300

It is a (exaggerated, I agree, but quite accurate at the core of its concept) story about a band of people who defeated a humongous army, defined the ultimate meaning of duty, honor and sacrifice for generations to come, and shaped world history in the process. Yet some people's main concern is STILL whether it has enough gay references or not.

Oh, the humanity. Not that I'd expect them to understand, really.

PS. The "Bush vs Anatolites" theory is...laughable, to say the least. When one goes to see the movie bearing in mind the preconceived notion that "I'm sure that this movie contains pro-bush and anti-iranian messages, and I will find them!", he will find such messages no matter whether it was the director's intend to put such things in there or not.

As is the whole "the Spartans are portrayed like Rambo and Arnold put together" thing. We're talking about a people that trained for war (they did not have any other profession) since the age of seven, and threw at the river all new-born babies that had physical defects that would hamper their war training. Rambo and Arnold are actually quite nice guys when put next to one of them.
 
Bisonman80 said:
I realize its probably the guy's job to do these kinds of reviews, but come onnn. Not every movie needs to be analyzed down to the ink used to write the screenplay. The movie is entertaining and worth the average person's money, that's all a review needs to tell you. I don't know what kind of venue he writes for but unless its some kind of Film academy or something, the guy takes his job way too seriously.
He did win a Pulitzer Prize as a film critic. And it is his job, reviews and the occasional article in the Style section of the Washington Post.

It's not that I agree with him on the 300, since I haven't seen it yet, I often disagree with his reviews. Rather, I simply enjoy the way he writes. Ranks above the normal, bland movie reviews you find in newspapers.

John, it's a good thing he doesn't call himself a historian then.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Persian_Wars

The Greco-Persian Wars were a series of conflicts between several Greek city-states and the Persian Empire that started in 499 BC and lasted until 448 BC. The expression "Persian Wars" usually refers to both of the two Persian invasions of the Greek mainland in 490 BC and in 480-479 BC; in both cases, the allied Greeks successfully repelled the invasions. Not all Greeks fought against the Persians; some were neutral and others allied with Persia, especially as its massive armies approached.

What is known today is derived primarily from Greek sources (mainly Herodotus), and to a lesser extent some Roman writings. The Persians enter Greek history after they conquered the Lydians and the Greek city-states of Ionia that were previously controlled by the Lydians.[1] When in 499 BC an attempt to help restore the aristocrats in Naxos failed, the Ionians rebelled against the Persians.[2] Token aid was sent from the Greek mainland, especially Athens, but this failed to prevent a Persian victory. Persian General Mardonius campaigned in 492 BC in Thrace to consolidate Persian power but was stopped by a storm.[3] An amphibious force under Datis and Artaphernes razed Eretria but was defeated in Marathon a few days later by General Miltiades of Athens.[4]

Ten years later, in 480 BC, after massive preparation King Xerxes led a huge force to subjugate Greece. A small force of about 300 Spartans and 700 Thespians led by King Leonidas of Sparta held off a Persian army of more than 200,000.

Thespians? What, a bunch of pussy actors! No wonder no one remembers them!

Ah Sparta. Those poor militaristic bastards. When faced with a rising democratic if imperialistic Athens they fought the

Peloponnesian war
and thus ended the great age of Greece.
For more on the Peloponnesian war- here

Happily, the Peloponnesia War also gave us the first great history in Thucydide's The History of the Peloponnesian War. (No the Bible is not history).

Honestly, I am kind of looking forward to this movie. But then I liked the original 300 Spartans when I was a kid.

Ok, so that film of Manly men with swords and loin cloths had homoerotic issues too... never mind that.

There are better movies of Greeks and Romans doing battle, of course. But most of them seem to be forgotton.

But I suspect the criticism is right. The problem is that too many dipshits are willing to use movies to learn history and won't get it or take the time to learn. Like most movies, it could be better. I mean, Sin City might have been fun to watch, but the violence become just a joke after awhile. It works as comedy, but as serious film noir it's ridiculous. I image the same is true here.

I don't mind movies making money and I realize that history can be retold according to those telling it. But do we need to really need to dumb down a society in the process?

It's not just that some assholes are going to see a movie like this (or Zulu ) and just miss this history and think, "Oh cool, that's what I want to do- be part of a small group of soldiers in a battle to the death!"

It's bad enough that people join the military because they can't think of a better way to make something of their lives. It's also pretty sad that war attracts people for the sake of adventure and to be part of a spectacle. But I worry that by selling war in a glossy film one also encourages people to chasing delusions of stardom by being part of a "real movie."

And if you think that's bullshit-
A lot of kids joined the army going into Vietnam because they wanted to be John Wayne in the Battle of Iwo Jima. Rambo has been used as a recruiting device in countries all over the world. How many guys joined the army to kick ass on Islamic terrorists and ended up in Iraq? How many movies does it take to sell an image?

Dumb down the audience and what do you get? You get the same group of idiots who failed to realize that Starship Troopers is a satire of war movies, patriotism, and is, in fact, just propoganda that sells to the same bunch of dumb asses who don't get it.

But yeah, I am going to go see it. It looks like fantasy to me. And yes, people can reinterpret history as fantasy, just like the owner's of a license can turn FO into a FPS and sell it to a whole new crowd of idiots who don't know better.
 
Welsh, you're missing the point. You can call this way of retelling history dumbed down only if you agree that The Illyad and The Odyssey are 'dumbed down'. It's an epic, pure and simple.

Also, saying that it's pro-American propaganda is as silly as claiming that the Bible says that racism is okay.
 
DirtyDreamDesigner said:
You can call this way of retelling history dumbed down only if you agree that The Illyad and The Odyssey are 'dumbed down'. It's an epic, pure and simple.
gskarumahitkp3.gif


What, exactly, makes it an epic?

All I see in 300 is a flashy piece of fluff, something to keep people entertained for a little under two hours. Historical value? Close to none. Serious message? Tenuous at best, and even that is hidden under the stylization and violence. Well written? Frank Miller is a credible graphic artist, but is a marginal writer in any sense.

Do production values make an epic? Do the stylized, but ultimately meaningless, works of Frank Miller make an epic? Do you consider The Matrix an epic?
 
welsh said:
I mean, Sin City might have been fun to watch, but the violence become just a joke after awhile. It works as comedy, but as serious film noir it's ridiculous. I image the same is true here.
I agree. I haven't seen it yet, but I've read the comic and am a huge fan of Miller.

That being said you can get away with saying and doing some really over-the-top things in a comic book that 'work' within the context of that medium. However, when you have live actors saying and doing these same things it borders on laughable. Sin City felt that way to me too, and I imagine 300 will be the same.
 
Tannhauser said:
What, exactly, makes it an epic?

What makes the Illyad an epic? Heroism, "Grandiosity", larger than life characters, larger than life story, etc.

All I see in 300 is a flashy piece of fluff, something to keep people entertained for a little under two hours.

Personal opinion.

Historical value? Close to none.

So? The Gladiator, by all means an epic, was also historically invaluable. Some would argue that the Illyad was also.

Serious message? Tenuous at best, and even that is hidden under the stylization and violence. Well written? Frank Miller is a credible graphic artist, but is a marginal writer in any sense.

Again, personal opinions. I find his work (300 especially) to be well written.

Do you consider The Matrix an epic?

Irrelevant, but I do.
 
DDD- then the problem is one of standards and what standards are you embracing?

What is the point of art and what is "good" art vs what is merely popular?

Honestly, I will probably go see the 300 expecting to see a spectacle. But do I expect a deep story involving serious themes? No. Do I expect a story made for an adult with intelligence? No. I expect to see a spectacle with gratuitious violence.

But that's not what an epic should be, and it certainly doesn't make for great art. Not unless you think watching Professional Wrestling is what sport is about.

If you can't distinguish the Illiad and the Odyssey from the Matrix trilogy- two of the foundation works of literature, bud, that's sad.

Compare Gladiator to Spartacus- both movies involve gladiators, political intrique, danger. Both are based, somewhat, on true events. But I'd argue that Spartacus is a better movie because of the themes it addresses and its relevance. Gladiator is remembered at best for some of the lines of script.

This past weekend I took my wife to see Pan's Labyrinth which I greatly enjoyed on so many levels and highly recommend. There was torture, bloodshed, heroism, villiany, tragedy and comedy- seriously a children's fairy tale written for adults. Parts of it were quite barbaric, but over all it was a pretty damn good film.

I don't know what to think of the 300 because I haven't seen it yet. But from what I see of the trailers it seems like a bit of fantasy bloodshed. Two hours of spectacle entertainment.

Art? A movie made for adults? I doubt it.

Now you may argue with me that one man's art is another man's garbage. Yeah. But then the question should be- what defines crap and what defines art - that's a question of standards.

We can add an issue here that art is relevant when framed in context of its time. You have a movie in which 300 Spartans (Westerners) face off against a multitude of Persian (Iranian) bad guys who aim to take over the world. Are you telling me that the art is not relevant to its time? Doesn't the artist have some responsibility for what he creates, especially as it relates to the mind of the viewer?
 
I saw 300 last Saturday and I have to say that it was everything that I expected out of it.

The problem with the movie was that the moments from the trailer were very noticeable.

Other than that, the movie was excellent. My hair stood up when I heard the synchronized chorus as the riders came in to Sparta, and when Leionidas came back to Sparta after his training. The soundtrack is excellent. The violence and visuals were excellent. The plot lacked somewhat, but the movie is definately worth watching just for the violence alone. :P
 
Well DDD, it is obviously futile to try to hold a discussion with you; as you are a being of pure reason, to which my lowly personal opinions are meaningless. I have to congratulate you on ferreting out my opinions, try as I might to hide them as factual information. I am deeply ashamed over using base personal opinions in a serious discussion over Hollywood pap, something which your logical excellency would never stoop to.

In truth, I think it is futile because all we will be doing is arguing over definitions and usage. While I think your use of 'epic' is pure idiocy, I am unlikely to change your mind. Though I do think it sad that anyone could think that 'epics' can be routinely manufactured by commercial interests utilizing mediocre talents.

Of course, as personal opinion, you can ignore all of that, your analytical majesty.
 
Welsh, I realise that we are both forming our opinion without watching the movie. You seem biased by the reviews, while I am biased by reading the excellent comic. And what I can say about the comic is that it is a fantastic epic in many ways superior to most other epics, regardless of their format. As it is, I (and for that matter, you as well) can't argue about the merits of the movie. I do however expect you to view the movie objectively. And that confess that it's awesome and that I was right. :D

But, seriously,

Honestly, I will probably go see the 300 expecting to see a spectacle. But do I expect a deep story involving serious themes? No. Do I expect a story made for an adult with intelligence? No. I expect to see a spectacle with gratuitious violence.

It is my belief that you will be pleasantly surprised.

But that's not what an epic should be, and it certainly doesn't make for great art. Not unless you think watching Professional Wrestling is what sport is about.

If you can't distinguish the Illiad and the Odyssey from the Matrix trilogy- two of the foundation works of literature, bud, that's sad.

That was unnecessarily condescending, but okay. I wasn't comparing the Illyad to the Matrix (although the discussion about why one is considered a work of art and the other isn't could be an interesting one), I was asked if I consider The Matrix to be an epic, and I responded. I do, and a damn good one at that.

We can add an issue here that art is relevant when framed in context of its time. You have a movie in which 300 Spartans (Westerners) face off against a multitude of Persian (Iranian) bad guys who aim to take over the world. Are you telling me that the art is not relevant to its time? Doesn't the artist have some responsibility for what he creates, especially as it relates to the mind of the viewer?

The movie is a faithful adaptation of a comic book which started in 1998, years before the current "US vs. Iran et al" issues. All of the same themes existed in it.
But, it is also interesting to note that the comic was influenced in turn by a 1962 movie "The 300 Spartans" which, at the time, was noted for having Cold War overtones. O tempora, o mores, I guess.

EDIT: Tannhauser, dude, it's just a discussion, sorry if I offended you, don't go all emo-Rosh on me...

Let's just see a movie and than comment, kay?
 
Fair enough DDD, as mentioned, I am looking forward to the film. After all I did like 300 Spartans. And yes, you're right. Apparently Miller liked 300 Spartans too, and thus did the graphic novel 300 based on 300 Spartans.

Didn't mean to be condescending. Rather, I am concerned about the issue of standards. Ok, yes art is in the view of the beholder, but seriously, if there are no standards for excellence or art than there is a problem. Yet, such standards are often hard to sustain. This has been discussed here before.

Is the Matrix an epic of just a serial? If you mean epic as big, yes perhaps. Was Starship Troopers an epic? But merely being epic doesn't make it good either. Honestly, I was disappointed with the Matrix. There was a lot of potential there that got squandered. The Matrix 1 was a pretty great flick but the sequels didn't do it justice.

Don't get me wrong though. Sandle and loincloth flicks are perfectly fine. There is also a Roman flick where they punish a legion for losing a battle by having the guys line up on a bridge and randomly tipping them over the side. Can't remember that one though. Maybe Fall of the Roman Empire which seems surprisingly like Gladiator.

Honestly though, if you want to see some fun depictions of murder, duplicity and violence in the ancient world- I, Claudius and the HBO-BBC series Rome would probably prove enjoyable.

As for the overtones of time... I had a discussion with a colleague over the responsibility of an artist in framing his art in time. How much responsibility does an artist have in recognizing that art is interpreted for the time in which it is made? Those commercials for the US Marines where the marine is suggested to be some kind of knight/warrior seem just damn silly to me. Yet those ideas draw on popular conceptions of the heroic that 300 seems to protray.
 
[quote='The Flowered Thundermug' by Alfred Bester]"We will conclude this first semester of Antiquities 107," Professor Paul Muni said, "with a reconstruction of an average day in the life of a mid-twentieth-century inhabitant of the United States of America, as Great L.A. was known five hundred years ago.

"Let us refer to him as Jukes, one of the proudest names of the times, immortalized in the Kallikak-Jukes-feud sagas. It is now generally agreed that the mysterious code letters JU, found in the directories of Hollywood East, or New York City as it was called then--viz., JU 6-0600 or JU 2-1914--indicate in some manner a genealogical relationship to the powerful Jukes dynasty.

"The year is 1950. Mr. Jukes, a typical `loner'--i.e., `bachelor'--lives on a small ranch outside New York. He rises at dawn, dresses in spurred boots, Daks slacks, rawhide shirt, gray flannel waistcoat and black knit tie. He arms himself with a Police Positive revolver or a Frontier Six Shooter and goes out to the Bar-B-Q to prepare his breakfast of curried plankton or converted algae. He may or may not surprise juvenile delinquents or red Indians on his ranch in the act of lynching a victim or rustling his automobiles, of which he has a herd of perhaps one hundred and fifty.

"These hooligans he disperses after single combat with his fists. Like all twentieth-century Americans, Jukes is a brute of fantastic strength, giving and receiving sledgehammer blows, or being battered by articles of furniture with inexhaustible resilience. He rarely uses his gun on such occasions; it is usually reserved for ceremonial rituals.

"Mr. Jukes journeys to his job in New York City on horseback; in a sports car (a kind of open automobile), or on an electric trolley car. He reads his morning newspaper, which will feature such stories as: `The Discovery of the North Pole,' `The Sinking of the Luxury Liner Titanic,' `The Successful Orbiting of Mars by Manned Space Capsule,' or `The Strange Death of President Harding.'

"Jukes works in an advertising agency situated on Madison Avenue (now Sunset Boulevard East), which, in those days, was a rough muddy highway, traversed by stagecoaches, lined with gin mills and populated by bullies, corpses and beautiful night-club performers in abbreviated dresses. Jukes is an agency man, dedicated to the guidance of taste, the improvement of culture, the election of public officers and the selection of national heroes.

"His office on the twentieth floor of a towering skyscraper is decorated in the characteristic style of the mid-twentieth century. He has a roll-top desk, a Null-G, or Free Fall chair and a brass spittoon. Illumination is by Optical Maser light pumps. Large fans suspended from the ceiling cool him in the summer, and an infrared Franklin stove warms him in the winter.

"The walls are decorated with rare pictures executed by such famous painters as Michelangelo, Renoir and Sunday. Alongside the desk is a tape recorder, which he uses for dictation. His words are later written down by a secretary using a pen and carbon ink. (It has, by now, been clearly demonstrated that the typewriting machine was not developed until the onset of the Computer Age at the end of the twentieth century.)

"Mr. Jukes's work involves the creation of the spiritual slogans that uplift the consumer half of the nation. A few of these have come down to us in more or less fragmentary condition, and those of you who have taken Professor Rex Harrison's course, Linguistics 916, know the extraordinary difficulties we are encountering in our attempts to interpret: `Good to the Last Drop' (for `good' read `God'?); `Does She or Doesn't She?' (what?); and `I Dreamed I Went to the Circus in My Maidenform Bra' (incomprehensible).

"At midday, Mr. Jukes takes a second meal, usually a community affair with thousands of others in a giant stadium. He returns to his office and resumes work, but you must understand that conditions were not ideal for concentration, which is why he was forced to labor as much as four and six hours a day. In those deplorable times there was a constant uproar of highway robberies, hijackings, gang wars and other brutalities. The air was filled with falling bodies as despairing brokers leaped from their office windows.

"Consequently it is only natural for Mr. Jukes to seek spiritual peace at the end of the day. This he finds at a ritual called a `cocktail party.' He and many other believers stand close-packed in a small room, praying aloud, and filling the air with the sacred residues of marijuana and mescaline. The women worshipers often wear vestments called `cocktail dresses,' otherwise known as `basic black.'

"Afterward, Mr. Jukes may take his last meal of the day in a night club, an underground place of entertainment where rare shows are presented. He is often accompanied by his `expense account,' a phrase difficult to interpret. Dr. David Niven argues most cogently that it was cant for `a woman of easy virtue,' but Professor Nelson Eddy points out that this merely compounds the difficulty, since no one today knows what `a woman of easy virtue' was.

"Finally, Mr. Jukes returns to his ranch on a `commuters' special,' a species of steam car, on which he plays games of chance with the professional gamblers who infested all the transportation systems of the times At home, he builds a small outdoor fire, calculates the day's expenses on his abacus, plays sad music on his guitar, makes love to one of the thousands of strange women who made it a practice of intruding on campfires at odd hours, rolls up in a blanket and goes to sleep.

"Such was the barbarism of that age--an age so hysteric that few men lived beyond one hundred years. And yet romantics today yearn for that monstrous era of turmoil and terror. Twentieth-century Americana is all the vogue. Only recently, a single copy of Life, a sort of mail-order catalogue, was bought at auction by the noted collector Clifton Webb for $150,000. I might mention, in passing, that in my analysis of that curio in the current Phil. Trans. I cast grave doubts on its authenticity. Certain anachronisms in the text indicate a possible forgery."[/quote]
 
Back
Top