted to the hospital and, without him there in the house, she was clearly lost. I had known that she was showing signs of dementia, but I never thought it was this bad.
So when I heard that my father had fallen and was hospitalized, I packed up and headed to Northeast Pennsylvania to try to help them both. That day, I became the long-distance caretaker of my parents, who lived about a five-hour drive from DC. And over many years, I learned what the rest stops along Routes 83 and 81 had to offer as I went up and back, and up and back, sometimes planned and sometimes not. I was a missile waiting for my next assignment.
A few years after this all started, at about 85 years old, my mother's condition had worsened, and she was living in a home solely for people with dementia. When I would appear at the front reception desk, she would run forward to meet me with glee. She knew I was her "person." And I would hug her and say how wonderful she looked, even though she was often wearing clothes that weren't hers, and her hair was usually askew.
I would sit with her on the very long porch where residents met with family. She wouldn't stay put for long; often she roamed the halls inside, going to her room, then back out again, then looked into the dining hall, calling it "the classroom." She was hard to keep up with. But thankfully, for some spell of time, she would sit when I visited, and we would talk.
If my father were with me, she would pull me aside and say, "Why did you bring that old man?" Thankfully, his hearing was quite poor, so he never heard this or any other insult she might toss in his direction.
She started to forget who I was
But during one visit, I could tell that she was a little more uneasy than usual. We were sitting on the porch, and I reminded her of my name; she remembered it for the entire visit, but at one point she looked into the distance and said, "I am starting to forget who you are."
"It's OK because I will remember for both of us," I spoke very quickly and choked my way through the sentence.
People told me that in time, I would just remember the good things. That just isn't true. While I do smile when I think of something Roberta may have said many years ago, or even find myself quoting her without attribution because I have personally adopted her view on something, the actual events of the final few years of her life are still in my head: the good and the bad.
When I think of how she asked me where "all the people were" in my first full exposure of her mental state, my throat still tightens up.
When I think of how she said she was starting to forget who I was, a surreal, haunted feeling emerges.
When I think of her small frame running to me with joy, even though at that point she still remembered that I was her "person," I try to push the image away to stop the jab in my gut that reminds me that soon after, I would be no one to her.
I remember the good and the bad
Time does heal wounds. Some wounds. But I don't believe that we just eventually remember only the good stuff after someone dies. Believing that the "good stuff" idea made me have unreasonable expectations about the grieving process. I kept hoping the bad would fade into oblivion, but it never did. It was easy enough to conjure up if I allowed it entrée.
Now, when my mother comes to mind, I focus on the earlier decades of her life when she was whole, growing up, and then later as an adult with her own children. Then I am able to remember the funny, wise, and even poignant moments we shared and feel comforted. As for the difficult memories, those engendering guilt and pain, I try to matter-of-factly acknowledge them when they appear. I then allow them to almost float over me, waiting for them to move on, hoping it won't take long to pass.
It took me a long time to learn that, and, of course, I sometimes fail miserably at this practice. But when it works, I'm able to stay in the present with good memories and go on with my day.
Diverse homelands and early-life displacement among St Helena's liberated Africans. Credit: Science (2026). DOI: 10.1126/science.aeb3661
In the mid-19th century, the remote island of St. Helena, located about 1,200 miles (1,900 kilometers) off the southwestern coast of Africa, became a receiving point for thousands of enslaved Africans rescued from illegal slave ships by the British Royal Navy. Tragically, about 8,000 died shortly after arriving and were buried in unmarked graves in Rupert's Valley.
… %!s()
Little was known about their lives because ship records usually named only coastal departure ports, not where captive people were born or lived before they were taken. But now, nearly two centuries after their arrival, new analysis of their remains is revealing more about them.
The findings are presented in a paper published in Science. R. Alexander Bentley of the University of Tennessee has written a Perspective piece on the work in the same issue.
Reconstructing journeys
To retrace the past, the research team analyzed tooth enamel from 152 people. Their remains were excavated in 2007 and 2008 after being discovered during construction of the island's first commercial airport.
Tooth enamel forms during childhood and adolescence and does not change over time. Because it absorbs strontium from food and drinking water, it locks in a permanent record of where a person lived during their formative years. Different areas have different strontium isotope signatures because of differences in the underlying rocks and soils.
The scientists then compared their results with a map showing strontium isotope patterns across sub-Saharan Africa. They also combined this information with historical shipping logs and DNA results from a previous study of the remains to estimate the most likely places of origin of these individuals.
"Together, these analyses shed light on two aspects of the trade in enslaved Africans that have been difficult to reconstruct: individuals' likely regions of origin and their forced movements before embarkation," wrote the researchers in their paper.
The results indicate that the captured individuals came from diverse backgrounds. Most grew up in coastal or near-coastal regions of western Central Africa, in areas around modern-day Angola and Gabon. However, the chemical signatures of some individuals point to origins much farther inland, as far as present-day Zimbabwe.
The authors also discovered clues about the journeys some children took. While strontium isotope signatures were consistent in most individuals, the chemical signatures in a small number of children shifted sharply between teeth formed in early and later childhood. This indicates that they may have relocated during childhood, possibly over hundreds of miles before reaching the slave ships on the coast.
Connecting to the past
As well as providing answers about the past, research like this can also help descendant communities connect with their heritage. "Rather than determining a single destination for return, these approaches provide an empirical framework to support informed, community-led decisions about remembrance and potential repatriation."
Written for you by our author Paul Arnold, edited by Lisa Lock, and fact-checked and reviewed by Andrew Zinin—this article is the result of careful human work. We rely on readers like you to keep independent science journalism alive.
If this reporting matters to you, please consider a donation (especially monthly). You'll get an ad-free account as a thank-you.
Publication details
Xueye Wang et al, Tracing the origins of St Helena's liberated Africans, Science (2026). DOI: 10.1126/science.aeb3661
Citation:
Tooth enamel reveals the origins of African slaves buried on St Helena (2026, July 17)
retrieved 17 July 2026
from https://phys.org/news/2026-07-tooth-enamel-reveals-african-slaves.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
%!s()
Well what a silly goose I am. Only a few days ago I was hyping up some new Windows (Insider) updates for actually looking like they might be decent for a change, and now I'm tearing my hair out trying to fix whatever the latest update (KB5101650) seems to have done to my PC. And yes, this is the first Windows update that Microsoft has used AI for, to help it discover a bunch more security fixes. It actually included a record 570 patches.
… %!s()
To be clear, it doesn't sound like Microsoft is saying AI is going to be used in fixes a lot more from now on, rather that it's going to be discovering a bunch more vulnerabilities thanks to AI, and then pushing out more fixes for them in each update. But a bunch more fixes each update, to my ears, just sounds like a higher likelihood of one or more of them breaking something.
And it seems like more than a coincidence that I ran into issues with my monitor the morning after the update.
My 400 Hz monitor will not run at 400 Hz anymore, at least not without cutting to black and re-connecting every second or two. Put it down to 360 Hz and that's every three or four seconds; down to 300 Hz and it's even more infrequent (but still terribly frequent). Put it down to 240 Hz, though, and I'm fine.
Peculiar.
I don't seem to be the only one struggling since the latest update, either, especially for those with an AMD card.
Judging by some Reddit threads, it seems like there are a few others struggling with display and graphics issues since the update dropped. Some of these problems could be coincidental—not everyone is linking their issues to the Windows update—but I doubt all of them are, given my own experience.
Keep up to date with the most important stories and the best deals, as picked by the PC Gamer team.
Microsoft has also had to pause the update for some Dell PCs due to a compatibility issue leading, in some cases, to "changes in performance, power consumption, or system behavior."
At any rate, I've not seen any word from Microsoft or AMD about the specific display issue I've encountered or other similar display and graphics issues I've seen some others reporting. I'll have to try reverting the update again, as my system didn't seem to want to get rid of the whole thing when I tried last night.
Whatever the case may be here, human or AI error, someone needs to get on it, pronto, because dropping from 400 Hz to 240 Hz is not pretty. Kidding, it's fine, I just don't like being forced into it from an update, if that is indeed what has happened.
Jacob got his hands on a gaming PC for the first time when he was about 12 years old. He swiftly realised the local PC repair store had ripped him off with his build and vowed never to let another soul build his rig again. With this vow, Jacob the hardware junkie was born. Since then, Jacob's led a double-life as part-hardware geek, part-philosophy nerd, first working as a Hardware Writer for PCGamesN in 2020, then working towards a PhD in Philosophy for a few years while freelancing on the side for sites such as TechRadar, Pocket-lint, and yours truly, PC Gamer. Eventually, he gave up the ruthless mercenary life to join the world's #1 PC Gaming site full-time. It's definitely not an ego thing, he assures us. %!s()
The last time the sword-and-sandal epic truly conquered the Oscars, Russell Crowe stood in the Colosseum and asked, “Are you not entertained?”
Ridley Scott’s 2001 blockbuster “Gladiator” won best picture that season, briefly reminding Hollywood that ancient-world spectacle could still capture the Academy’s imagination. Since then, the genre has largely retreated to the multiplex, where toga-clad warriors and mythological heroes have been treated as summer entertainment rather than awards-season contenders.
… %!s()
But Hollywood has a long history of embracing the sword-and-sandal epic when the scale is matched by prestige.
Before “Gladiator,” William Wyler’s “Ben-Hur” dominated the 1959 Oscars, winning 11 awards — a record at the time — including best picture, director and actor for Charlton Heston. Earlier biblical and historical epics such as “The Ten Commandments” (1956) and “Spartacus” (1960) demonstrated that spectacle could become a path to Oscar glory when paired with strong storytelling and cultural impact. Even Peter Jackson’s “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” (2003), though rooted in fantasy rather than ancient history, proved that a massive mythological adventure could become an awards-season phenomenon, sweeping the ceremony.
Now, Universal Pictures hopes for another genre revival with Christopher Nolan‘s newest cinematic endeavor.
“The Odyssey,” Nolan’s adaptation of Homer’s epic, has arrived to a wave of critical love, sitting at 96% on Rotten Tomatoes and 89 on Metacritic. It represents the rare summer tentpole with awards ambitions built into its foundation. It pairs one of Hollywood’s most ambitious filmmakers with source material that has shaped Western storytelling for nearly three millennia, sprinkled with an ensemble stacked with some of the biggest stars on the planet and a technical approach designed to make the theatrical experience itself part of the conversation; you have to recognize the birth of a viable Oscar contender.
Interestingly, it also arrives at the perfect moment for Nolan.
Fresh off “Oppenheimer” (2024), which delivered him his first best director Oscar and a best picture victory (which he shared with his wife and longtime producing partner Emma Thomas) after decades as one of the industry’s most celebrated yet repeatedly overlooked filmmakers, Nolan enters his next campaign with unprecedented Academy goodwill.
If anyone can convince voters that a three-hour epic about ancient mythology belongs in the best picture conversation, it is the filmmaker who proved that a dense, dialogue-heavy drama about the creation of the atomic bomb (and one that never even shows the bomb fall) could become a global phenomenon.
From a craft perspective, Nolan’s awards case is tailor-made for the Academy: The filmmaker who has spent his career defending the theatrical experience adapts one of literature’s foundational myths on an enormous scale. In many ways, it also serves as his finest screenwriting effort since “The Prestige” (2006), making interesting and thought-provoking changes from the original text (and no, that isn’t simply casting Lupita Nyong’o).
The narrative for him this season will be simple: rinse and repeat the last one.
Nolan takes the oldest adventure story in Western literature and gives it the full prestige treatment. And then inside it, Matt Damon, an Oscar winner for screenwriting but never a statue for his acting, is at the forefront. Aside from “Good Will Hunting” (1997) and “The Talented Mr. Ripley” (1999), the latter of which did not even earn him a nom, he has never made a stronger case for his acting to be recognized on the big stage.
“The Odyssey” marks Damon’s first leading role for Nolan after supporting turns in “Interstellar” and “Oppenheimer.” He carries the film as Odysseus, a legendary warrior defined less by triumph than by exhaustion, loss and the consequences of survival. His take on the legendary king of Ithaca is complex, physically visceral and dynamically charged. With festivals and early releases already making viable cases for Jaafar Jackson (“Michael”), Ryan Gosling (“Project Hail Mary”), Sebastian Stan (“Fjord”) and John Turturro (“The Only Living Pickpocket in New York”) — and with anticipated work still to come from Tom Cruise (“Digger”), Andrew Scott (“Elsinore”), Pedro Pascal (“Behemoth!”), John Malkovich (“Wild Horse Nine”) and Timothée Chalamet (“Dune: Part Three”) — the best actor race is sure to be a blood-filled sprint to the finish.
(Good. It should always be that way.)
Melinda Sue Gordon
Damon has garnered five total Oscar nominations across several categories: “Good Will Hunting” in best actor and original screenplay, “Invictus” (2009) in supporting actor, “The Martian” (2015) in best actor and “Manchester by the Sea” (2016) in best picture as a producer. He won for writing “Good Will Hunting” with his best friend, Ben Affleck.
The Academy could feel he is due for another trip to the stage.
Now comes the hard part. Which supporting players can, will and should enter their respective categories?
If social media and the early reviews are any indication, there is no consensus favorite among supporting actors or actresses, with the possible exception of Samantha Morton.
A two-time Oscar nominee for “Sweet and Lowdown” (1999) and “In America” (2003), the British veteran steals the movie as Circe, the witch of the island of Aeaea, who commands less than 10 minutes of screen time midway through the film but may be the easiest call voters have to make. Think Judd Hirsch’s one-scene wonder in “The Fabelmans” (2022), which landed him a supporting actor nomination.
It is, yet again, another one-scene wonder from Morton. This move seems to have become her signature contribution lately. She turned brief, pointed appearances into standouts in films like the #MeToo drama “She Said” and as Mary, the estranged ex-wife of Brendan Fraser’s Oscar-winning lead in “The Whale,” both in 2022. Perhaps this is the one that earns her a return to the ceremony, and it could be worthy enough to win, depending on how the race shakes out.
On paper, there are others worth considering, and that is exactly what will make orchestrating the campaign so difficult.
Take Robert Pattinson, who is having a stacked year with the early A24 hit “The Drama,” the still-to-be-released “Primetime” (in which he portrays TV journalist Chris Hansen) and Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune: Part Three.” As Antinous, one of the suitors competing for Penelope’s attention, Pattinson has the type of role Oscar voters traditionally embrace: A memorable antagonist, full of theatricality and danger, that lets an actor steal focus without carrying the emotional burden of the entire film.
Pattinson’s suave villain feels cut from the same cloth as Alan Rickman’s scene-stealing Sheriff of Nottingham in “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” (1991). The loudest role is often the easiest to coalesce around, especially for an actor who has had a big year. Look at Brad Pitt getting in for “Moneyball” the same year as “The Tree of Life,” or Jessica Chastain getting in for “The Help” when she had a half-dozen other performances to choose from.
The villain, or even the most unlikable character, can also be easy Oscar fodder, following nominees from large sprawling ensembles like Matt Dillon in “Crash” (2005) and Josh Brolin in “Milk” (2008). Sometimes it is simply an industry sentiment that says, “It’s their time.” Look at Sacha Baron Cohen from “The Trial of the Chicago 7” (2020) or Delroy Lindo from “Sinners” (2025).
That veteran sentiment is what I think could build a rallying cry around Latino legend John Leguizamo and his deeply moving turn as Eumaeus, Odysseus’ faithful and blind swineherd. Despite an illustrious career spanning his acclaimed solo special “Freak” and memorable film roles in classics like “Carlito’s Way” (1993) and “Romeo + Juliet” (1996), Academy recognition has eluded him. The closest he has come is his unforgettable turn as drag queen Chi-Chi Rodriguez in “To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything! Julie Newmar” (1995), which earned him a Golden Globe nom for supporting actor. I believe this could finally be his time.
Elsewhere, it is a wait-and-see game for who can surprise as the season unfolds. Himesh Patel, Tom Holland, Jon Bernthal, Anne Hathaway and Charlize Theron all drew their share of shout-outs in early reactions. Zendaya, Lupita Nyong’o, Elliot Page, Corey Hawkins and Benny Safdie are not in it enough. Still, ultimately, it will come down to who the Academy chooses to rally around.
It is also worth noting that aside from the three acting nominations for “Oppenheimer,” which produced two wins (Cillian Murphy and Robert Downey Jr.), and Heath Ledger’s posthumous Joker in “The Dark Knight” (2008), acting nominations for Nolan films have been scarce even when critics and audiences believed they are deserved (see Guy Pearce in “Memento,” Leonardo DiCaprio in “Inception,” Matthew McConaughey in “Interstellar,” among others).
Yet the inevitable Oscar campaign could carry a fact worth considering.
Nolan assumed the presidency of the Directors Guild of America in September 2025. He had already won the guild’s feature-directing prize for “Oppenheimer” in 2024, the same season he took his best director Oscar. The guild’s line of presidents stretches back to King Vidor, who opened the run with the newly formed Screen Directors Guild in 1936. Although the guild’s first honor was an Honorary Life Membership given to D.W. Griffith in 1938, the modern DGA Award began in 1948, with Joseph L. Mankiewicz taking the inaugural feature prize for “A Letter to Three Wives” and repeating the win at the 22nd Academy Awards. The DGA Award for feature directing carries the single best track record of any guild prize at forecasting the Oscars, both for best director and, by extension, best picture.
Nolan is, inarguably, the most famous president the guild has ever had, and he holds the post at the peak of his career. And while legends and Oscar winners like George Stevens, Robert Wise, Frank Capra and the aforementioned Mankiewicz all held the office, none of them mounted an Oscar campaign in the middle of their tenure.
From a purely optics standpoint, how will the industry feel if Nolan wins the DGA Award while sitting in the guild’s highest office? That is not to allege a conflict of interest. It is simply a dynamic worth considering. Does the presidency help or hurt him?
The optimistic interpretation is that Nolan’s visibility among directors has never been higher, and that his leadership role only strengthens his relationship with the very voters who determine the DGA winner. A filmmaker at the height of his influence, delivering the year’s most ambitious cinematic achievement, could become an irresistible narrative.
The counterargument is that award bodies can be cautious about appearing to reward their own “king.” The “overdue” factor that so often fuels guild victories has already been satisfied by Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” breakthrough.
There is little modern precedent to guide voters. Directors such as Frank Capra and Joseph L. Mankiewicz held leadership roles within the guild while continuing to make acclaimed films. Still, the modern DGA Award era presents a different landscape, and a far more media-savvy one.
Whatever happens at the guild will likely reverberate throughout the Oscar race.
Beneath the spectacle sits one of the most intriguing questions that has already popped up online: can Nolan tie or break the all-time Oscar nomination record set by Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners” last year, which picked up 16 nominations?
“The Odyssey” is a top-to-bottom artisan contender in nearly every craft category, which this time includes, for the first time in a Nolan film, an original song. Rapper Travis Scott, who also has a brief role in the film, recorded “When I’m Home,” the end-credits anthem, which features production and vocals from James Blake and Ludwig Göransson, with Nolan himself reportedly helping write the lyrics. Along with the casting award introduced last year, this brings 10 categories into play before the acting races even begin. Add what many expect to be a triple bid for Nolan in picture, director and adapted screenplay, and the tally reaches 13.
From there, it comes down to the actors.
Damon is the safest bet, and a nomination for him would push the total to 14, tying the former all-time record shared by “All About Eve,” “Titanic” and “La La Land.” Beyond that, the supporting races are where records would fall. A double dip in one supporting category would move the film past that mark, and a double dip in both — five acting nominations in all — is the scenario that would challenge the “Sinners” record outright.
For reference, only nine films have ever received five acting nominations: “Mrs. Miniver” (1942), “All About Eve” (1950), “From Here to Eternity” (1953), “On the Waterfront” (1954), “Peyton Place” (1957), “Tom Jones” (1963), “Bonnie and Clyde” (1967), “The Godfather Part II” (1974) and “Network” (1976).
Even last year’s best picture juggernaut, “One Battle After Another” from Paul Thomas Anderson — which many expected to land five acting nominations — dropped one on nomination morning (lead actress hopeful Chase Infiniti).
“The Odyssey” does not have an obvious lead actress, unless Hathaway, who has five films this year, mounts a surprise lead submission. That leaves very little wiggle room for error. Heavy, male-dominated ensembles have pulled off strong showings before. “The Godfather” (1972) landed best actor winner Marlon Brando, plus a supporting-actor trifecta of James Caan, Robert Duvall and Al Pacino. Its sequel, “The Godfather Part II” (1974), did it again with three supporting bids, Robert De Niro (the winner), Michael V. Gazzo and Lee Strasberg, alongside best actor nominee Al Pacino.
In this scenario, “The Odyssey” will undoubtedly be the one film everyone agrees on.
Consider, too, that only two films have ever picked up double nominations in both supporting categories: “Peyton Place” (1957) and “The Last Picture Show” (1971). Neither carried a best actor or actress nominee alongside that haul.
Can it happen? Sure. But important for awards enthusiasts to remember… It’s July. And that is early for declarations that “it’s over” and “it’s breaking records.”
In addition, this could be an awards season with many populist titles vying for recognition, and the one most likely to feed from the same voter demographic is Denis Villeneuve’s upcoming sci-fi “Dune: Part Three.”
The central question surrounding “The Odyssey” is not whether Nolan can create spectacle. He’s done that. It’s whether he can make the Academy revisit the same well they drank from so overwhelmingly only two years ago. The last two-time directing winner to also win best picture twice was Clint Eastwood with “Unforgiven” (1992) and “Million Dollar Baby” (2004) — a 12-year gap. And before that was Miloš Forman with “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” (1975) and “Amadeus” (1984) — a nine-year gap. Ten of the 21 filmmakers who have won best director more than once had their films also win best picture.
If “The Odyssey” becomes the next great Oscar epic, it could carry Damon, one (or two) of its supporting players and Nolan himself into another awards-season triumph. And it could remind Hollywood of something Maximus already knew: the epic still has the power to entertain.
Upcoming fall movies… it’s your move, now.
“The Odyssey”
Universal Pictures
Oscars Predictions Tracking (July 17, 2026)
Best Picture “The Debut” (A24) “Digger” (Warner Bros.) “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “Fjord” (Neon) “I Play Rocky” (Amazon MGM Studios) “La Bola Negra” (Netflix) “Michael” (Lionsgate) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) “Project Hail Mary” (Amazon MGM Studios) “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures)
Director Javier Ambrossi and Javier Calvo, “La Bola Negra” (Netflix) Jesse Eisenberg, “The Debut” (A24) Martin McDonagh, “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures) Christopher Nolan, “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) Denis Villeneuve, “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.)
Actor Tom Cruise, “Digger” (Warner Bros.) Matt Damon, “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) Ryan Gosling, “Project Hail Mary” (Amazon MGM Studios) John Malkovich, “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures) Andrew Scott, “Elisnore” (Focus Features)
Supporting Actor Colman Domingo, “Michael” (Lionsgate) Paul Giamatti, “The Debut” (A24) John Leguizamo, “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) Sam Rockwell, “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures) Jeremy Strong, “The Social Reckoning” (Sony Pictures)
Supporting Actress Gemma Chan, “Josephine” (Sumerian Pictures) Penélope Cruz, “The Invite” (A24) Penélope Cruz, “La Bola Negra” (Netflix) Mariana di Girolamo, “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures) Samantha Morton, “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures)
Original Screenplay “The Debut” (A24) — Jesse Eisenberg “Fjord” (Neon) — Cristian Mungiu “Josephine” (Sumerian Pictures) — Beth de Araújo “Werwulf” (Focus Features) — Robert Eggers and Sjón “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures) — Martin McDonagh
Adapted Screenplay “Clarissa” (Neon) — Chuko Esiri “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) — Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve “The Invite” (A24) — Rashida Jones and Will McCormack “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) — Christopher Nolan “Wildwood” (Laika) — Chris Butler
Casting “Being Heumann” (Apple Original Films) “Clarissa” (Neon) “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “I Play Rocky” (Amazon MGM Studios) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures)
Animated Feature “Forgotten Island” (DreamWorks Animation) “Ray Gunn” (Netflix) “Shaun the Sheep: The Beast of Mossy Bottom” (GKids) “Toy Story 5” (Pixar) “Wildwood” (Laika)
Production Design “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “La Bola Negra” (Netflix) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) “Untitled David Fincher/Cliff Booth Movie” (Netflix) “Werwulf” (Focus Features)
Costume Design “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “La Bola Negra” (Netflix) “I Love Boosters” (Neon) “Michael” (Lionsgate) “Werwulf” (Focus Features)
Film Editing “The Debut” (A24) “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “Michael” (Lionsgate) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures)
Makeup and Hairstyling “Digger” (Warner Bros.) “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “I Play Rocky” (Amazon MGM Studios) “Michael” (Lionsgate) “Tenzing” (Apple Original Films)
Sound “The Debut” (A24) “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “Michael” (Lionsgate) “The Mosquito Bowl” (Netflix) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures)
Visual Effects “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “Godzilla Minus Zero” (Toho) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) “Project Hail Mary” (Amazon MGM Studios) “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” (Sony Pictures)
Original Score “The Debut” (A24) “Dune: Part Three” (Warner Bros.) “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) “Wild Horse Nine” (Searchlight Pictures) “Wildwood” (Laika)
Original Song “By Any Means” (Paramount Pictures) “The Debut” (A24) “Forgotten Island” (DreamWorks Animation) — “A Parallel World” “The Odyssey” (Universal Pictures) — “When I’m Home” “Toy Story 5” (Pixar) — “I Knew It, I Knew You”
Documentary Feature “American Doctor” (Watermelon Pictures) “The History of Concrete” (Magnolia Pictures) “Musk” (Bleecker Street) “Once Upon a Time in Harlem” (Neon) “One in a Million” (PBS Documentary Films)
International Feature “All of a Sudden” from Japan (Neon) “Fatherland” from Germany (Mubi) “Fjord” from Romania (Neon) “La Bola Negra” from Spain (Netflix) “Minotaur” from Russia (Mubi)
%!s()
