Comments | 300_movie: A few thoughts on 300...

frogfrizz in 300_movie

A few thoughts on 300...

Mar 19, 2007 23:15

Just all-over-the-place academic wankery that's rated R, at best. No kiddies allowed!

Now, don't get me wrong --I love the film. Technically, it's the most beautiful thing I'd ever seen (next to Lord of the Rings). But I thought I'd share some deeper issues with regards to the film, no matter how disorganized those thoughts are:

"300": Race, ( Read more... )

Comments 20

Dont quote me! (my opinion) > tangets included afterlifekid March 19 2007, 17:10:57 UTC

Welp, story of 'the 300 Spartans' as told from generation to generation portrays the Persians as 'scary' and unusual 'monsters' because that is the way it is interpreted. Greeks had not seen elephants or rhinos (whether those were used or not, doesn't matter) or even Persians! Ya know, when told the story of the heroic 300 and all the thousands that followed after there is a bit of fantasy thrown in. "The persians where hideous creatures, 8 feet tall with horns coming out of their heads!" Like perhaps in the future Hitler will be portrayed as this giant octopus with razor sharp tenticles. It's a story, BASED on what happened. I dont think the movie is saying "ahh, persians are hideous troll like creatures, that ride rhinos in warfare" I think it's just the perspective of a small nation that was threatened by a vast army!

Re: Dont quote me! (my opinion) > tangets included afterlifekid March 19 2007, 17:11:36 UTC

*tangents

Re: Dont quote me! (my opinion) > tangets included frogfrizz March 19 2007, 17:27:59 UTC

Oh no, you missed my point. =) I'm talking about the discourse that informs the polarities in this film, not so much the 'actuality' of what happened or how much of the film was an adaptation.

I know for a fact that it's a loose interpretation of the Battle of Thermopylae but the fact that they used this particular kind of visuals, and the fact that the filmmakers infuse the film with Manichean opposites...it bothers me, as an Asian. It was one-sided in that the Persian had no redeeming qualities whatsoever. At least, in my view.

Then again, it's just wankery and I'm reading a lot into the film. =) But it makes for interesting discussion. Thank you for sharing!

nysea March 19 2007, 19:24:33 UTC

I have not checked out the Frank Miller novel, but assuming the movie accurately portrays the illustrated novel...
I HATE how the Persians were portrayed. My family is from Greece. The Perians were very worthy adversaries. The Persians were kick ass engineers with an incredible military force. Frank Miller choosing to portray Persians as monsters seems to me to be politically motivated. Just like all that crap about freedom and democracy. The Spartans didn't push that agenda. The Athenians were the ones who would have gone on about freedom and democracy. The movie had way too much propaganda. I found it a insulting to my intelligence.

So that's my 2 cents.
:)

Thread 8

You think you're disorganized? Wait till you read this! godsy March 19 2007, 19:37:01 UTC

I have not seen the comic version yet, hence I cannot make too much assumptions or defend the movie entirely. However, I don't see why you guys are so critical of this movie! It's a comic book adaptation. Whatever historical/racial/social blunder/bigotry/all around ebilness this movie may present are all simply taken from the comic book it painfully tried to be faithful to. Since it came a comic book, it is understandable that the characters (be it good or bad) are gravely exaggerated. Of course the Persians had to be evil, deformed people. Of course the East is evil and the West is not. Of course Xerxes and the Persians had to be ghey because of course, the Spartans are manly and proper. This movie's purpose is to bring Frank Miller's creation to the screen, not to teach any sort of historical lesson or to provide social commentary or ... whatever else they're being criticized for doing 'wrong'. To change anything would be to change whatever Miller intended. To do so would defeat the whole purpose of staying faithful to the comic (I' ( ... )

Re: You think you're disorganized? Wait till you read this! nysea March 19 2007, 20:12:04 UTC

Oh no, I get what you're saying. Its based upon Frank Miller's novel, not history. And I loved the visuals. Frank Miller's use of color and contrast is awesome. Just like in Sin City, I loved the contrast of the muted tones and then a more brilliant color... generally red in 300 for the blood and capes. The music that was chosen rocked. :)

I hate that I was distracted by what feels like propaganda. :(

Re: You think you're disorganized? Wait till you read this! nysea March 19 2007, 20:12:59 UTC

Oh and the actors are HOT.

Re: You think you're disorganized? Wait till you read this! godsy March 19 2007, 20:21:41 UTC

Damnit, my pathetic joke failed XD It was supposed to be: "Also, for the record ... And for the record ..."

Failed attempt at dehumiliation aside, I'm just a bit irked by the people who criticize the movie a bit too much (at least in my opinion). I don't know, I see it being about as ridiculous as PETA demanding the cancellation of Blue's Clues because it might encourage fur dying. Or something. I'm sorry, I think all the points raised thus far totally have merit! I just think they're all rather inappropriate.

Thread 10

More rambling! ashoka March 20 2007, 00:20:52 UTC

I really didn't see any political themes in the film at all, other than the overbearing 'WHOO HOO the West is AAAAAWESOME!' At the same time, the Westerners kill messengers who have some sort of diplomatic immunity, expose infants, treat their women like crap, and basically run around killing people all the time. And that's not just how the movie portrayed it; that's how they actually were ( ... )

Re: More rambling! frogfrizz March 20 2007, 00:23:37 UTC

Yay for more rambling!

There's just no way you can look at the Spartans and not know that they're a gayer group of men than the Backstreet Boys.

That's so true! Hahahaha!

=) Loved your points, too. Thanks for sharing!