Glory of Persepolis' goes on screen in response to insulting movie `300'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius Nero

I brought my proof, you bring yours. The man who wrote the "Persians" fought against them. The "Persians" weren't a novel to be read by Athenian leftists and intellectuals, it was a play shown on stage to be watched by all Athenian citizens. Show me one piece of art that depicts a Persian as a subhuman monster and I might start seeing that theory as remotely valid.

---

Again - very few persians are depicted as monsters - Xerxes (somehow), the immortals and the executor - they are depicted as weak fighters...
And Herodot is the Greek who told the story of more than 1.000.000.000 Persians who are unable to fight down comparable few Greeks for 3 days...

You forgot the goatman, the chained ogre and the mutant chicks in Xerxes' tent. And implying that the Greeks were better fighters or that the Persians were cowards or were worse fighters than the Greek hoplites is not on the same level as depicting the Persians as the Horde of Hell.

Well, there's also the soldiers with the weird claw weapons. (any body else notice that? You can see them in this clip, at around 1 minute in) First time I noticed that, I looked like this guy -> :dizzy2:

At least, I hope those are just claw weapons, and not part of their arms....

Looks like the arms were removed and the 'cleavers' attached.

Agreed, at times I thought the Persian army would have been better used in lord of the rings, but I still enjoyed the film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius Nero

You forgot the goatman, the chained ogre and the mutant chicks in Xerxes' tent. And implying that the Greeks were better fighters or that the Persians were cowards or were worse fighters than the Greek hoplites is not on the same level as depicting the Persians as the Horde of Hell."

---

The "ogre" I counted to the Immortals - but sorry for the goatman ;)
And again - most Persians were depicted as ordinary human beings - and men who are too afraid to advance don't seem all too demonic to me.
And what about the greeks? They also had their mutants. They had ephialtes (the traitor) and those men in the temple...
Of course now could be argued that these were traitors and no "real" greeks or something like that - but look at it from this way: The Persians had no traitors in their ranks...

Um I dont think muslim extremist will go away even if the U.S. backs down, they'll keep hitting the west for one reason or another.


OR, the west backs down (which is extremely wussy) and the mid east thinks they're victorious and go back to living their life.

Did I get this topic on target?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K COSSACK

OR, the west backs down (which is extremely wussy)

---

:laugh4: thats got to be the best quote I've seen all week. Almost good enough to make into a sigline.

That's probably the best example of why most of the world hates Americans. And did you ever stop to think, there's actual reasons the islamic extremists don't like us?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

The Persians had no traitors in their ranks...

---

And what's that say to you about their overall depiction ?

Answers other than something to the effect of "unthinking hordes" don't get a cookie. In other words, "the Enemy" are denied even the capacity for dissent and, thus, presumably individual (or at the very least certain degree of critical/rational) thought... The tie-in to Miller et Co's political opinions oughta be fairly obvious.

Well, K COSSACK helpfully demonstrated more or less what I'm talking about. On top of what Zak said. But let's not stray too far into Backroom territory here, 'k ?

I don't like 300 and I don't like bashing Islam or the Muslims as it is done nowadays sometimes. But...

That said I'm a bit anxious about what you implied, Zaknafien. Maybe it's just my bad English. Should the west (which is not the USA but the western way of life containing not only exploitation, greed for oil and a sometimes cynical capitalism but also human rights, equality, democracy, laicysm and so on) really back down? I don't think so.

I will stop because this would be a modern discussion and this is EB forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

And what's that say to you about their overall depiction ?

Answers other than something to the effect of "unthinking hordes" don't get a cookie. In other words, "the Enemy" are denied even the capacity for dissent and, thus, presumably individual (or at the very least certain degree of critical/rational) thought... The tie-in to Miller et Co's political opinions oughta be fairly obvious.

Well, K COSSACK helpfully demonstrated more or less what I'm talking about. On top of what Zak said. But let's not stray too far into Backroom territory here, 'k ?

---

Hm - so when they lack good fighting abilities and courage they are depicted in a derogatory way - and when they lack treachery they are also depicted in a derogatory way?
To be honest - that doesn't sound very sensible to me...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

The "ogre" I counted to the Immortals - but sorry for the goatman ;)
And again - most Persians were depicted as ordinary human beings - and men who are too afraid to advance don't seem all too demonic to me.
And what about the greeks? They also had their mutants. They had ephialtes (the traitor) and those men in the temple...

---

If you listen to the dying groans of the Persian foot soldiers you could hardly mistake them for ordinary humans I think...

Also the Ephors in the movie are explicitly made out to be representatives of the Old World of Mysticism and the Irrational, and therefore on the same camp by default with the Persians. As such it is no wonder they are the deformed subhumans they are made out to be. 300 is quite consistent in its symbolism.

Nevertheless the Ephors are Greek and not Persian and don't forget the corrupt politician who wasn't deformed or something like that - and that impression about the dying groans of Persian infantry I can not support

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

Hm - so when they lack good fighting abilities and courage they are depicted in a derogatory way - and when they lack treachery they are also depicted in a derogatory way?
To be honest - that doesn't sound very sensible to me...

---

Well duh. Whatever agenda Miller and Snyder may have isn't the same Herodotus or whoever it now was had. By the take of the former the Spartans are nigh-undefeatable supermen to start with so it's not terribly important if the Persian soldiery don't quite match up to them - but then their message doesn't concern the actual military aspects of the story anyway, but the ideological and symbolic stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardu

Exactly, most people aren't as intelligent or well-informed as most of the people on this forum are, but they still hold the right to vote. So films like this do have an influence on voters and as such on politics, wether conscious or unconscious...

---

Then I fail to see what the problem is. There really isn't much that a filmmaker can do to prevent his movies from being interpreted by people who are either incomprehensibly stupid or are so thouroughly affected by their own political agenda that they see examples of it even where there are none.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

So the opinion of those who argue it is a good movie is worth nothing and they (we) never brought any acceptable argument? Good to know...

---

Of course no one can argue against opinion, if you think this is a good movie then that's how it is. But whether 300 is good or not based on it's merits is a completely different question. I have yet to see a single good argument for why 300 is a good movie, which isn't strange since there are none. 300 is garbage that has sold very well by appealing to the right demographic. But I am not trying to tell anyone that they can't enjoy it, to each his own. Hey, some people jerk off to badly drawn Simpsons porn and some enjoy videos of real life mutilation and murder, in that light 300 isn't so bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Given that "evil comes from the East" is pretty much one of the core building blocks of the whole damn plot, I'd say it matters fairly little if the Easterners were purple. The racism, or rather ethnocentrism, in the movie is not so much based on specific nationality and ethnicity as on a "the West vs. the Rest" duality, where the former - represented by the Greeks in general and the Spartans in particular - get to represent what really amount to "good old American values" and the latter - summed up as "Persians", "all the hordes of Asia" in one line at least - the negation of those values and duly everything vile and oppressive and whatnot.

In other words, crazy Easterners are assailing the very roots of human civilization as we (or rather, Miller et Co...) know it and it is up to Real Men(tm) to make sacrifices and if necessary do bad things to save it.

---

Well, the East vs West issue is kinda unavoidable, as it was the key theme of Herodotos Histories. And hasn't "evil comes from the east" been a fixture in the european world view for the last 2000 years or so? What with the lack of amphibious assaults by native americans and all. As for the whole evil thing, I will say this for the hundredth time, what does anyone expect from a movie such as this? But hey, why not be productive and suggest an alternate course 300 could have taken? Imagine the following, if you will, in the voice typical of tacky action movie trailers.

IN 480 B.C THE SPLENDID AND MAGNANIMOUS PERSIAN EMPIRE EMBARKS ON A PUNITIVE EXPEDITION TO PUNISH THOSE GREEKS WHO HAVE SUPPORTED REBELLION AND CONTRIBUTED TO THE BURNING OF THE WESTERN CAPITAL OF THE EMPIRE AND HAVE SINCE FAILED REPENT BY THE SIMPLEST TOKENS OF SUBMISSION TO THE GREATEST AND MOST HUMANITARIAN EMPIRE ON EARTH.
THE FIRST TO FEEL THE RIGHTFULL JUSTICE OF PERSIA WILL BE THE GODLESS SPARTANS, WHO IN THEIR PRIDE AND TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL DECENCIES DISREGARDED THE SACROSANCT PERSONS OF THE PERSIAN MESSANGERS AND MURDERED THEM IN AN ACT OF UNEQUALED IMPIETY AND CRUELTY. THESE SLAVE-MURDERING PAEDOPHILES AND PURVEORS OF EUGENICS WILL SURELY SUFFER THE WRATH OF GOD AND THEIR LIES WILL BE CONSUMED IN THE FIRE OF ULTIMATE TRUTH.

Somehow I think that wouldn't have appealed to 300s target audience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

And what's that say to you about their overall depiction ?

In other words, "the Enemy" are denied even the capacity for dissent and, thus, presumably individual (or at the very least certain degree of critical/rational) thought...

---

Actually there is one scene where the narrator tells us that the "ones in the back yelled 'Forward!!!', but the ones in the front yelled 'BACK!!!'" However, this is the only such scene in the film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

Nevertheless the Ephors are Greek and not Persian and don't forget the corrupt politician who wasn't deformed or something like that - and that impression about the dying groans of Persian infantry I can not support

---

This is why I have been saying that the bias of the movie is not racial, but political/cultural. It matters not that they are Greek, it matters that politically/culturally they are on the same camp as the adversaries. Traitors in our ranks and all that. And the Persian soldiers, when they die, they sound like Uruk-hai who have smoked a cigarette too many, listen to them again (u-tube should have several battle scenes from 300) and hear for yourself.

btw the whole totally irrelevant queen/politician subplot wasn't in the comic, but I grant you that, it wasn't probably added to make an extra point (the traitors amongst us theme is already present with the Ephors), it is blatantly obvious that it was added because, hey, we got a fine chick playing Leonidas' wife, it is a shame not to include half an hour with her on screen, no? :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius Nero

This is why I have been saying that the bias of the movie is not racial, but political/cultural. It matters not that they are Greek, it matters that politically/culturally they are on the same camp as the adversaries. Traitors in our ranks and all that.

---

But if miller and/or snyder wanted the Spartan-culture they created to be associated with the USA or the Western World than they are among the dumbest propagandists ever seen - for the Sparta that is shown in the movie/comic is fascist...
Lets collect things that movie Spartans and the West have in common:
They are in the West...
They have a superior military...
They claim to fight for freedom and democracy (not a big deal though as nazis also claimed to fight for freedom and communists also said they'd fought for democracy)...
But in both cases you have a superpower invading a smaller country (though of course the West claims to defend itself...) - just that Persia is the superpower in this case...
And Spartans (I know - I'm repeating myself) kill anyone who tries to speak to them (except that one guy who loses his arm at the wall built of men), they murder their children when they don't seem to be fit enough, they kill wounded enemies, they build walls out of corpses and they refer to their allies in a derogatory way - Leonidas sacrafices his men without hesitation, is sad that he couldn't sacrafice even more and refuses any terms given by xerxes without ever making a counteroffer...
Only a complete retard would show such a society with the aim to glorify the own culture/country or justify any politics...

But ok - I thought about the arguments presented and have to say - the way the persians are presented shows more similarity to the stereotype of a middle-eastern-enemy (soamee) than pure geographical origin:
Their infantry wears often some pseudo-taliban outfit...
They are religious fanatcis (They alsways claim to fight for a god-king)...
They use weapons considered to be the weapons of cowards (arrowshower/terrorism - though it is questionable wether blowing up yourself is an act of cowardice)
But there are also points speaking against this:
They often wear all that gold stuff at their body (soamees are expected to be poor)
They have this orgy tent (soamees are expected to hide their women)
They are often too afraid to attack (soamees are expected to be fanatic enough to fight to the end)
They have many Black in their lines (soamees haven't)
Xerxes offers Leonidas several times terms for a ceasefire (soamees are expected to be unconditionally out for destruction - not for a talk)

Quote:

---

And the Persian soldiers, when they die, they sound like Uruk-hai who have smoked a cigarette too many, listen to them again (u-tube should have several battle scenes from 300) and hear for yourself.

---

I did as you suggested and have to admit - not only immortals but also some grunts make this orc-like sound when they die. Though this is maybe because of the slowmotion...
But I can't remember that they made this sound in the German version I saw...

Quote:

---

btw the whole totally irrelevant queen/politician subplot wasn't in the comic, but I grant you that, it wasn't probably added to make an extra point (the traitors amongst us theme is already present with the Ephors), it is blatantly obvious that it was added because, hey, we got a fine chick playing Leonidas' wife, it is a shame not to include half an hour with her on screen, no? :p

---

:laugh4: - good point ^^
This whole subplot was to me the worst part of the movie - especially the embarassing scene in the council...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aecp

Of course no one can argue against opinion, if you think this is a good movie then that's how it is. But whether 300 is good or not based on it's merits is a completely different question. I have yet to see a single good argument for why 300 is a good movie, which isn't strange since there are none. 300 is garbage that has sold very well by appealing to the right demographic. But I am not trying to tell anyone that they can't enjoy it, to each his own. Hey, some people jerk off to badly drawn Simpsons porn and some enjoy videos of real life mutilation and murder, in that light 300 isn't so bad.

---

Hm - the effects are excellent, the actors convince (they are not brilliant but nevertheless good enough for an good action movie), the style of the comic is accurately brought on screen, the soundtrack fits and the narrator (at least in the German Version) does a good job at telling the story (not that there would be much story to tell) - all in all I think these are good arguments to claim that this is a good actionmovie...
And I hope you are not suggesting that people who liked 300 are potentially the same who like "badly drawn Simpsons porn" and/or "videos of real life mutilation and murder" ^^

"But if miller and/or snyder wanted the Spartan-culture they created to be associated with the USA or the Western World than they are among the dumbest propagandists ever seen - for the Sparta that is shown in the movie/comic is fascist...
Only a complete retard would show such a society with the aim to glory the own culture/country or justify any politics..."

Hello, long time lurker first time poster. I apologize for making my first post on the Totalwar forums a potentially contentious one but felt compelled to address the above quote.

While I wouldn't care to characterize the majority of the 300's viewing audience as "retards" the facts of my experience with the film were that the overwhelming sentiment of the audience at the close of the film was positive and one dimentional in support of the Spartans which is perfectly natural as no thought-provoking counterpoint was given in the film to the moral position of the greeks. However, what was interesting was that this sentiment had not diminished in those I spoke to several days later. This I observed in people who had seen the film during it's opening week and had ample time to contemplate it's possible implications but largely did not do so, rather many chose to accept what was given at face value...after all, it's just a silly film?

You'll have to pardon me for not having mentioned my backround in film studies...and the fact that I am originally german by nationality and completed my studies there. During my study of film I was made quite intimatly familiar with the films of the german prewar period. These films were often times quite compelling toward a sentiment of solidarity, cultural identification, and a feeling of being besieged by foreign elements intent on destroying the traditions, culture, and unity of the volk. Often times this militaristic and nationalistic xenophobia was dressed in quite stunningly beautiful cinematography. Beautiful things, after all, are desirable and draw us to them.

Yet undeniably these films helped to condition a german population by reinforcing latent sentiments already present in the society and endorsing ever increasingly simplistic binary moral paradigms which allowed for ever increasingly simplistic solutions.

In retrospect everything as it occured in pre-war Germany seems obvious, it was hardly so at the time. While I am not suggesting that the current socio-political climate in the United States mirrors that of Germany following the collapse of the relatively moderate Weimar government, I am suggesting that one must be very careful with cultural trends toward which such films as the "the 300" lead. It is the very fact that reasonable American audiences cheered unreservedly this "fascist" Spartan culture that should raise a slight concern. This country (the USA) is yet in the grip of a startlingly conservative political movement to which a corrective balance has yet to be applied. We should be skeptical and encourage public dialogue in the wake of such films.

p.s.
As a side note I have the utmost respect for the many of you who post here, the level of discourse and maturity here is a wonderful example of polite civility. I have increased my little understanding of history by leaps and bounds through regular visits to this forum and am thankful for both the wonderful EB mod and this gratious community.

Very interesting first post Lowenklee. Welcome to the fora! Glad you've come aboard matey! :grin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aecp

First of all, apologetics? And you have to consider the target demographic and artistic (HA!) intentions of the movie in question. The first is obviously the teenager/fratboy demographic and the second is ripped men in thongs spinning in slow-mo. Do you seriously expect such a movie to be concerned with portraying the villains fairly? And what does Trajan's Column have to do with anything? I have a hard time seeing the relevance of comparing a mindless popcorn-flick to a nearly 2000 years old monument. I hardly think the creators of the two had the same intentions.

---

Well that was a lame response. It hardly matters what the demographic is as people who are teenagers should have the facultative capacities to understand a more complex movie. An action movie shouldn't use the excuse that it is an action movie in order to avoid good acting or story-telling. The apologetics have been arguing the opposite and quite vigorously.

Furthermore, you're missing the point. Considering how subversively propagandistic 300 is, it compares quite well with the Column of Trajan. Both tell a story, but one did so without treating its audience as children.

Also, Lowenklee, thanks for your post. I wish more would consider it.

Hello Lowenklee, a very good post but I don't agree with some of your conclusions and suggestions.

Not only is the political system in the USA different from that of post33 Germany, also the influence of the government on the movie industry cannot be compared.
Of course the zeitgeist favors anti-Iran and anti-Muslim sentiments and there are of course people who use this. I allege some bad motives in case of 300 fe.

This prevailing mood has nevertheless some cause, in case of Iran it has a long tradition reaching back in the 1970s. Iran now only wants to use civil nuclear technology (perhaps there are people in the world believing this) but acts against some international declarations. It's a bit ominous.
In case of Islam you should listen to some religious masterminds who declare war on the west in a spiritual sense. This spiritual war has real effects. In my opinion it stems from the -correct- believe that the western system threatens traditional Islam and the related forms of society so Islam has to defend himself. The western world reacts, sometimes overreacts. I hope it is not a vicious circle. But in my opinion not every threat to some systems of thinking and living in this world is totally bad let alone can be avoided.

Btw: If you would like to see a counterpart to German pre WWII movie industry, look at the title of this thread. The operation of that countrys answer to a privately made bad movie from another country reminds me a lot more of what you implied.

correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Thermophylae in Greece? Spartans are Greeks right? Persians? Are they Greek? Once again I'm kind of lost on the anti-west pro-Iran thing. Persia was invading Greece during this time period and the Spartans 3 day battle gave the Athenians time to raise armies and defeat the INVADING Persians. Now once again, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Athens the birthplace of democracy? I'm pretty sure it wasn't Persia. So, per the going logic, this movie insults true imperialist Persia by saying they are, well, imperialist and the Greeks are mistakenly held up as heroes for defending the cradle of democracy and their homeland. If that's progressive call me Captain Caveman. :thumbsdown:

*groan*
That there, sir, is not only a fine example of swallowing propaganda hook line and sinker, but also of far too loosely used terminology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowenklee

While I wouldn't care to characterize the majority of the 300's viewing audience as "retards" the facts of my experience with the film were that the overwhelming sentiment of the audience at the close of the film was positive and one dimentional in support of the Spartans which is perfectly natural as no thought-provoking counterpoint was given in the film to the moral position of the greeks. However, what was interesting was that this sentiment had not diminished in those I spoke to several days later. This I observed in people who had seen the film during it's opening week and had ample time to contemplate it's possible implications but largely did not do so, rather many chose to accept what was given at face value...after all, it's just a silly film?

---

Welcome to this forum - though of course I'm not registered much longer than you are ^^

That is a very convincing point I have to admit...
I saw that movie with a couple of friends and none of them saw the Spartans in the movie as heros - maybe this has other reasons...
However - I give up. If this is how most see the movie and it's Spartans than this is perhaps indeed propaganda...
Obviously more efficient than I could immagine...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mucky305

correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Thermophylae in Greece? Spartans are Greeks right?

---

The Greece of that time can hardly be seen as a nation - Sparta, Athens and some minor cities only had an alliance.

Quote:

---

Once again I'm kind of lost on the anti-west pro-Iran thing.

---

I'm certeinly not pro Iranian - and I guess few others here are. However that doesn't mean that we are pro USA or pro war on terror...

Quote:

---

Persia was invading Greece during this time period and the Spartans 3 day battle gave the Athenians time to raise armies and defeat the INVADING Persians.

---

First of all we are talking about a time when war was a legitime act of "diplomacy" - a time that ended in 1918 not even 100 years ago...
War - as long as properly declared - wasn't seen as a crime...
And you find other answers to this topic in this thread already: Athens attacked a Persian town or at least a Persian allied town (I'm not sure about this - but what I want to say that there were more complex reasons for this war than Persian greed for expansion...)
Nevertheless - it were the Greeks who started the war by slaughtering the messengers...

Quote:

---

Now once again, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Athens the birthplace of democracy? I'm pretty sure it wasn't Persia.

---

And I'm pretty sure it wasn't Sparta -.-
1st There is much we don't know about many ancient peoples - who tells you that there never was a democracy before the Athenians? And you know that Athenian "democracy" is quite diffrent from our democracy...

Quote:

---

and the Greeks are mistakenly held up as heroes for defending the cradle of democracy and their homeland.

---

The Greeks did not defend democracy - propably not the Athenians and certainly not the Spartans...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

Hm - the effects are excellent, the actors convince (they are not brilliant but nevertheless good enough for an good action movie), the style of the comic is accurately brought on screen, the soundtrack fits and the narrator (at least in the German Version) does a good job at telling the story (not that there would be much story to tell) - all in all I think these are good arguments to claim that this is a good actionmovie...

---

You'll have to be more specific about the effects and acting, otherwise this discussion will amount to nothing more "yuh-huh" and "nuh-huh". IMO Butler was terrible as Leonidas. The role was pretty much a standard Mel Gibson action hero and Butler still managed to bungle it. Instead of the quiet resolve that defined Leonidas in the comic we got a constantly shouting fool who had to get his wifes permission for everything. And it was funny to hear him occasionally lapse into his Scottish accent. As for Gorgo she just came of as a sassy self-righteous bitch whose subplot seemed ripped straight out of Gladiator and sprinkled with a heavy dose of girlpower. Granted, some of the bad acting must've been due to the terrible script. As for example I think the guy who played the traitor is usually excellent in The Wire. And as for the effects, some of them were OK, some of them wouldn't have felt out of place in a God of War II cut-scene. But some, like the blood that for some reason never touched the floor was just sloppy. And in the scene where the 300 depart from Sparta, the whole lot of them appear to be shuffling in place at the end of the studio.

The only surviving elements of the comic is the sepia tone, the ridiculous amounts of blood and the lack of a coherent plot. The portrayal of Leonidas, the Spartan way of war and the Persian army were all changed for the worse and significantly dumbed down. The worst thing about the soundtrack was the nu-metal riffs that felt completely out of place. And the narrator was just grating. Sometimes he would explain things as if the audience was blind, his voice was terrible (English version) and some of the things he said just made me wince (for example: "Only the hard and strong can be Spartans. Only the strong. Only the hard."

Quote:

---

And I hope you are not suggesting that people who liked 300 are potentially the same who like "badly drawn Simpsons porn" and/or "videos of real life mutilation and murder" ^^

---

Nope, just saying that we all enjoy different things, some of which might be hard to understand for others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abou

Well that was a lame response. It hardly matters what the demographic is as people who are teenagers should have the facultative capacities to understand a more complex movie. An action movie shouldn't use the excuse that it is an action movie in order to avoid good acting or story-telling. The apologetics have been arguing the opposite and quite vigorously.

---

I'm sorry you feel that way, but your post warranted nothing more. Presenting your own opinion as absolute truth and the nay-sayers as "apologetics" is far beyond lame. But I guess you're right, I'll see to it that my future posts match the quality of your straw men and irrelevant examples.

When have I said that teenagers can't understand a more complex movie? Stop distorting my arguments. The success of 300 alone is sufficent to prove that millions of people around the world enjoy mindless action. That isn't to say that the same people can't enjoy something more sophisticated, just that sometimes that's not what you're looking for.

As for the acting and the story, I've already complained about those a hundred times, if you won't even read my posts i don't see much of a point to this discussion. Looking for good acting and story in 300 is like buying a pizza and being surprised it isn't filet mignon when you eat it. There's room for both movies like 300 and Conan on one side and, say, Kingdom of Heaven on the other. With that said I dislike 300 intensely and find its success depressing.

Quote:

---

Furthermore, you're missing the point. Considering how subversively propagandistic 300 is, it compares quite well with the Column of Trajan. Both tell a story, but one did so without treating its audience as children.

---

Please stop saying that 300 is propagandistic as if it were an established fact and not your own opinion. Both tell a story, is that your criteria? And I don't really get what you're saying here. Are you saying that the Column of Trajan isn't propagandistic or what? Is the point you're trying to make that good propaganda doesn't treat its audience as children? Why not compare 300 to something that's actually relevant. Such as Herodotos Histories, which was very fair to the Persians in comparison to 300. Or a recent movie like Kingdom of Heaven that treats the "the East" very gently.

Im no expert on roman monuments, but it seems to me that the Column of Trajan was made with accuracy and realism in mind, which 300 was not.

And as for comparisons to pre-war Germany, I think I'm just going to invoke Godwins Law and go bash my brains out against the nearest wall. Just keep reaching for that rainbow, while somewhere in the world there is a TV-series where the entire universe is run by evil space-jews and another where small children are brainwashed by the unlicensed likeness of Mickey Mouse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aecp

The worst thing about the soundtrack was the nu-metal riffs that felt completely out of place.

---

Well, I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how backwards that opinion may be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Afro Thunder

Well, I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how backwards that opinion may be.

---

Certainly, if someone thinks nu-metal has any merit in a movie depicting an ancient battle or that including the "wailing woman" that has somehow become prerequisite for all sword n' sandal movies since Gladiator, then so be it. That doesn't change it from being tacky and unoriginal respectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aecp

You'll have to be more specific about the effects and acting, otherwise this discussion will amount to nothing more "yuh-huh" and "nuh-huh". IMO Butler was terrible as Leonidas. The role was pretty much a standard Mel Gibson action hero and Butler still managed to bungle it. Instead of the quiet resolve that defined Leonidas in the comic we got a constantly shouting fool who had to get his wifes permission for everything. And it was funny to hear him occasionally lapse into his Scottish accent. As for Gorgo she just came of as a sassy self-righteous bitch whose subplot seemed ripped straight out of Gladiator and sprinkled with a heavy dose of girlpower. Granted, some of the bad acting must've been due to the terrible script. As for example I think the guy who played the traitor is usually excellent in The Wire. And as for the effects, some of them were OK, some of them wouldn't have felt out of place in a God of War II cut-scene. But some, like the blood that for some reason never touched the floor was just sloppy. And in the scene where the 300 depart from Sparta, the whole lot of them appear to be shuffling in place at the end of the studio.

The only surviving elements of the comic is the sepia tone, the ridiculous amounts of blood and the lack of a coherent plot. The portrayal of Leonidas, the Spartan way of war and the Persian army were all changed for the worse and significantly dumbed down. The worst thing about the soundtrack was the nu-metal riffs that felt completely out of place. And the narrator was just grating. Sometimes he would explain things as if the audience was blind, his voice was terrible (English version) and some of the things he said just made me wince (for example: "Only the hard and strong can be Spartans. Only the strong. Only the hard.

---

Hm - I look forward to get the DVD so that I'll be able to compare the original version with the German one. Leonidas was depicted as following: When he is not fighting he is sarcastic to cynical but if he faces something really important (few things seem to be important to this warrior though) he becomes calm - he is easy to outrage...
In the comic he is also easy to outrage - he kills the messenger with SPARTA on his lips...
But I agree - the depiction of him in the movie is different from that of the comic. And of course - in the German version he had no scottish accent ^^
Concerning Gorgo - it doesn't mean that she has done a bad job, just because her character isn't sympathic - however I agree that the subplot was useless and I think the scene in teh Spartan council was the most embarassing of the whole movie...
But in the comic the Spartans also don't keep their phalanx
And concerning the nu-metal riffs - i think they perfectly fit. ;)
Btw - I think there are very few scenes in the movie that lack special effects sicne almost everything was created with the PC. But I agree that some simply looked ridiculous - such as the flying head of the beheaded Persian general, though this was taken 1:1 from the comic...

PS

Quote:

---

Certainly, if someone thinks nu-metal has any merit in a movie depicting an ancient battle or that including the "wailing woman" that has somehow become prerequisite for all sword n' sandal movies since Gladiator, then so be it. That doesn't change it from being tacky and unoriginal respectively.

---

First of all - I think that this movie hasn't all to mutch in common with the real battle at the termopylae - I wouldn't call it "depicting an ancient battle" but "loosely based on an ancient battle". It is fast action movie - not a monumental thing like lord of the rings. It's style is exaggeration and it uses lots of SFX. It doesn't tell an epic story - it focuses on combat...
What kind of music would you have prefered? These standart orchestral sounds during the complete movie? I think something harder (like nu-metal) fits better...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

*groan*
That there, sir, is not only a fine example of swallowing propaganda hook line and sinker, but also of far too loosely used terminology.

---

Indeed. :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miles Sueborum

I'm certeinly not pro Iranian - and I guess few others here are. However that doesn't mean that we are pro USA or pro war on terror...

---

Not pro war on terror?!?!