All is not lost, then. It will be a dark day when everything will be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWFanatic
Printable View
All is not lost, then. It will be a dark day when everything will be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWFanatic
I disagree that a movie such as "300" was all "pure capitalism"; its political allusions were clearly conveyed, and according to many others it would hold a valid comparison to fascist art. The Persians were effectively denied their humanity. The Persians were marketed as a demonic horde, all dressed up in Arabesque garb, and worse, clustered together "non-white" peoples as the foe to a bunch of perfectly chiseled, waxed and oiled Caucasian body-builders. It is nonsensical to suggest that the movie had no political undertone to it, or a subconscious, derogatory (Towards Iranians) message attached to it. It's like watching John Wayne's "The Green Berets" being set in antiquity all over again!Quote:
Originally Posted by TWFanatic
If capitalism is implied by deception, defamation and distortion of facts, then the lack of scruples of the landed merchant classes of today (*ahem*) is merely being perpetuated. It is a filthy business. But on the other hand, to merely believe that all these tricks were just used to milk more money is to dismiss their lasting effect. Why get the cow when you can get the milk for free? The average Joe ignoramus is as good a source as he can get.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGlobalizer
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Yes, clearly it is "artistic liberty". No hidden undertones here. I am sure Hydarnes finds this a most excellent "artistic tribute" to his legacy. I am most confident that he shall find the added drool, animalistic growling, gingivitis gone extreme, and BDSM collar to be satisfactory additions to his character :eyesroll:
Look, I don't give a shit about the "official response" from Warner Bros. I don't fall for the folly of "C'mon it's just entertainment! It's not real! It's not real! It's fantasy!", because I know how hypocritical some individuals might get if we switch settings to the American War of Independence, and play dress-up with George Washington and turn him into a gigantic demonic bullfrog with a white wig. Hey! Isn't that "fantasy"? I mean, it's not "real", now is it? I'd be heckled beyond belief. And understandably too, as I would relate to the reaction myself. No producer in Hollywood would ever accept the idea.
So don't give me any bullshit about it being "artistic liberty". Why wasn't there a black Spartan? Why not a Mongol Spartan to add? What difference would that have made? They were certainly capable of giving the "Persians" a spectrum covering sub-human species and apply to some trans-gender characteristics. The movie certainly had its homo-erotic moments; Greeks don't look like that. Period. There are no excuses left.
Yeah, they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim
...And?
To add to TPC's argument, Frank Miller is working on a new graphic novel entitled Holy Terror, Batman, in which Batman fights al-Qaeda in Gotham city.
It's pretty clear Frank Miller has put certain agendas into his work (such as dehumanizing Iranians in 300, which he has admitted to) and this latest is clearly the most blatant and likely to be among the worst of the worst. And considering I don't hold Miller's works in high regard you can imagine what I mean by worst of the worst.
I say things like that to act like a pike to the person's temper...if you got my idea, you'd should be laughing ~;)Quote:
Yeah, they do.
...And?
just trying to calm you. no use debating if you are enraged..I mostly agree with ya anyways..mostly.
let's take this elsewhere, plz?
Seconded. Nobody is going to be convinced here of whatever and what could be said has been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim
By the way, i played the Romans first, too, because i think they are the best choice to learn a mod's concept's differences to those of other mods, as they are most "common" faction for ancient era mods.
Another thing is, they are designed very interesting in EB: they have the most reforms, they have a lot of special traits, they have offices and so on.
It's not a matter of making excuses -- it's a matter of whether Frank Miller, Warner Bros., or anyone in Hollywood really gives a shit about "The Persian Cataphract", historians, or anyone other than their core demographic when it comes to producing a movie.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract
Is Hollywood disingenuous, hypocritical, inaccurate, and does it play into the worst elements of American popular culture and ignorance about the world? Absolutely. But most people who walked into that movie understood that it was fiction, that such people did not exist, and that it was a marked deviation from anything remotely historical.
My point is very simple: If you expect Hollywood or the American movie-going public to rise up and embrace the cause of the mis-portrayal of Hydarnes in an action blockbuster film, perhaps the issue is your expectations and not the actions of Hollywood or the American movie-going public.
It's not that Hollywood or America has some latent issue with the Persian Empire because of some perversion of politics -- it's just that neither of them care one iota about accuracy or how it may be interpreted by "vested interests" around the world. Good guys, bad guys, underdogs, epic battle, lots of blood, good guys win, end of story. That's the model, and it sells tickets.
When historians become the primary source of revenue for the film industry, you'll see the presentation change to preserve historical accuracy. When fans of the Persian Empire become the primary source of revenue, then movies will be more sensitive to the depiction of Hydarnes and Persian history and culture. Until then, keep getting bent out of shape about this all you like, it won't change the formula or the resulting ahistorical nonsense.
(Or feel free to go all EB on it and make your own version of the Battle of Thermopylae -- I'll watch it.)
I'm happy to take this private if you want to discuss further, but I do agree that this is the wrong thread (or forum) for this discussion.
Epeiros, just wanted to quickly kick some Roman ass
Then you have indeed validated my idea for a caricature of President George Washington. The rationale you have presented applies to basically anything one can throw on the table then.
Either you are expecting the best out of the audience, or you are incredibly naïve. Have you read YouTube comments as of late? As before, I do not care about the official response of the movie-makers and their sponsors, as they are just providing a response for catering. You can keep crying about fiction all you like, at least Frank Miller portrayed the Persians within the sapient spectra; Zack Snyder however went the extra mile, and the inclusion of this concept is bizarre to say the least. Besides, the movie does have a historical precedent to it (As did the comic), effectively negating the argument of "fiction". Snyder says it here himself:Quote:
But most people who walked into that movie understood that it was fiction.
"The events are 90 percent accurate. It's just in the visualization that it's crazy.... I've shown this movie to world-class historians who have said it's amazing. They can't believe it's as accurate as it is."
Historians! World-class historians even, if we are to take Snyder's words somewhat seriously. If this is even somewhat true, many professors ought to lose their tenures. Why then put any faith to the average Joe who probably slept through elementary history classes? Where did this 90% figure come from, and why does it appear to be so remote from the appeal to fiction? Like I said, if this is no more than harmless fiction, then why was there not a black or a Mongol Spartan? I would have enjoyed a wise-cracking Chris Tucker, or Gerry Lopez doing another "battle of the Mounds". Instead we got to see a Riefenstahl-influenced cockamamie caricature of an event that Greeks hold in high esteem. If I as an Iranian, am baffled by how the Persians were depicted as sub-human demons, then I would, if I were a Greek, be even more baffled at how a bunch of Americans have taken the Spartans and turned them into Hitler's little boys. All fully intended.
You claim "fiction", but are you willfully forgetting that even fiction can have its own subconscious and sometimes explicit political innuendos and statements? You make it out like it's all about the money. It's not just about the money. We are talking about a 60 million dollar movie full of various ideas that are getting streamed into the popular culture. You say "That's the model, and it sells tickets", but I say that this is still a filthy business, and the filthy money is accumulated at the expense of another. On one hand, it defames and dehumanizes the Persians (There is no argument, it does); on the other hand it lampoons physically disabled, and "non-white" peoples. On boot, the movie is very serious in its portrayal of the events. If this is what caters the popular youth, then I can only lament. Now what if this was a movie which glorified Hitler and portrayed a bunch of Jews as monsters with claws begging to be gassed en masse? The argument of demographics doesn't hold water, if one must assume a perspective broader than that of a marketer.
I'm not advocating a boycott; it would only serve to dignify the film intellectually, which it does not deserve. I'm not advocating censorship, because even though the movie was fucking racist (This coming from someone with enough anthropological know-how to dismiss the concept of "race" altogether), it's still creative property and would in the spirit of Voltaire still have it this way than the other. I am however pointing out the movie for what it is and what it portrays. It's full of irrational Nordicist demagoguery, it's full of derogatory racial allusions, and wears a deceptively simplistic facade from where it can resort to "IT'S FICTION IT'S ALL FICTION GET IT IT'S JUST FICTION AMERICAN YOUTH WANTS THIS NYAH-NYAH!"-card which already has seen official application. It's a stupid flick, yes, but it carries a message nonetheless.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Warner Bros. doesn't care about what I think? Good riddance, I don't need the approval or permission of a bunch of overpaid mentally numb individuals wearing the executive badge so that I can speak my mind. They'd probably sell their own mothers as prostitutes for peanuts. You are very right, my friend, their target demographics colloquially forms the relevant cash-cow, and the same would apply to fascist rhetorics being directed towards aspiring bullies. So? It doesn't render what I have said untrue. It's like saying the latest TV-shop scam, promising instant abs and pecs, doesn't care about what I think, just because I'm not obese and therefore not a part of the target demographics. Isn't it still a scam? Someone needs to break the ice.
And speaking of which, where is this Aemilius Paulus now? I'd certainly like to hear his "politically incorrect" point-of-view on this ordeal. On-topic or not, the poll lives on.
May the Jägermeister-gods forbid that Satrap Ariobarzanes shall ever be subject to the fate of King Leonidas. Thermopylae has been cheapened and served like a MacDonald's burger: Cheap, quick and without nutrition. I will hang myself if they turn the battle of the Persian Gate into something even remotely similar to "300".
THIS. IS. CAKETOWN.
I am not so sure Adolf Hitler would enjoy seeing Aryans, the favored race, ripped to shreds.
That aside, TPC is beginning to convince me that 300 is not, well, as it is just because the marketers reckoned it would bring in more dough. Virtually everything Hollywood comes out with these days has an underlying activist message.
I thought that summed it up well.Quote:
It's a stupid flick, yes, but it carries a message nonetheless.
persian cataphract, shesh no need to complain about films like 300?
youtube?! LAWL you should c what people post on Music videos like rock is better than hip hop!
than political yells like, KILL THE USA!! fuck the usa!! LETS NUKE IRAQ AND GET OUT BLAH BLAH!!!
I watched it at the movies, nearly everyone i knew including some 13 year olds (that got in ?wth)
it was entertaining, good use of $10 to waste 3 hours... But hell anyone who went thru and remembered 7-9th grade would know spartans, athenians, greeks wore armor, not some mediteranian tanned muscled dude...
Well, i know the persians were not accurately displayed (does any movie on history accurate except documentaries even do that?)
at least they tried to mix in historical facts like 3 days battle, and the rebuilding of the wall etc...
alright lets get off this topic
I played makedonians because i remember Alexander the movie (hate the gay part...killed the movie)
the fight scene... it was the best historical presentation in any movie of any battle (only missing the 2nd line of hoplites, mercs , greek allies etc)
anyone ever thought it was the funny when the thessalians and peltests charged at the baktrian calvalry and that peltest slipped? LOl it was funny as hell
There is such a difference between what 300 did and what other historical, but hardly accurate, films like Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, Alexander, etc.
There is a feature of war, whereby the enemy are seen as inhuman - as monsters. It is the kind of understanding that allows such offences as Abu Ghraib to go unchecked and unquestioned by otherwise decent human beings. This moral image was transformed into the physical image of the persians. Of course people are going to realise that the persians didn't look like mutant freaks, but what they will take home from that symbology is that they were monsters, souless slaughters unfit for the title of human-being. Further symbology acts to portray the film as a battle between the western democracies and the middle-eastern tyrannies (Spartans and democracy, my arse!). This combined with the element of monstrosity in the persian soldiery paints a picture that is both relevant and bias. I'm not talking about people reflecting, "wow, those persians are awful people, I bet the iranians are as well", but a subtle connection, unknown, can seriously influence how people react to modern political messages. I'm certainly not saying that the producers of the film were playing the political game and supporting a war against Iran or against the middle-east in general, but it sure as hell wasn't responsible.
Also it was damn crap cinema. I could watch more than 15 mins before I had to switch it off. I can understand why people like it. But if we are right in assuming that ordinary people have more important things to worry about than the delicacies surrounding the political climate of the modern world today, then it sure as hell ain't responsible of a media to play to the fears and hopes of a bigoted minority and then wrap it up in an action-packed cgi fest of muscles and homo-erotic nudity. Cinema is a medium that can both entertain and be intelligent, its a shame that it so often fails to do either.
Foot
yeh I hate when my country (Mexico) is portrayed by US producers...
(they're not the only "americans" :shifty:)
Now I understand TPC , and I agree 100% with him...
What would you rather we call ourselves? Statsians?Quote:
(they're not the only "americans" )
ROMA INVICTA of course I am sure that %90 of RTW player started with Julii and wiped out all romani faction and tasted to be imperator...
when I was bored with infantry I started to play Parthia.
in EB 1.1 I am not playing with any faction other than Pahlava.
If Konny or other smart guys manages to put RS Legions (I am a failure on adapting them) into EB I do not think that I will play with other than Romani
for that reason when I want to play Romans I play RS when I want to play pahlava I always play EB..
OMG I am a maniac I have two seperate RTW folder for this reason. one for EB one for RS...
10 GB...
my first PC had 8 GB HD only!.....
for foot : the world of screen is just a manipulated imaginery life... for me best of the tools for escapism......
maybe for that reason I almost never watch TV, except LOST of course....
Two folders? If you think that's much, you don't want to know how many I have... :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Atraphoenix
Edit: A lot of mods nowadays can be used in one rtw-folder without interfering, but i think it's cleaner to use separate ones. Just a bit of superstition on my part.
what about US citizens... <.<Quote:
Originally Posted by Bellum
currently it's as if someone said european and everyone though the're British >.>
I call em "the inhabitants of teh US and A" =P
i played as the romani in the waning months of .81aV2 :beam:
Agreed with this sentiment whole-heartedly. I'm just too old to bother giving a shit about what Hollywood or any other broadly-defined, amorphous group is supposedly conspiring to achieve. Some see these sorts of movies as a disease; I just see them as a symptom of the larger disease of human ignorance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
FWIW, I'd actually like to see some movies portraying Americans as craven beasts. As long as the movie has action and some nifty CGI.
The best films, of course, are as Foot wishes -- entertaining and intelligent. But for me, in lieu of that, there's a time for in-depth documentary filmmaking and a time for completely mindless bullshit.
Casse :yes:
They seemed like an intriguing bunch, and they still are.
Saba. Actually, I started as the Ptolemaioi, but I didn't even push end turn, so it was Saba.
Macedon. All because of Alexander.
I had a lot of fun with that campaign too.
Look!
https://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i...p226bccopy.jpg
ummm how the hell do two different people own the deserts?
and who is bright green? ooooh wait this must be a version before i started playing... im a feckin' eegit
ALL HAIL MAKEDONIA!!!!
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bellum
Whoa! How did you and Carthage conquer Eremos? I thought the African Eremos and the Arabian Eremos were the same province. Plus, isn't there only one city in all of Eremos, Terhazza, which you cannot reach without cheating. The Arabian Eremos doesn't even have a city.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarardo
0.7 rings a bell?
Nope, my EB experience began with v1.1 in April.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
photoshop then :smash:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
Hax means it's from a 0.7x version of EB. You can also see the Yuezhi in the northeast, where Saka have replaced them in later versions because they were somewhat out of the starting timeframe. We now have a scripted Yuezhi invasion instead, however we struggle to get the AI to use them for anything worthwhile.
This was also the time of "the desert wars" between Carthage and the Ptolemaioi, who would fight over Nubian lands all the time.Quote:
Hax means it's from a 0.7x version of EB. You can also see the Yuezhi in the northeast, where Saka have replaced them in later versions because they were somewhat out of the starting timeframe. We now have a scripted Yuezhi invasion instead, however we struggle to get the AI to use them for anything worthwhile.