My criticism is intended to apply to the graphic novel as well as the movie wherever appropriate, hence my address to "Frankie-boy" towards the end. That being clarified...
Analysis does not in any way preclude enjoyment of a work (in many cases it may even be essential), nor does criticism. There are a number of works I find awful by some measure or another that I also heartily enjoy; Final Fantasy VIII, for instance. And many, many more works I merely find highly flawed that I still enjoy as well (Throne of Bhaal, say), if not love to death (Revenge of the Sith).
300 in particular, however, can't say I enjoyed much. Its "story" is built around, upon, and with the premise that the 300 Spartans and Sparta in general were TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME; so TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME that we should TOTALLY OMFG TRY TO BE MORE LIKE THEM, because they were such TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME WARRIORS (nevermind the means used to make them that way - the ends always justify the means after all) who fought and died for all the right TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME REASONS, in particular TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME and TOTALLY OMFG MODERN (I TOTALLY OMFG SWEAR) FREEDOM. And since that premise is shown to be patently false within the movie itself - no real need at all to crack open a history book to see it - the story in the end comes across to me as completely, even hilariously absurd.
A work needn't have criticism as its purpose to still be critical of its subject matter where the subject matter warrants it. Just a single, unridiculed voice speaking even one word contrary to the overwhelming rhetoric of masculinity cultism would have made a huge difference. 300 more than just lacks criticism towards the excesses it presents - it idealizes those excesses. Honestly, with the amount of uncompromising, unmitigated, nausea-inducing idealization of the fictional Sparta going on in 300 I wouldn't be surprised if Frank Miller regularly ran around like a 2-year-old screaming (possibly while shitting himself) "SPARTA IS SO AWESOME SPARTA IS SO AWESOME I'M WRITING ABOUT SPARTA SQUEEEEEE XD XD XD" while he was writing it; assuming he doesn't still do so now (plus requisite tense changes).
Of course there are other aspects of 300 besides the story to be enjoyed. The action, for instance, or the, uh...artsiness or whatever. Though the movie's blatantly - and I'm sure deliberately - unrealistic "people-are-made-of-butter-and-armor-is-useless" style presentation of combat really isn't my thing (unless of course a movie bothers to provide a solid explanation for such to-me screaming deviations from basic physics - weapons being magic, for instance; probably a +4 enhancement bonus at the least for the kind of easy impaling seen in 300 ). And artsiness alone can't take the place of actual story and/or satisfying action.
"Over-analyze" is a false concept. Analysis is either good or bad or somewhere inbetween; "too much" is not on the scale. If the assertion is that analyzing over a certain "quantity" always yields bad analysis (a bold assertion to say the least), it is still your burden to identify this bad analysis and explain why it is bad - which you can in fact just do right from the beginning, without first prefacing (and consequently burdening) your argument with the unwieldy assertions inherent to crying "over-analysis". In the end such a cry is only chaff; a diversion and nothing more.
I guess the movie tells the story of a horribly munchkined group of players against another horribly munchkined group of players. Let's just claim that they're all epic or something, lol :D
Analysis does not in any way preclude enjoyment of a work (in many cases it may even be essential), nor does criticism. There are a number of works I find awful by some measure or another that I also heartily enjoy; Final Fantasy VIII, for instance. And many, many more works I merely find highly flawed that I still enjoy as well (Throne of Bhaal, say), if not love to death (Revenge of the Sith).
300 in particular, however, can't say I enjoyed much. Its "story" is built around, upon, and with the premise that the 300 Spartans and Sparta in general were TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME; so TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME that we should TOTALLY OMFG TRY TO BE MORE LIKE THEM, because they were such TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME WARRIORS (nevermind the means used to make them that way - the ends always justify the means after all) who fought and died for all the right TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME REASONS, in particular TOTALLY OMFG AWESOME and TOTALLY OMFG MODERN (I TOTALLY OMFG SWEAR) FREEDOM. And since that premise is shown to be patently false within the movie itself - no real need at all to crack open a history book to see it - the story in the end comes across to me as completely, even hilariously absurd.
A work needn't have criticism as its purpose to still be critical of its subject matter where the subject matter warrants it. Just a single, unridiculed voice speaking even one word contrary to the overwhelming rhetoric of masculinity cultism would have made a huge difference. 300 more than just lacks criticism towards the excesses it presents - it idealizes those excesses. Honestly, with the amount of uncompromising, unmitigated, nausea-inducing idealization of the fictional Sparta going on in 300 I wouldn't be surprised if Frank Miller regularly ran around like a 2-year-old screaming (possibly while shitting himself) "SPARTA IS SO AWESOME SPARTA IS SO AWESOME I'M WRITING ABOUT SPARTA SQUEEEEEE XD XD XD" while he was writing it; assuming he doesn't still do so now (plus requisite tense changes).
Of course there are other aspects of 300 besides the story to be enjoyed. The action, for instance, or the, uh...artsiness or whatever. Though the movie's blatantly - and I'm sure deliberately - unrealistic "people-are-made-of-butter-and-armor-is-useless" style presentation of combat really isn't my thing (unless of course a movie bothers to provide a solid explanation for such to-me screaming deviations from basic physics - weapons being magic, for instance; probably a +4 enhancement bonus at the least for the kind of easy impaling seen in 300
). And artsiness alone can't take the place of actual story and/or satisfying action.
"Over-analyze" is a false concept. Analysis is either good or bad or somewhere inbetween; "too much" is not on the scale. If the assertion is that analyzing over a certain "quantity" always yields bad analysis (a bold assertion to say the least), it is still your burden to identify this bad analysis and explain why it is bad - which you can in fact just do right from the beginning, without first prefacing (and consequently burdening) your argument with the unwieldy assertions inherent to crying "over-analysis". In the end such a cry is only chaff; a diversion and nothing more.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment