(Or: IF YOU DON'T LOVE THIS MOVIE AND IT'S MESSAGE, THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON!!!!!)
Yeah.. I saw this today. It's kind of funny how INSANELY ANGRY it made me. The whole thing just came off like a big defense of GW Bush's america, whether or not it was intended. - Fight the big brown "persian horde", basically start a war based on pride and ignorance, your world is based on logic, but don't really use any, defend the world from "mysticism and ignorance", and Sparta is surrounded by AMBER WAVES OF GRAIN. At some point someone says "Freedom isn't free!" fucking ridiculous. I'm not even a really super political person and it just had me twitching with rage.
Everyone I saw it with loved it, based on the pure fact that: it was cool.
Yes, it's "COOL". There are monsters and ninjas and titties shit like that (hey there historical accuracy!!)
But god is it dumb. DUMB DUMB DUMB. jesus. LOUD. DUMB.
That said- It's a fairly successful popcorn movie, and some of the actors had charisma. The art direction, cinematography etc were all great. stylistically, it was pretty neat and most of the battle scenes were pretty awesome, but they all kind of ended up feeling really same-y and by the last 30 minutes of the movie I just really wanted everyone in it to DIE DIE DIE.
At least it looked neat? ...And I didn't pay for it.
rick [email] said at 12:48 AM 03-11-2007: WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD
Yeah.. I saw this today. It's kind of funny how INSANELY ANGRY it made me. The whole thing just came off like a big defense of GW Bush's america, whether or not it was intended. - Fight the big brown "persian horde", basically start a war based on pride and ignorance, your world is based on logic, but don't really use any, defend the world from "mysticism and ignorance", and Sparta is surrounded by AMBER WAVES OF GRAIN. At some point someone says "Freedom isn't free!" fucking ridiculous. I'm not even a really super political person and it just had me twitching with rage.
Yeah, and there seemed to be some homophobic currents when they talked about Athens and in the way Xerxes was portrayed.
I would say it is the US analogue to Hero which was basically Chinese nationalist propaganda.
Everyone I saw it with loved it, based on the pure fact that: it was cool.
Yes, it's "COOL". There are monsters and ninjas and titties shit like that (hey there historical accuracy!!)
But god is it dumb. DUMB DUMB DUMB. jesus. LOUD. DUMB.
I loved how they talked about the "free" men of Sparta when in reality most of the Spartans were serfs (helots) bound to the land and Sparta officially declared war on them every year in part to justify whatever nasty steps they would take to put them down.
That said- It's a fairly successful popcorn movie, and some of the actors had charisma. The art direction, cinematography etc were all great. stylistically, it was pretty neat and most of the battle scenes were pretty awesome, but they all kind of ended up feeling really same-y and by the last 30 minutes of the movie I just really wanted everyone in it to DIE DIE DIE.
The Aesthetics were great; in fact, I believe I liked them better than Sin City( that being said, I could have done though without seeing the elephants' impact on the rocks below in one of the battles).
abby at momz said at 12:11 PM 03-11-2007: i thought about this more and enjoyed some inward reflection as i walked through verdant greenbelt, md to get a fabulous cup of coffee. it is kindof fun to realize you have a working knowledge of ancient greek sociopolitical systems, but id prefer not to say anything critical about it at the risk of sounding like a knowitall.
and then i realized that that is because i loathe knowitallism more than most things, currently, and that cynical nitpicking infuriates me before it brings me way down.
so i can understand that we all perceive the great movie differently and have our own unique reactions!
rick [email] said at 12:55 AM 03-11-2007: Anyone who would like to watch a film with a good story (though nowhere near as aesthetically pleasing and boasting not a lot of gore), should go seeThe Lives of Others which I just saw and was great, the first good film I have seen this year in the cinema.
kiche [email] said at 1:51 AM 03-11-2007: zack, you've never noticed that frank miller is a rabid right winger before?
i mean, batman returns is about how the hippies are the reason for the 80s crime increase and the plot revolves around how the namby pamby liberals have outlawed superheroes and are letting criminals out of jail to show their compassion and weakness.
also, 300 is supposed to be about the battle of thermopylae. this is important because the nra uses the supposed rallying cry of the spartans as a rallying cry for their organization (disclaimer: i whole heartedly support gun ownership, i do not support right wing organizations like the nra).
also, this is a movie about the spartans, the were the fascists of the greek cities states. athens, the greek city state that inspired our own democracy was constantly fighting them off.
jake [email] said at 2:33 AM 03-16-2007: No, no, it's amazing. It's not about GWBush, or American politics at all. It's about Palestinian resistance. And it's awesome.
abby at momz said at 11:11 AM 03-11-2007: i don't know where to begin. i loved this movie, it was visually stirring and overwhelming, which is precisely what i expected when i smoked that joint in the parking lot before hand. so it was also amusingly corny and over the top, and that was a total bonus. why would you think so hard about this as to get angry? its a fucking movie without any actual depth, it cant be intended as anything beyond pure entertainment. i mean you watched it, too!
rick [email] said at 12:51 PM 03-11-2007: I liked the film on the aesthetic level; as I said before, I find it to be the US analogue to Hero which is another film I got into.
rick [email] said at 11:36 AM 03-13-2007: Right, it's actually one of my favorite films (besides the whole "we-should-submit-to-a-greater-authority-no-matter-how-ruthlessly-despotic-they-may-be" thing).
sp said at 1:47 PM 03-11-2007: The problem is that you DON'T have to think that hard to get angry about this movie. The sheer way the factions were represented was unjustifiably heterosexist and ethnocentric. And all movies have depth, it's just a function of whether or not you choose to acknowledge it: whether or not you simply want mindless entertainment even if that means it's brainwashing you to hate.
abby in space said at 4:02 PM 03-11-2007: yes i cant believe how brainwashed i just got by having a good time laughing at a ridiculously exaggerrated battle movie with anal rape. i peed out my values immediately afterwards because it was so powerful!!
sp said at 4:22 AM 03-12-2007: Dude, you're absolutely right, you've shown me the error of my ways. Who was I to think that I should try and analyze or even criticize a film that I felt was bombarding me with slanted political views and was unenjoyable to boot! How could I ever thank you enough for insulting me like a petulant third grader and snapping me out of my exegetic delerium?
kara [email] said at 4:06 PM 03-13-2007: I just clicked it again and tried to read 10 more words than I had previously and I still don't see the point of your reply
zack [email] said at 2:24 PM 03-11-2007: I pretty much agree with Rick and "SP" in their responses to this. I was hoping it'd be good. And aesthetically, it was really fucking neat. But you know, like my mind was in the movies too, and my mind was PISSED. So, I watched the whole thing out of a desire to see what happened next, see if there was more cool visual excitement (even though I thought that the movie got kind of boring even on that level by the end, just because there was never any variation in the visual assault), and because i was there with a group of friends, and moviegoing is one of those things you don't just storm out of a theatre before it's over.. You never know if something's going to get good!
The only movie I can really remember walking out on was "Chariots of Fire", because my dad and I both fell asleep during it. If I'm not mistaken, we then snuck in to see "Porky's".
abby in space said at 4:06 PM 03-11-2007: zack, you need to relax my beaner friend. did you see that, i called you a beaner because this movie made me racist!
rick [email] said at 12:56 AM 03-12-2007: The only movie I can really remember walking out on was "Chariots of Fire", because my dad and I both fell asleep during it. If I'm not mistaken, we then snuck in to see "Porky's".
lol
I actually liked Chariots of Fire (which just goes to show I can like a conservative film).
But yes, Porky's was a far more enriching film, from both an aesthetic aspect and from the insightful sociopolitical critique it offered within the Early Eighties.
katie [email] said at 12:16 PM 03-11-2007: they all kind of ended up feeling really same-y and by the last 30 minutes of the movie I just really wanted everyone in it to DIE DIE DIE.
this is precisely why i don't go to the movies. it's time you can never have back.
rick [email] said at 12:56 PM 03-11-2007: The funny thing is, ninety-five percent sitcoms make me feel this way. If I was given the task of mass genocide, I would ready myself by watching old episodes of "Full House," "Yes, Dear," "Friends," and Saved by the Bell."
kiche [email] said at 1:14 PM 03-11-2007: beyond the politics of the movie, which i admitedly haven't seen, is that this movie is based on an actual event. while i reallize there can be a lot of mythologizing of an event and a lot of symbolism in the event.
the trailers for this just look absolutely ridiculous. from what i've seen it makes the lord of the rings look realistic.
kiche [email] said at 3:21 PM 03-11-2007: while dressed in an american flag kilt and waving an ak-47 over his head. the movie should also have taken place in south central l.a.
all done in that "heavy metal magazine" graphic format.
jake [email] said at 2:38 AM 03-16-2007: It did bother me that all of their accents sounded like kilt-wearers, and the ending was too too too much of a rip from the end of that other movie about a band of plucky rapscalions...
kiche [email] said at 12:58 PM 03-12-2007: sugarlips?
nay. mel should stick to his original wording "sugartits"; and xerxes response to this question should be different. he should look with intense interest at gibson while fondling his naked man boobs.
xerxes should also be wearing a yamulke and have long side curls and wear a loin cloth made from the foreskins of defeated gentile enemys.
marcia [email] said at 2:27 PM 03-11-2007:
Everyone I saw it with loved it, based on the pure fact that: it was cool.
Yes, it's "COOL". There are monsters and ninjas and titties shit like that (hey there historical accuracy!!)
But god is it dumb. DUMB DUMB DUMB. jesus. LOUD. DUMB.
My boyfriend saw this movie and after saying it was terribly sexist and homophobic and gross in general, he said after thinking about it he decided it was pretty awesome because it appealed to the lizard brain in boys. It was endless action and fighting.
Yikes.
I want to see it just to be able to have a conversation about it, but I get the feeling it may be a waste of time and money for me.
rick [email] said at 12:00 AM 03-12-2007: he decided it was pretty awesome because it appealed to the lizard brain in boys
Give in to your triune brain and watch the film. Then let bloodlust overwhelm you and don your helmet, cuirasse and shield and defend America from Xerxes.
marcia [email] said at 1:03 PM 03-12-2007: Abby had the right idea by getting high beforehand. I get the feeling I would have to smoke a bunch of weed and take a few Vicodin before I witness such a movie.
luster [email] said at 4:06 PM 03-11-2007: i went and watched christina ricci's boobies last night. they were niiiiice... but i dont really like her that skinny.
pokey [email] said at 9:47 PM 03-11-2007: I liked the fighting and the boobs, and the production designs, but I could do without the talking, and thought, for a drag queen, that Xerxes should have had way better makeup.
kiche [email] said at 5:50 PM 03-12-2007: incidently, i read in this imdb thread that the director of 300 said that if xerxes represents anyone, it's george w. bush.
there are some interesting comparisons of xerxes to bush in that thread.
i still probably won't see this in the theaters, though. my feelings about over mythologizing still stand.
josh [email] said at 8:36 AM 03-13-2007: i think thats untrue? i heard an interview with him where he he expressly denied that and then said when asked what his themes as a director were "making movies that rock!!"
rick [email] said at 11:39 AM 03-13-2007: That being said, I have read that the tree of war victims and the man with the prosthetic arm swords (both of which I liked) were his ideas.
chrisx [email] said at 11:25 PM 03-13-2007: Saw it tonight. I thought it was really good. Most negative criticism I have read online is a bunch of cases of reading too much into it instead of enoying the spectacle. All this politicizing of the film is a bunch of monkey's bath water.
seipp [email] said at 12:48 PM 03-15-2007: Yeahhhhh I don't even know what to say to all of this nonsense. If you were expecting more than brutal battle scenes I just kind of feel bad for you. Also read the graphic novel. it's good. Good and sexist.
josh [email] said at 9:48 PM 03-15-2007: i like 300 okay. it's just pretty pictures and nice coloring... frank miller has long since stopped mattering as anything beyond nice compositions.
neilbert said at 12:39 AM 03-16-2007: 300 is an "old" graphic novel (1999) and the movie pretty much follows the comic frame for frame for the most part. It's a pretty much by the numbers action flick. The biggest letdown was the mostly flashy man to man fighting. I really was expecting to see the Spartans use their "Phalanx" technique more; crushing the enemy as one big monster. Instead the movie breaks down into one guy taking out countless drones over and over again, in slow motion.
I saw no "politics" in the film, and for the director to say that Xerxes represents George Bush is really, really, stupid and a really pathetic jab, especially since he did not create the character and the character did not exist when GW was president. It's like George Lucas would try to claim that Darth Vader, and the Empire was symbolic of the United States and George W.
josh [email] said at 11:18 AM 03-16-2007: the interviews i have read, the director denies that the movie has anything to do with current politics, but says "it's cool" that people "can read all kinds of stuff into it"
josh [email] said at 12:53 PM 03-18-2007: It was enough, Snyder joked, to have some who saw it early wonder if the film actually is a conservative take on the glory of war. Indeed, he noted, some wonder if it's about President Bush and the war in Iraq with the Spartans symbolizing Americans. He laughed about that but also conceded there is a place where "300" intersects with post-9/11 American politics. (Miller, who could not be reached for comment, has a reputation in some quarters as a conservative.)
"People have jumped to the conclusion that I've been paid by the U.S. government to make this propaganda film," Snyder said. "I don't think it is. I didn't make it that way. Someone asked me, 'Are your politics the same as Frank's?' And I said, 'When I'm making Frank's book into a movie, Frank's point of view is my point of view. It's not my job to edit it out."' - denver post
jake [email] said at 2:51 AM 03-16-2007: You need to see this movie in Imax. And you need to see it with me laughing my ass off at all the punch lines no one else seemed to be hearing.
I think branding the movie as "heterosexist" is bizzarre. It ain't Trans America, and it ain't Frodo and Sam, but there's certainly gay undertones. And although there's only one significant female character, she's a very strong one that's neither a caricature nor just eye-candy (any more than the rest of the cast...)
As for pro-America, or pro-war, or pro-fascism... Well, the movie shows an executive leader who accepts the rule of his "senate," and still takes action. It shows warriors who almost always strike in self defense, NOT pre-emptive strikes. It shows the downfall of a hero because he took his ideals of purity too far. Now, it doesn't show Africans, Asians, or people with gold jewelry on their faces in a good light. But at least it comes up with newish cliches for their antagonist roles.
If anything, this movie reads as propaganda for the Palestinians or Iraqis, struggling against the whole Western world, promised sovereignty if they only submit, and knowing that submission means slavery.
reggie [email] said at 9:52 AM 03-16-2007: I saw 300 and immediately wanted to grab a battle axe and shield and fight something.
I thought it was a pretty awesome movie. I can't really say all I want to say because I haven't seen it a second time (and I will) and also because time is money at Kinko's.
But the two movies I thought of immediately while watching 300 were Sin City and Gladiator. I liked 300 more than either of those movies and I'm trying to figure out why. I think I liked it more than Sin City because the over-stylization works better in this kind of mythical-historical-fantastical setting. I don't think there's any need to be either realistic or even remotely historically accurate with this kind of movie so why not go way over the top.
I think another reason I liked it more than Sin City was that the violence isn't made to look "cool" -- okay that's just not true but I mean the violence is there in glorious technicolor and not hidden in shadows. The blood is CGI but it's red and not yellow, white or black.
I liked 300 more than Gladiator for the simple fact that it's just such big campy comic book fun and not as, well, boring as Gladiator was.
I also don't see as a defense of GWB's America because as has been proven GWB's America doesn't really agree with him anymore. You're right about people liking it "because its cool" (which is why people like Sin City by the way) but if you haven't noticed Americans really love violent, bloody movies.
Also, I felt that if there was a political message it was more along the lines of: while the politicos are back at home bickering and backstabbing and politicizing the war (Iraq, Vietnam, Thermopylae, whatever) there are folks out on the battlefield paying in blood not because of politics or who's right or who's wrong but because of duty.
rick [email] said at 1:06 PM 03-18-2007: Maybe, but GWB with First Mate Cheney is still at the helm, so he doesn't have to care as much about what "real America" wants.
reggie [email] said at 7:16 PM 03-18-2007: Here's another thing I thought about. 300 is about a small under-manned army going against an entire legion who threaten to invade if they don't join them. I don't know, sounds to me like in this analogy the US is the legion and the "terrorists" are the minority.
jeremy [email] said at 4:12 PM 03-18-2007: I just saw this movie and I didn't get into it. The dialogue was irritating. I thought I would really like the surreal imagery and stuff (which overall I did) but in a lot of places it was just distracting.
