"Persians" I thought.
"All of Asia came before us..." - The Narrator.
The Persian empire spanned "over a hundred nations of Asia." At least that's what 300 told me GGG.
If you can't see the inherent racism in it, then I don't know what to say my man.
So, somehow that doesn't make it a good movie? I should never see "Merchant of Venice," read about loathsome Lovecraftian "foreigners" and "half-breeds," No Charlie Chan? Never watch a war movie that refers to a Kraut? Jap? Charlie?, or read an old pulp novel with a sneaky, hanky-using dandy? No Jackie Chan beating the hell out of dishonorable Englishmen (played by Aussies) using guns and money? These are all sterotypes to be true, but taking it from the the early Greek standpoint Persians where the enemy and demonized, (and feminized as well). As the inheritors of Western culture we still see traces of that in the works of Shakespeare and his contemporaries. Should we in all of our new found "PCness" toss aside such relics? Really is there any worth in watching a war movie? We won (or lost), now let's dwell on it?
I'm glad we both agree it was racist. I prefer not to watch racist drivel trolled out before me by big money producers who think it will sell to a reactionary American public. That's my call. If you want to, go for it. Who's stopping you? Certainly not me. I am not saying everyone who liked this movie is racist, to clarify yet again. I am saying the movie contains an extreme pro-racism bent. I'm not giving it my dollar vote...that's all I'm saying. I'm not picking on you guys for liking it.
Personally though, I didn't find it to my taste.
That movie really wasn't catering too Iraqis or anti-war democrats. You could try and slice it up to Xerxes = Bush, but I don't really see how, especially since the message being drummed out over and over again was "Freedom" and "Send more troops." Are you really going to tell me this wasn't there my man.
This was a pretty minor point in the grand sceme of things. I try not to let entertainment influence my voting position but for the sake of a good arguement I'll play devil's advocate.The movie is based on a graphic novel (1998-9) based on a movie (300 Spartans, 1966) that Frank Miller loved watching as a kid. As I recall we weren't in "Crusade mode" at the time (1998-9) that is. Miller's Sin City came out a couple of years ago at the instigation of the director (whose name escapes me)...
Yeah but Miller is a known reactionary. We didn't have to be in Crusade mode for him to be.
As to it being a small point in the scheme of things, this is where you and I disagree. And that's cool. I felt it was the overriding message of the movie.
Nicolas Logue wrote:
No offense to any who think the Persians were supposed to be Americans,
Again, 'a very small bit of the arguement.' How about the points on story structure, genre, things a someone can judge a movie on beyond politics, etc...?
I thought I mentioned earlier who I thought the rest of the movie stank too...if not here you go:
Acting...I guess yelling is acting to Butler in this movie. No body experienced or felt anything. Just going through the motions as far as I'm concerned.
The Cinematography: Why soooooooo sloooooow. Why did we need a thirty second close-up of Butler's face every time he had to make a decision...Egads.
Character and Plot...Plot is driven by characters and our ability to identify with them and like them. I didn't personally care about anyone in this movie. When they died I thought it was amusing. Badly done.
The Action Sequences: These were alright. There were not near enough of them, and far too much was in slo-mo for my personal taste, but I would say they were well choreographed (I am a stage combat choreographer in real life when I am not gaming, and I give the work done on this movie a thumbs up).
Nicolas Logue wrote:
....but I do theatre for a living, I know how we spin s&%*.
I don't know that a theatre background necessarily means much in critism. Everyone can be a critic, and the reality of how something is viewed can be very personal. An artist might guess how another artist created something, but the reason and message might still remain hidden. Judge not lest- and all that.
You are mistaking my comments for criticism. I am not a critic. But you know what, I would hope any critic of theatre be decent at it themselves...otherwise, how do they really know what the f@&& they are talking about? This matters not though:
I am talking about how and why we do what we do. Almost every film or staged play has a message or theme it is trying to convey...this is how screenwriters, playwrights and directors are trained and how they work. I promise you I'm not making this up GGG. I didn't work in the theatre for going on twenty years and not pay attention to what we do. If you don't think the reason they hit the "Freedom isn't free" and "Freedom this and that" and "the evil Persians (Iranians)" vibe on purpose and for specific reasons, then you are out of your mind. It's what writers and directors (and especially producers) do.
Nicolas Logue wrote:
This movie was targeted at getting Bush-supporters, and on-the-fencers to say "Our boys in Iraq are doing a great job under horrible circumstances. They are outnumbered and outflanked by an evil enemy, and we need to send more troops to help them."
Once again it is possible, but I don't give the administration that much credit. Really they're lousy at covering up coruption in the ranks (Bin Laden, Plame, Gonzalas, Rove, Haliburton, Iraqi prisons, environment, wire-tapping, CIA torture centers, GOP ethic's scandals - God, its a long list - etc...). They just let general puplic apathy rule the day.
Nicolas Logue wrote:
Forget the fact that if Bush really cared about our soldiers in Iraq, he'd be trying to get them home safe and sound as fast as possible...or wait, maybe he wouldn't have sent them there in the first place.
Amen there. I'm not an overly religious sort, but I'm praying everyone is safe over there tonight. There's about 10 or 20 more people wounded for evey one person killed many of them seriously. For them and their families the war may never end. And I'm not just praying for our "boys" either but everyone touched by this war. We are breeding a great deal of bitterness over there right now, most of it justified. We really didn't go there to save our nation or theirs we went there to serve some special self-centered interests.
How many ancient vases in that museum that is being looted? Who cares. I saw the apathy very clearly then.
Good-O. We agree on this. Get the boys and girls home safely, avoid more civilian casualties in Iraq. Death is bad. This was one of my big problems with the movie.
Nicolas Logue wrote:
As a trained professional actor who has worked in the trenches of theatre since I was 14 years of age, I am saying that in my opinion, this movie was racist pro-military garbage.
And here I thought I was the vocal lefty. I disagree (and I'm sorry (and I mean it too), but I can't help but think of a scene or two in "Team America" when you say that).
"Team America" was ironic. It was irony, it was purposely over the top to illicit a "wow this is a ridiculous part of our culture" response. That's what satire does.
...lots of funny stuff and some interesting questions on Racism.
Racism against orcs or klingons, while maybe sets up problematic tropes in the mind of young children, is nothing compared to taking a whole group of people or section of the world and labeling them "Axis of Evil." That's what this movie did. It said those bad-wrong Middle Easterners and Asians are evil, mutated f!%+os and we need to stamp em out with our superior tactics. Iran agrees with me here. If it was so harmless why are the Iranians pissed.
I would be pissed if a movie came out representing my ancestors as mutated, feminine freaks who are inherently immoral in all regards and celebrated their slaughter...especially if the nation responsible for producing said film is eyeing up my country for its next "Big Money Making War."
But, yeah, GGG, let's work on an orc war prop together. I am down! ;-)
Actually it's funny you mention orcs, I've got a manuscript in the works that plays on these "racist" tropes against orcs. You shall see when the time comes!!! :-)
As far as the people of Iran being offended by the film, I can understand it but I also doubt many of them have even seen the film to judge for themselves. As citizens in a part of the world where unapologetic caricatures of big nosed Jews are just more fodder for comedy, I would hope that the people of Iran could take what they dish out. I don't condone racism, of course. But it seems like everyone the world over is just waiting for their opportunity for self-righteous moral indignation.
The reason Americans and the United States are fodder for lampooning is because our government's actions have shown that we have little regard for the opinions of others. However, when almost the entire population of a large chunk of the world's real estate refuses to acknowledge the right of one much smaller group of people to exist in their backyard but then becomes extremely upset about a tasteless cartoon of their own prophet and a fictional version of what their ancestors may have been like from another perspective (that they haven't even seen for themselves) then I lose sympathy for said moral indignation. "Cast as many stones as you like at whomever you like so long as none of them hit our guys" is the message that I get from that kind of outrage.
Some people have also been wondering why the only reference to homosexual behaviour is derogatory description "boy lovers" of Athens, considering that Sparta must have been the most openly homosexual society in the history of the world (even if concept of homosexuality is different from what it is now).
The point is addressed in Thermopylae Battle for the West - it is believed by the author of that book (an attempt at a historical analysis - pro-Greek but definately giving the Persians their due- especially as planners, but also as warriors) and supported by his analysis of the culture that homosexual behavior was much lower among the Spartans than many of the other Greek states. Personally I don't really think it matters that much - but it was a topic that was assessed and addressed - convincingly in my opinion, but I really liked that book (and Pressfield's fictional Gates of Fire) and so I choose to be swayed by those portrayals of the culture and the how conflict took shape. But I am by no means and expert - having only those books and "300" the graphic novel as a reference, the movie is out yet in my corner of the world - but I look forward to seeing it.
I don't condone racism, of course. But it seems like everyone the world over is just waiting for their opportunity for self-righteous moral indignation.
Then again, I do remember how amusing IMDb message boards were when Dogville by Lars von Trier came out...and hordes were screaming bloody murder for the portrayal of Americans.
Same went for V for Vendetta movie a while ago...
|
Whoa there cowboy...who the f%#! called you a Nazi. I sure as hell didn't. Plenty of my close friends whom I love liked this movie. I don't think they are Nazis for liking it, any more than I think you are friend.I am simply reading into the producers intent more than you. That's my perogative, as is my right to express what I think about the movie. I thought it was pro-militarism, pro-racism garbage. That doesn't mean I think you enjoyed it for those two reasons. You probably liked the kickin metal and cool well-choreographed combat scenes (maybe, I don't really know). Good for you. Glad you enjoyed it. I didn't, and I was saying so. I thought GGG and I were having an interesting discussion about the movie's "politics." I didn't know I was calling people Nazis. So if I offered offense then I am sorry.
I disagree with you on the other points. How long a movie is in production has nothing to do with what sneaks in before the final cut.
They called the Persian horde "Asians" (in point of fact, most of middle Asia was represented among the Persians) and then showed us monsters...that's how I thought it was racist.
OK - maybe I read too much into the "it would have made Hitler proud" comment... I still don't know about the intended messages and all that - however, there are a bunch of people out there who will take it as vindication for their views of the "true face" of the East, and they will be in the news a lot...
The Nazis are a good choice for the archtypical evil force, I agree...
Anyhoo, I was really talking more about 300's disgusting portrayal of several hundred nations as monsters, and their portrayal of Nazi-like greeks as "great hero do-gooders." It was just a little illness-inducing, especially when one takes in the modern corollaries to it...
And after spending three solid years in Beijing, I am a man who can sniff out propaganda.
Everyone has the right to their tastes and opinions - well at least in the West were soldiers stand prepared to fight to the death to protect that - as a former member of that fraternity - who was spat on and protested (in the 80's too) for filling that role I feel some small sense of entitlement in pointing out that this "right" is one of the many legacies left by those "nazi-like" Greeks that fought the Persians.
Those monstrous Persians - weren't coming to Greece for peaceful trade - they were coming to conquer the Greeks, take away their religion, force them to accept Ahura Mazda, and effectively make them slaves of the empire, and doing the same to the rest of Europe.
The Spartans fought because their freedom, their faith, and their culture were all very much on the line.
I haven't seen the representation of the Spartans in the film, but the Persians of history - at that time - were, in terms of modern Western culture, pretty vile - doesn't mean that as a culture they didn't have admirable traits - but they are remembered for a number of characteristics that are easy to vilify - is the movie over the top - well it is a Hollywood epic adaptation of a Frank Miller graphic novel - so I expect it is over the top.
Even the "History Channel" tends to be over the top offering more edutainment than education - not without value but hardly comprehensive or balanced.
As to the recognition of propoganda - I think I do as well - I have lived in two absolute monarchies - rich with censorship, devoid of any kind of vote, rife with inequalities - that experience instructs me to hold the legacy the Greeks who fought in the Pelopenisian War in esteem rather than contempt.
Starship Troopers is a good example, especially because it was a vehicle for Heinlein's personal views on politics which were that the US should be a Greek-style democracy with citizen-soldiers. I don't agree with his politics but I still think the book and the movie are interesting and entertaining.
It is a little off topic but the lines are pretty much drawn with regard to the movie - but what is it about the Greek citizen soldier concept model that you disagree with?
I thought I mentioned earlier who I thought the rest of the movie stank too...if not here you go:Acting...I guess yelling is acting to Butler in this movie. No body experienced or felt anything. Just going through the motions as far as I'm concerned.
The Cinematography: Why soooooooo sloooooow. Why did we need a thirty second close-up of Butler's face every time he had to make a decision...Egads.
I think you need to check out the graphic novel.
Every single design choice you hate (shot choice, character close-ups, dialogue, costume design....) etc. etc. is driven by the graphic novel. And has other people have stated the graphic novel was out long before Iraq was a glimmer in one of Dick Cheney's wet dreams...or maybe not, I am not sure how long those old ghouls have been dreaming up this current fiasco.
And I think it's so damn funny how that macho vaguely homophobic swagger comes across in a film so fully about celebrating male flesh.
As my friend Pat said, "It was like a Falcon video." These guys didn't have six packs. They had cases. What's more there was a lot of make-up shadowing to accentuate each and every cut of well worked man meat.
How to segue from that statement into mentioning that I enjoyed the film, slo mo metal scenes and all. It was a hack n' slash boy fantasy and although the 'freedom isn't free' smacked of right wing power phrases and the dialog was right up there with an Olson sisters movie, I got into it quite viscerally.
I have no problems with Persians, and I understand how one sided and apocryphal this tale was... but despite being moderate to left politically, I still punched the seat in front of me and wanted to battle... anyone... Spartans, Persians, pedestrians on the way to the car in the lot. I can't argue the artistic value of 300 but a film speaks to you or it doesn't and I can say this one fired me up and when I got home I ran five miles on the treadmill and benchpressed two housecats. My one pack is ripped!
Some of my best friends happen to be transexual crab-handed 800 pounds razor tooth Persians.
It is a little off topic but the lines are pretty much drawn with regard to the movie - but what is it about the Greek citizen soldier concept model that you disagree with?
Starship Troopers is a good example, especially because it was a vehicle for Heinlein's personal views on politics which were that the US should be a Greek-style democracy with citizen-soldiers. I don't agree with his politics but I still think the book and the movie are interesting and entertaining.
I suppose I only object to it on the assumption that a democracy representative of the people is a good thing. Even if entry to the military was open to everyone, you would end up with a hugely disproportionate amount of votes in the hands of males between the ages of 18 and 50. Coming from Australia where voting is compulsory for everyone over the age of 18 that seems grossly unbalanced to me.
There is also I think a stronger potential for some sort of fascist police state to emerge than there is in a standard democracy, though if only the military voted that is probably what you'd end up with as a matter of course. Don't get me wrong, I greatly respect the military; I come from a military family and my father is a brigadier. But if my father and his friends ran Australia it would be a lot safer and a lot less free...
It's a nice idea in principle, rewarding those who are willing to die for the demos with control of the demos, but I don't think it follows that the way of life of someone prepared to die for their beliefs is suitable for everyone. Most people are not that hard-core basically, and I think it would create a state where the majority was unhappy, which is against the spirit of a modern democracy.
Some of my best friends happen to be transexual crab-handed 800 pounds razor tooth Persians.
Oh you know Clarence? He used to live next door to me. Great guy.
Some of my best friends happen to be transexual crab-handed 800 pounds razor tooth Persians.Oh you know Clarence? He used to live next door to me. Great guy.
Last I heard he was modelling big and tall lingerie in Prague but was arrested for devouring an incompetent sous-chef.
I thought I mentioned earlier who I thought the rest of the movie stank too...if not here you go:Acting...I guess yelling is acting to Butler in this movie. No body experienced or felt anything. Just going through the motions as far as I'm concerned.
The Cinematography: Why soooooooo sloooooow. Why did we need a thirty second close-up of Butler's face every time he had to make a decision...Egads.
I think you need to check out the graphic novel.
Every single design choice you hate (shot choice, character close-ups, dialogue, costume design....) etc. etc. is driven by the graphic novel. And has other people have stated the graphic novel was out long before Iraq was a glimmer in one of Dick Cheney's wet dreams...or maybe not, I am not sure how long those old ghouls have been dreaming up this current fiasco.
I'll go check out the graphic novel at Borders later tonight. The pacing of the movie was waaaaay too slow though, and you can't blame a thirty second close-up on the novel. But I'll check it out on your say-so.
I truly wonder how much of the "Send More Troops" rhetoric and subplot was in the graphic novel...I'll see tonight.
OK - maybe I read too much into the "it would have made Hitler proud" comment... I still don't know about the intended messages and all that - however, there are a bunch of people out there who will take it as vindication for their views of the "true face" of the East, and they will be in the news a lot...
Whoa there cowboy...who the f%#! called you a Nazi. I sure as hell didn't. Plenty of my close friends whom I love liked this movie. I don't think they are Nazis for liking it, any more than I think you are friend.I am simply reading into the producers intent more than you. That's my perogative, as is my right to express what I think about the movie. I thought it was pro-militarism, pro-racism garbage. That doesn't mean I think you enjoyed it for those two reasons. You probably liked the kickin metal and cool well-choreographed combat scenes (maybe, I don't really know). Good for you. Glad you enjoyed it. I didn't, and I was saying so. I thought GGG and I were having an interesting discussion about the movie's "politics." I didn't know I was calling people Nazis. So if I offered offense then I am sorry.
I disagree with you on the other points. How long a movie is in production has nothing to do with what sneaks in before the final cut.
They called the Persian horde "Asians" (in point of fact, most of middle Asia was represented among the Persians) and then showed us monsters...that's how I thought it was racist.
My Hitler comment was how akin to good propaganda the movie was. It would have made Mao happy too...if the Spartans had been Chinese. By the way if you want good China-prop see "Hero." Well made propaganda.
I skimmed through the article you linked but found no mention of 300 within. I'll read it more in-depth later when I'm not on a quick break between classes...I must teach the kids (all of whom loved 300 by the way, and all of whom I love like my own regardless) how to kill with spear and sword...
It's funny I'm one of the only people who didn't like the movie since its my job to teach our youth how to kill...on stage at least. ;-)
That's my concern though. I think a lot of people will see this movie and think - "yeah! Kill those dirty vile Persians!" I don't know if that's exactly the kind of sentiment I personally want to promote with my dollar vote (and the last two elections have shown my that my dollar vote is the only one that really counts these days). I don't care what you do with your dollar vote, but I'll spend mine elsewhere.
Everyone has the right to their tastes and opinions - well at least in the West were soldiers stand prepared to fight to the death to protect that - as a former member of that fraternity - who was spat on and protested (in the 80's too) for filling that role I feel some small sense of entitlement in pointing out that this "right" is one of the many legacies left by those "nazi-like" Greeks that fought the Persians.
You totally have a right to your taste and opinions my man. I was just stating mine. However, you haven't even seen the movie, so you don't really even know what we are talking about yet right? No offense.
Let me clarify - I do not think the story of the Spartans is racist. It's history. PCness gets ridiculous to the point where we try to ignore history. That's just plain stupid.
My point is that real history is subjective and there are a thousand ways to view an event or series of events. When you make a narrative film of one (or write a graphic novel) you choose one...I think it's best if you choose one that represents more than one side of the equation, but hey, that's not always possible...
That being said, the movie 300 was racist in the extreme. So much so, that I, who have a pretty low tolerance for PCness, and a pretty high tolerance for racist tropes for the sake of story-telling, couldn't ignore it and enjoy the movie. It made me sick. So I'm saying so nice and loud.
I haven't seen the representation of the Spartans in the film, but the Persians of history - at that time - were, in terms of modern Western culture, pretty vile - doesn't mean that as a culture they didn't have admirable traits - but they are remembered for a number of characteristics that are easy to vilify - is the movie over the top - well it is a Hollywood epic adaptation of a Frank Miller graphic novel - so I expect it is over the top.
See the movie and we'll talk...but by the gods don't put money in the pockets of the racist people who made it. Buy a ticket to another movie you like and want to support and then see this. Actually, do whatever you want...its' your dollar vote not mine.
The Persians weren't represented as "monstrous" in the abstract immoral sense. They were literally shown as deformed monstrosities that made the orcs in Lord of the Rings look human. That was when I started to lose interest in the movie.
As to your propaganda props. Nobody gots nothing on the Chinese as far as I'm concerned...they been doing it for thousands of years...it's brillant!!! ;-)
[
Some of my best friends happen to be transexual crab-handed 800 pounds razor tooth Persians.
LOL!
There's a movie coming out whereby when the vikings invade the native americans in Pre Columbus North America they leave behind a boy who the native americans raise themselves. He grows up to be a unnaturally gifted swordsmen and becomes their defender when the vikings return.
NOW. Has anyone seen Lee Majors star as Thorvald in a movie called The Norsemen (1978)? OMG... those poor vikings... watch as those evil native americans slaughter them so. lol. Now THAT was the epitome of what we're talking about taken to such an faulted and absurd extreme that it's almost an accidental comedy. You'll hate yourself for laughing.
If you want more on Asia and the Middle East as the decadent, evil, amoral and exotic "other"...I suggest the book Orientalism by Edward Said. Fantastic book on the subject. Really interesting stuff about the West's ongoing relationship with the East.
NOW. Has anyone seen Lee Majors star as Thorvald in a movie called The Norsemen (1978)? OMG... those poor vikings... watch as those evil native americans slaughter them so. lol. Now THAT was the epitome of what we're talking about taken to such an faulted and absurd extreme that it's almost an accidental comedy. You'll hate yourself for laughing.
I think I've seen that movie. Is taht the one where the last surviving Viking becomes a sort of Viking ninja and hunts down the Americans with throwing knives? That movie was awesome......ly poor.
As far as the people of Iran being offended by the film, I can understand it but I also doubt many of them have even seen the film to judge for themselves. As citizens in a part of the world where unapologetic caricatures of big nosed Jews are just more fodder for comedy, I would hope that the people of Iran could take what they dish out. I don't condone racism, of course. But it seems like everyone the world over is just waiting for their opportunity for self-righteous moral indignation.
The reason Americans and the United States are fodder for lampooning is because our government's actions have shown that we have little regard for the opinions of others. However, when almost the entire population of a large chunk of the world's real estate refuses to acknowledge the right of one much smaller group of people to exist in their backyard but then becomes extremely upset about a tasteless cartoon of their own prophet and a fictional version of what their ancestors may have been like from another perspective (that they haven't even seen for themselves) then I lose sympathy for said moral indignation. "Cast as many stones as you like at whomever you like so long as none of them hit our guys" is the message that I get from that kind of outrage.
Leave the Jews out of this says I. The movie was about East vs. West, and I think that's what Iranians are reacting to. My experience with pirated DVDs (and VCDs) while traveling reports to me that more than likely a lot of people in Iran have seen this movie. I saw Lord of the Rings in China on a pirated DVD before it came out in theatres in the U.S. I didn't buy the pirated DVD by the way, before the flames start aflying, nor do I support piracy...just stating the facts. Information is everywhere.
You boiled down the extremely complicated conflict in the Middle East to "the Arabs just can't let the Jews be." I personally think the problems are a ot more complex. What about the Gaza Strip, and the displaced stateless Palestinians who lived there for hundreds of years before the Jews moved in. I'm not taking sides here, just pointing out how many shades of grey there are.
Regardless, this movie didn't appear to be paralleling the Israel/Iran conflict to me, so much as it paralleled American militarism and attempting to drum up support for wiping out those "Persian" hordes. Just my opinion.
There's a movie coming out whereby when the vikings invade the native americans in Pre Columbus North America they leave behind a boy who the native americans raise themselves. He grows up to be a unnaturally gifted swordsmen and becomes their defender when the vikings return.
NOW. Has anyone seen Lee Majors star as Thorvald in a movie called The Norsemen (1978)? OMG... those poor vikings... watch as those evil native americans slaughter them so. lol. Now THAT was the epitome of what we're talking about taken to such an faulted and absurd extreme that it's almost an accidental comedy. You'll hate yourself for laughing.
LOL! I need to see The Norsemen!!! :-)
|
|
My Hitler comment was how akin to good propaganda the movie was. It would have made Mao happy too...if the Spartans had been Chinese. By the way if you want good China-prop see "Hero." Well made propaganda.
I skimmed through the article you linked but found no mention of 300 within. I'll read it more in-depth later when I'm not on a quick break between classes...I must teach the kids (all of whom loved 300 by the way, and all of whom I love...
OK. Sorry about that - I spent parts of my youth as a stone-throwing SHARP skinhead after getting the wits thumped out of me by neo-nazis at a soccer match. I'm a little touchy about Nazism, I guess...
As for the article, it doesn't concern itself with 300; it is more of an East vs West thing. Still, I would think that influential academics and politicians it is about, who are still celebrating the Crusades, would love the interpretation of "Asiatic" wickedness and Western enlightenment and valour.
Finally, "The Norsemen" isn't so good... it is kinda fun, though. At least I thought so when I was 19 or so. As for that other Viking thing ("Pathfinder"?), it looks like it has been...,um, borrowed a lot from an old Norwegian action flick about a single Sami youngster fighting a band of Vikings. I'll probably still see it, though - it is always amusing to watch Hollywood takes on old Norse culture...
As far as the people of Iran being offended by the film, I can understand it but I also doubt many of them have even seen the film to judge for themselves. As citizens in a part of the world where unapologetic caricatures of big nosed Jews are just more fodder for comedy, I would hope that the people of Iran could take what they dish out. I don't condone racism, of course. But it seems like everyone the world over is just waiting for their opportunity for self-righteous moral indignation.
The reason Americans and the United States are fodder for lampooning is because our government's actions have shown that we have little regard for the opinions of others. However, when almost the entire population of a large chunk of the world's real estate refuses to acknowledge the right of one much smaller group of people to exist in their backyard but then becomes extremely upset about a tasteless cartoon of their own prophet and a fictional version of what their ancestors may have been like from another perspective (that they haven't even seen for themselves) then I lose sympathy for said moral indignation. "Cast as many stones as you like at whomever you like so long as none of them hit our guys" is the message that I get from that kind of outrage.
Leave the Jews out of this says I. The movie was about East vs. West, and I think that's what Iranians are reacting to. My experience with pirated DVDs (and VCDs) while traveling reports to me that more than likely a lot of people in Iran have seen this movie. I saw Lord of the Rings in China on a pirated DVD before it came out in theatres in the U.S. I didn't buy the pirated DVD by the way, before the flames start aflying, nor do I support piracy...just stating the facts. Information is everywhere.
You boiled down the extremely complicated conflict in the Middle East to "the Arabs just can't let the Jews be." I personally think the problems are a ot more complex. What about the Gaza Strip, and the displaced stateless...
Okay, my bad. Poor choice of words on my part. My point is can it really be all that surprising that we have our own propaganda machine? Unless I've been completely mislead and Iran is a land of complete civil liberty and nothing but objective truth is portrayed in its media outlets, I would think that they already have an East vs. West mentality of their own. I doubt westerners are portrayed in the most favorable light on their side of the fence. Does this mean that we should react in kind? That's debatable, but it shouldn't come as a surprise that our media outlets have.
I'm not surprised we have our own propaganda machine. I am saddened by it though, and I won't support it at all.
Part of what makes this country great is that we are supposed to be a bastion of civil liberties. So I refuse to accept that we should be as bad and jingoist as everyone else just because. Why make a movie to piss off a bunch of people across the sea and invigorate a bunch of pro-war sentiment here? Oh yeah, cause it will make money. Well, I'm not buying.
Sorry if my earlier comments offended anyone, I didn't intend to. Vats, I didn't mean to get you riled up, and I agree with you that this movie is going to be used by lots of people on both sides of the fence to hurl muck and get all indignant and irate. Personally I'd rather see movies that provoke high-minded debate about important issues (like Syriana, Good Night and Good Luck and V for Vendetta) than ones that just get people all crazy-f@@~. That's a big part of why I hated this movie.
|
There's a movie coming out whereby when the vikings invade the native americans in Pre Columbus North America they leave behind a boy who the native americans raise themselves. He grows up to be a unnaturally gifted swordsmen and becomes their defender when the vikings return.
NOW. Has anyone seen Lee Majors star as Thorvald in a movie called The Norsemen (1978)? OMG... those poor vikings... watch as those evil native americans slaughter them so. lol. Now THAT was the epitome of what we're talking about taken to such an faulted and absurd extreme that it's almost an accidental comedy. You'll hate yourself for laughing.
I didn't see the movie, but I read the saga. What's sad is it all might've gone down because of a misunderstanding.
What happened was Leif Erickson and his crew got to Vinland. They met the Native Americans who they referred to as "skraelings."The first encounter was nonhostile. The two groups tried to trade. The Skraelings were very interested in iron objects, which the vikings didn't want to trade to them. The vikings did have a milk cow, and gave the Native Americans some milk, which they seemed to relish.
The next day they came back hot on the warpath.
Modern historians interpolated this from the saga to reflect the Native Americans' belief that the vikings had tried to poison them; since they did not have a culture of domesticated milk products, they were prolly lactose intolerant. Drinking the gifted milk led to some pretty gnarley stomach cramps etc...
Finally, "The Norsemen" isn't so good... it is kinda fun, though. At least I thought so when I was 19 or so. As for that other Viking thing ("Pathfinder"?), it looks like it has been...,um, borrowed a lot from an old Norwegian action flick about a single Sami youngster fighting a band of Vikings. I'll probably still see it, though - it is always amusing to watch Hollywood takes on old Norse culture...
Too true! What did you think of "13th Warrior"...I enjoyed that take on Viking culture quite a bit...even if it was adapted from a book by a crazy right-wing madman too. :-)
I am curious to see Pathfinder. I'll probably play it safe by buying a ticket for something else first, but if it turns out to be really good, I'll redeem it next time I hit the theatre by buying a ticket for it and seeing whatever other movie I am after that time. Devious am I! ;-)
The vikings did have a milk cow, and gave the Native Americans some milk, which they seemed to relish.
The next day they came back hot on the warpath.
Modern historians interpolated this from the saga to reflect the Native Americans' belief that the vikings had tried to poison them; since they did not have a culture of domesticated milk products, they were prolly lactose intolerant. Drinking the gifted milk led to some pretty gnarley stomach cramps etc...
Reminds me of my first big "milk and cheese" meal when I got back to the East Coast after two years straight in Beijing...gnarley is good word for em...
...they were prolly lactose intolerant. Drinking the gifted milk led to some pretty gnarley stomach cramps etc......gnarley is good word for em...
Ugh. Having become intolerant in the last year or so...blech. >.< That would make me go on the warpath.
I liked it. I thought the book, Eaters of the Dead, was bloody lovely. It's kind of a redo of Beowulf.Too true! What did you think of "13th Warrior"...I enjoyed that take on Viking culture quite a bit...even if it was adapted from a book by a crazy right-wing madman too. :-)
Yeah, I loved the book too. A great idea executed very well. A very fun read.
I never noticed Michael Crichton was a conservative.
I didn't until his last book...can't remember the name...the one about how Global Warming is a myth. What a moron. Every single climatologist disagrees with him, but hey, he wrote Jurassic Park right, so how could he be wrong. ;-)
Actually, I didn't read the whole book so I should probably shut the f!%# up. Just seemed very conservative to me.
I'm with ya Heath.
I'm conservative on a lot of days, and many topics, but I'm blood-spewing heart liberal other times.
We are complicated men you and I...
Nobody understands us...
but our women!!!
By the way if you want good China-prop see "Hero." Well made propaganda.
Damn. I loved "Hero", too. But I saw it as an amazing martial-art movie with cool 'fight' sequences and beautiful colors and art direction.
I also liked "Casablanca","Once Upon a Time in the West", "Cool Hand Luke", and "KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park".
I never noticed Michael Crichton was a conservative.I didn't until his last book...can't remember the name...the one about how Global Warming is a myth. What a moron. Every single climatologist disagrees with him, but hey, he wrote Jurassic Park right, so how could he be wrong. ;-)
Actually, I didn't read the whole book so I should probably shut the f%@! up.
Be very thankful. *SPOILERS* Greenpeace has super-advanced technology that makes lightning strike individual cel phones at will and creates earthquakes (who knew they were so well funded?), and all well-meaning environmentalists are at the mercy of their invincible propaganda machine... utter trash. It was so bad I left it in a hotel room in the middle of Kansas somewhere.
I find it amusing that in New York, I was considered a "right-wing reactionary." Here in Texas, I'm a "communist humanist bleeding-heart liberal." My views haven't changed, only my geography.
|
|
What did you think of "13th Warrior"...I enjoyed that take on Viking culture quite a bit...even if it was adapted from a book by a crazy right-wing madman too. :-)
I am curious to see Pathfinder. I'll probably play it safe by buying a ticket for something else first, but if it turns out to be really good, I'll redeem it next time I hit the theatre by buying a ticket for it and seeing whatever other movie I am after that time. Devious am I! ;-)
I wouldn't exactly call The 13th Warrior a good movie, but I quite liked it. It really got panned by the Norwegian press for all kinds of socio-historical inaccuracies - which are legitimate complaints, but completely miss the point: it probably wasn't meant to be a particularly realistic portrayal of Viking life or culture, but rather as a good ole adventure yarn. I was very impressed with Antonio Banderas' linguistic acumen; he picked up Old Norse just by chilling with the guys for a few days! It took me years to get even a working knowledge of that wretched language, and I've forgotten most of it already... The movie could have been set in any remote location, really - but Vikings have a name recognition factor that few other warrior cultures have. I should probably read the book, even though Crichton suddenly turned all weird; after all, I loved The Andromeda Strain...
I do find it ironic that a lot of "conservatives" don't believe in global warming. I'd think that a conservative take on it would be--hey, we might be destroying the planet, and we haven't even found a backup yet. Maybe we should err on the side of conservatism and cut it out.
They've been hijacked by Biblists, who believe we should destroy the planet as quickly as possible so that Jesus will take us all to heaven.
My Hitler comment was how akin to good propaganda the movie was. It would have made Mao happy too...if the Spartans had been Chinese. By the way if you want good China-prop see "Hero." Well made propaganda.
FOR GOD'S SAKE MAN WHAT MOVIE DOESN'T HAVE PROPOGANDA?!?!?! Care Bears? Hell, no! You can only be happy by sharing your feelings? What kind of message is that to tell someone who's about enter a relationship?!?! ;)
I must teach the kids (all of whom loved 300 by the way, and all of whom I love like my own regardless) how to kill with spear and sword...It's funny I'm one of the only people who didn't like the movie since its my job to teach our youth how to kill...on stage at least. ;-)
I suppose that's better than dying on stage.... bud-dumpt-dump (I'm here all week folks!)
That's my concern though. I think a lot of people will see this movie and think - "yeah! Kill those dirty vile Persians!"
Dude those guys could have been Martins they where so divorced from reality. Really I believe the horse is dead. Stop beating it. I saw it and I don't really feel the need to travel back in time and slay hordes of Persians (or Asians, or Africans for that matter) any more than I wanted to orchestrate a series of terrorist attacks (which lead to "acceptable" losses) with the idea of revenging myself on members of the English government and creating an anarchy after the style of "V for Vendetta" (I love how folks forget the 'vendetta' bit, or V's ocassional needless murder). Now I did feel the urge to throttle the people who made "Ultraviolet" and for those of you who feel you were harmed by that movie I invite you to join my class action suit. Granted, I did feel pumped leaving the threatre of each of these productions (and for different reasons to be sure), but I didn't suddenly freak out and knife people on my way home or call the Joint Chiefs and tell them to nuke Iran. Perhaps this is why some movies are rated R. Because they figure adults can handle them (they would be wrong), but really I'd give the folks on this board at least the benefit of a doubt.
I saw a lot more posts below but I'm a tired and cranky god right now and need to sleep....no more 15 hour work days with no lunch.
-GGG
By the way if you want good China-prop see "Hero." Well made propaganda.Damn. I loved "Hero", too. But I saw it as an amazing martial-art movie with cool 'fight' sequences and beautiful colors and art direction.
I also liked "Casablanca","Once Upon a Time in the West", "Cool Hand Luke", and "KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park".
Oh "Hero" rocked for sure. I liked the propaganda in that too so I coulda cared less.
I saw a lot more posts below but I'm a tired and cranky god right now and need to sleep....no more 15 hour work days with no lunch.
LOL! You definitely need sleep my man. We left the dead horse dead a long time ago and started rapping about The Norsemen, ninjas, and The 13th Warrior. It's all good man. I love you...even if you are racist scum. ;-)
And you know how much I love you from our dirty dirty little two night Origins stand. ;-)
Rest well my man...and keep your strength up...Iron DM Season is coming up soon and I want you at your fighting weight my man! :-)
The events at Themopylae occurred almost 2500 years ago (480 BC)...our only "reliable" reference to the Greek side of the battle comes from Herodotus' "Histories" of Hellas. Herodotus was four years old when the battle against Xerxes was fought. The funny thing about Herodotus: if he didn't have the facts...he made them up. "300" is based on a graphic novel-adaptation, not Pressfield's novel, and is certainly intended to be entertainment.I think it will be good, but far from historically accurate, which makes wonder why is it ok for movies of actual events to be interpreted as seen fit. Yet comic book movies get labeled as crap(On these boards specifically) if the movie studio shows creative license? Accurate make-believe and make believe history. Personally, I am more concerned with history being accurate. Anyway 300 still looks awesome.
There's always someone that wants to pee in the pie. Its a good movie period.
Hee hee... this made me smile when I read it in Dan Savage's column:
With nothing but time on my hands this week, I slipped out of the office and went to the movies. Have you seen 300 yet? It's about a handful of lightly armed ancient Greeks—the Spartans—who take on the mighty, massive Persian army. Some feel the film is homophobic; some feel it's a conservative, pro-war piece of agitprop.
Homophobic? It's Ann Coulter on a meth binge.
The Persian army is an armed gay-pride parade, a threat to all things decent and, er, Greek. The king of the Spartans—among the most notorious boy-f*ckers in all of ancient history—dismisses Athenian Greeks as weak-willed "philosophers and boy lovers." The Persian emperor? An eight-foot-tall black drag queen—mascara, painted-on eyebrows, pink lip gloss. Emperor RuPaul is positively obsessed with men kneeling in front of him. Why gay up the Persians? So that straight boys in the theater can identify with the Spartan king and his 300 soldiers—all of whom appear to have been recruited from and outfitted by the International Male catalog.
What isn't up for debate is the film's politics. The only times the Persian army doesn't look like a gay-pride parade in hell, it looks like a crowd of madly chanting Islamic militants. And if the Spartan king has to break Spartan law to defend Spartan freedoms? Well, sometimes a king's gotta do what a king's gotta do. Because, as the queen of Sparta points out, freedom isn't free. And, yes, she uses exactly those words. George Bush is going to blow a load in his pants when he sees this movie.
For many of the same reasons already posted, I too did not think it was such a good movie.
|
|
Just out of interest, I flicked through the 300 graphic novel at the bookstore the other day.
Whilst Xerxes does bear a certain resemblance to a 7 foot tall drag queen (in the GN), from what I could see at a quick glance, most of the Persian soldiers looked fairly "normal" - ie, with one notable exception they didn't look like freaks, mutants, a gay pride parade, or even like militant Islamists...
Just two cents worth from someone who hasn't seen the movie.
I think 300 was a male movie made to appeal our macho need for bloodlust, honour, muscles and to feel justification in fighting for a greater cause. And a huge spectacle. 300 fits this bill perfectly by hitting all those notes.
Is there a political message in this story. Maybe. Was there meant to be one? No. The Persians are the bad guys. Hence, in the movies they are going to be depicted as things we associate with bad. Ugliness, perversion, arrogance and overbearing.
That the Persians once held Iraq as part of their empire is pure coincidence. If that's all the Iraqi's have to worry about with a foreign power occupying their home, killing their citizens and making their country a warzone, then you certainly overexaggerate the importance of a movie most Iraqi's won't see.
It's a friggin movie.
I just seen the movie last Saturday (better late than never)...
I must have seen the movie with the eyes of a child, for I saw nothing but great battle sequences, great cinematography, and a cool soundtrack. I REALLY enjoyed myself for about two hours and didn't regret the money I spent to see it.
For those who see nothing but homophobia and racisme everywhere they look; The problem is, no doubt, more behind the eyes than in front of them. I suggest maybe a trip to the therapist to find out why you're not ok with these subjects. And try to be happy once in a while.
The movie is what it is... A neat action flick.
I would recomend this movie to anyone who doesn't mind a few gory scenes. It's a lot of fun.
Ultradan
|
I find it amusing that in New York, I was considered a "right-wing reactionary." Here in Texas, I'm a "communist humanist bleeding-heart liberal." My views haven't changed, only my geography.
I've experienced the exact same thing. In school, on an archaeological dig in the American SW, I camped and worked daily with a ton of folks from NE schools. They all thought I was a southern conservative because I have a slight north Florida drawl. Here at home, I'm about the most radically left person I know.
People carry lots of baggage around with them, and they like to hit you with it. 6 weeks of camping with them in the desert, and I think they still left with the impression that I'm a republican. Hell, I'm not even a capitalist!
Too keep this more on topic let me just say:
"Moderation in all things."