Though their stories are set over three thousand years apart, taking place around 1200BC after the siege of Troy and around 1930AD during the Great Depression respectively, there are a shocking number of similarities between the stories the Odyssey, and the film Oh Brother Where Art Thou. If these similarities seem too coincidental, the film even begins with an old-timey slide of a direct quote from Homer’s epic poem, simultaneously establishing such a direct connection and also alluding towards its modern take on the slapstick silent-film style. As in Homer’s poem, the protagonist of Oh Brother Where Art Thou is not so simply a hero crafted as is the nearly invincible Achilles from the Illiad, whose only real problems are self-designed in a state of arrogance. On the other hand, our hero Everett frequently must come to terms not only with his companions’ inadequacies, but also his own. As mentioned by our professor, the Odyssey is often taken to be a direct response to the Illiad, as it is the story not of a valiant warrior in the midst of battle, but of a calm and clever man merely attempting to return to his family. Just as Odysseus uses his peculiar intelligence to overcome the violent, brutal, and often supernatural forces he is often faced with on his long journey home, poverty-stricken escaped convict Everett must overcome the powerful forces in his story using only his, albeit backcountry-tinged, wit and charm.

In the first scene of the film we witness our protagonist’s escape from a chain-gang with the two men he is tied together with. Although Everett tells them he is escaping to retrieve a treasure he buried before his arrest, there really is no such thing and instead he simply wants to return to his family, specifically his wife, before she remarries. Already we must question the morality behind our hero’s actions, but in his favor such an admirable goal is maybe worth deceiving other criminals over for the benefit of their mutual escape. The slapstick nature of the film and Everett’s companions imperfections are quickly revealed, as Delmar takes a fall attempting to board a moving train, dragging the other two along with him. In this way Everett’s two companions represent the largest flaws of Odysseus’ crew, with Delmar being guilty of senselessness, whereas Pete is often mutinous toward Everett. Soon after the Lotus Eater sequence is played out as the gang is lured in by a Baptist congregation. Although Everett witnesses the congregation and is to an extent mesmerized by them, he has the sense not to believe a dousing of water will absolve him of his past crimes, just as Odysseus knows better than to eat the fruit.

Odysseus too wishes to return to his wife, but instead of Everett’s one rival suitor, Odysseus must deal with over a hundred of them. In a lot of ways the film takes a step back in terms of such fantastical circumstances, but also works to create its own sort of mythology, as can be seen in Everett’s seven daughters as compared to Odysseus’ single child. Odysseus also seems flawed, in that he ends up brutally murdering all of the suitors, though he was able to do this through the use of his cleverness to trick them all into an enclosure unarmed. In a retelling of the slaying of the Cyclopes, Everett is able to rescue his friend from the Ku Klux Klan rally, and successfully escape a very large and angry mob, in the mean time killing a thieving Bible salesman. The means by which each of these characters achieve their goals are questionable, and yet their mental prowess is certainly commendable, along with their ends, leaving them in an interesting moral grey area as compared to the common impractically noble protagonist.

There are of course differences between each work. For example, Everett proclaims not to believe in any God, whereas Odysseus must confront many of them directly and so has little choice in his religious belief. However, despite Everett’s lofty praise for the faculties of reason, he still comes off as being steeped in tradition and moral certainties. His almost constant application of hair gel throughout the movie can be seen as a sort of materialistic sacrifice, and although he has no religion, he still must come to terms with supernatural forces throughout the film. Immediately after they escape from the chain gang the group comes across a blind seer pushing a cart up the railroad track. The seer offers them strange but surprisingly accurate predictions, the same sort that Odysseus receives after meeting with his seer in the underworld. It would seem that both writers wanted to portray the idea that our senses can easily deceive us, so it is not our eyes which leads the seers to true knowledge. This contrasts with the way in which Everett is so often seen chiding his friends over some moral quandary. Often his solutions are scheming and quite questionable if not blatantly crooked, but he always presents them as if they’re a part of some obvious moral truth known only to him.

Although large sections of the poem were modified, reordered, or even left out entirely, it is the mood of the film that most strikingly resembles the original work. And this seems perfectly acceptable, as the poem itself, having been passed down as an oral tradition originally, must have changed wildly over time from poet to poet and even through the same poet during different retellings. Odysseus and Everett are both uncanny heroes who use their intelligence to overcome obstacles on their voyages to return home. Their crews are often unruly and unreliable, but their sense of brotherhood requires them to continue on with them, through acts of foolishness and even outright rebellion. Although even these two protagonists perform actions of questionable morality, in the end their causes seem worthy and the powerful forces they are faced with along the way meant they were often given little choice in fending for themselves.