Odyssey allegory

It was based on the Odyssey allegory it isn't the Odyssey Allegory remade in the 20th century.

What you mention is the plus side of the film, you know JLG thoughts on the subject. They are mixed very well with everything, it's remarkable I might add.

It is complete and utter waste of grey matters searching for some sense in that movie. It shows Brigitte Bardot's (kinda flat) butt. That's all folks!

Prokosch seems to be more closely identified with Poseidon (Neptune), as the 'natural enemy' to Paul's Odysseus; this would tend to parallel Jean-Luc Godard's own feelings about producers as potential 'destroyers' of the artists' vision. If Homer's world cannot exist in the modern world, then it is reasonable to assume that the relationship between Paul and Camille, unlike Odysseus and Penelope, is doomed.

Camille, who first enjoys the attentions of Prokosch, and then quickly tires of them when she realizes he is a giant homeric jerk, is helpless to understand why Paul defends the role of the producer, even as he experiences some of the drawbacks himself; thus, when she opposes Prokosch, Paul reflexively opposes her.

Whether or not Paul sees himself as a failed Homeric hero in a world that is no longer Homeric depends on whether or not we believe that he believes whatever Prokosch tells him; his need to acknowledge both producer and director puts him in an impossible position, as Lang's and Prokosch's perceptions of film are presented as contradictory. In the final analysis, a film writer who chooses his work over his marriage is hardly a shockingly novel, nor unique scenario in the world of modern filmmaking. However, it is not very Homeric.

On the other hand, I myself firmly believe Paul and Camille's relationship was in deep trouble long before the film's beginning.