The Deer Hunter
Member
What else can you ask for?
300 Movie
- Thread starter C-grunt
- Start date
- Status
What else can you ask for?
silverlance
Member
sorry guys, I have to side with Zorg and Willbrink.
The movie a mythos - a glorious story built around a small but important grain of truth.
The battle was intense, the women were quite alluring (especially the oracle), and all the cool lines from the "shield" comment to the "here we lie" epitaph were there.
That said -
The myth suffered from an irrepressible need to spout the word "we fight for freedom! FREEDOM!" at every corner. The attempt to either support or capitalize upon the war in Iraq was simply far too thinly veiled.
To say that Spartans believed in "freedom" is about as laughable as the idea of professional soldiers being heavily muscled, oiled, and hairless. The legends of battle were built upon not the backs of the studly, but the scrawny and wiry.
The movie a mythos - a glorious story built around a small but important grain of truth.
The battle was intense, the women were quite alluring (especially the oracle), and all the cool lines from the "shield" comment to the "here we lie" epitaph were there.
That said -
The myth suffered from an irrepressible need to spout the word "we fight for freedom! FREEDOM!" at every corner. The attempt to either support or capitalize upon the war in Iraq was simply far too thinly veiled.
To say that Spartans believed in "freedom" is about as laughable as the idea of professional soldiers being heavily muscled, oiled, and hairless. The legends of battle were built upon not the backs of the studly, but the scrawny and wiry.
Outlaws
Member
Multiple positions. Oh wait, they did that.
Cesiumsponge
Member
The ENTIRE movie was shot with a bluescreen, the same way Sin City was filmed. The CGI wolf wasn't meant to look realistic, nor was the rhino, elephants, or monsters. The Persian army's wardrobe wasn't realistic or factual either. All of it was purposely gritty and surreal, probably much in the same way traditional oral storytelling has a tendancy to embellish the truth.
People seem to forget this is an interpretation of the Frank Miller interpretation of the interpretations of historical accounts of the event so it's not remotely true to source material.
"Fictionalize" ie false.
"make sh*t up" ie false.
I still don't get why people expect a factual documentary when going to watch a piece of entertainment. This film doesn't even remotely claim "based on a true story" or "inspired by a true story" so it doesn't even so much as insinuate it was going to be remotely factual.
Also the entire "Bush propaganda" thing applying to every modern movie is getting pretty fricken old. Astronaut Farmer is about Bush wanting to build Moon bases. Brokeback Mountain is about Bush and gays. Cars is about Bush and the war on oil.
longeyes
member
300 took liberties--but it is STILL about liberty. And for that reason alone was worth making. Over the top and surreal? Yes, but it still dramatizes an ideal of selfless honor and courage. And for that reason alone was worth making.
False to history? Perhaps so.
But excitingly true to the mythic essence of the event. And that is what drama is all about.
False to history? Perhaps so.
But excitingly true to the mythic essence of the event. And that is what drama is all about.
This movie had a poignant message that could benifit all. It would be more consumable by all if not or the nudity. I am not personally offended, but it is now a flick I cannot show my kids. That being said, I loved it.
The director said that this movie was not intended as an analog of the current conflict. This movies message is timeless, even if its syle isn't.
From an artistic standpoint, I noticed that the individuals were a visual personification of their inner self. IE the incestuous old guys being covered with boils, the spartans being perfectly fit and trim, the traitor being horribly disfigured. It worked for me. I have been quoting the speeches for some time, so now maybe they will have more meaning for some. This movie took the message to the masses. A spoonful of violence helps the message go down.
The director said that this movie was not intended as an analog of the current conflict. This movies message is timeless, even if its syle isn't.
From an artistic standpoint, I noticed that the individuals were a visual personification of their inner self. IE the incestuous old guys being covered with boils, the spartans being perfectly fit and trim, the traitor being horribly disfigured. It worked for me. I have been quoting the speeches for some time, so now maybe they will have more meaning for some. This movie took the message to the masses. A spoonful of violence helps the message go down.
SnWnMe
Member
Once more for possible penetration.
It's based on a comic book which is based on the author's fanciful take on Herodotus' story.
It's based on a comic book which is based on the author's fanciful take on Herodotus' story.
300 was a fantastic movie. My friend didn't care for the stylized genre, and I would have preferred they back down on the monsters just one notch, but otherwise, it was a killer action flick (no pun intended.) Last night when I saw it, the entire audience lit up in applause at the end.
It's a shame some people think everything has to be a documentary. Oh well, I enjoyed the heck out of it.
It's a shame some people think everything has to be a documentary. Oh well, I enjoyed the heck out of it.
Outlaws
Member
The only place there was serious applause when I saw it last night was when the queen stabbed whats his name in the gut. That and when the credits started there were a few claps.
I walked out of the film marveling at how history repeats itself.
Twenty-five centuries ago Western civilization was threatened by Persian aggression.
Today Western civilization is threatened by Persian aggression.
Back then a small band a men fought and died to buy enough time for the rest of the local democracies to wake up and mobilize themselves.
Will we wake up in time?
It always seems to come down to a thin red line of heroes.
Iran and nuclear weapons, what could possibly go wrong?
Twenty-five centuries ago Western civilization was threatened by Persian aggression.
Today Western civilization is threatened by Persian aggression.
Back then a small band a men fought and died to buy enough time for the rest of the local democracies to wake up and mobilize themselves.
Will we wake up in time?
It always seems to come down to a thin red line of heroes.
Iran and nuclear weapons, what could possibly go wrong?
CountGlockula
Member
Think our all troops should get a chance to watch 300. It really brings patriotism, purpose and a rally cry to fight!
Brian Dale
Member
Anybody know when the DVD's scheduled to come out? I imagine it'd be enjoyed; good movie to buy and send to them!
Yes, but. . . .
The film, which I loved, really pre-dates the Iraqi conflict by a few years. No, not all the way back to 480 BC.
This was a 5 book series released in 1998 - well before our current engagement in Iraq. The language about fighting as free men, for justice, law, etc. all come from the original graphic novel. I just checked - I have the re-release in hardcover right here. The line "freedom isn't free", which was in the film, was not in the book - but it follows Miller's theme. The film is pretty faithful to the book, both visually and in the dialogue. Like Sin City, the film is to a great extent a shot by shot adaptation of the graphic novel. So, Spartans as free men is a theme that runs through Miller's comic book, director Zack Snyder's movie, as well as Steven Pressfield's 1988 novel about Thermopylae, "Gates of Fire". And the Richard Egan film "The 300 Spartans". Egan , of course , played Leonidas, and in 1962, critics read it as a commentary on the Russian-American Cold War, with the Spartans fighting for freedom against the totalitarian Persians invading from the East. The film has opened strongly here in the US, but in Europe audiences seem to have drawn the Bush - Iraq picture, and are critical.
The truth and history are both complicated. The Spartan culture and economy, as well as that of the other Greek city-states, was based upon a labor force of slaves. Modern scholars acknowledge that Sparta's "freedoms" fed off the enslavement of its immediate neighbors and on its huge population of helot slaves. They did all the work in the militarized city-state. In fact, it was slave labor that allowed the Spartan male citizen to train and act as a full time military professional. The widespread use of slaves shows that the Greek concept of freedom was limited only to a select group. Herodotus spoke pretty well of the Persians and by the accounts of scholars the Persian empire was a fairly benevolent one. And Xerxes cannot possibly have been as, uh. . . . gay as portrayed in 300*. So, it is easy to mock the comic’s, and film’s, portrayal of Spartans saluting justice, law and freedom. But the truth is also that the Greek city-states were the first in the world to experiment with a truly radical new form of government - democracy. Had the Persians conquered them, those ideas, and the rest of Greek culture that forms the bedrock of what we call “Western civilization”, would not have survived to become, among other things, a constitutional republic like the United States.
* I mean, couldn't you describe 300 as Following a vigorous night of really heterosexual sex with his beautiful queen Gorgo, King Leonidas and his disciplined, ascetic Spartan gym rats, sneering at the Athenian “boy-lovers”, set forth in short leather shorts and capes to battle the multiracial sybarites of the Persian empire, led by a ten foot tall, heavily pierced Xerxes who seems to be channeling Grace Jones and hosts parties where people are smoking who knows what out of pipes and women are kissing each other!
The film, which I loved, really pre-dates the Iraqi conflict by a few years. No, not all the way back to 480 BC.
This was a 5 book series released in 1998 - well before our current engagement in Iraq. The language about fighting as free men, for justice, law, etc. all come from the original graphic novel. I just checked - I have the re-release in hardcover right here. The line "freedom isn't free", which was in the film, was not in the book - but it follows Miller's theme. The film is pretty faithful to the book, both visually and in the dialogue. Like Sin City, the film is to a great extent a shot by shot adaptation of the graphic novel. So, Spartans as free men is a theme that runs through Miller's comic book, director Zack Snyder's movie, as well as Steven Pressfield's 1988 novel about Thermopylae, "Gates of Fire". And the Richard Egan film "The 300 Spartans". Egan , of course , played Leonidas, and in 1962, critics read it as a commentary on the Russian-American Cold War, with the Spartans fighting for freedom against the totalitarian Persians invading from the East. The film has opened strongly here in the US, but in Europe audiences seem to have drawn the Bush - Iraq picture, and are critical.
The truth and history are both complicated. The Spartan culture and economy, as well as that of the other Greek city-states, was based upon a labor force of slaves. Modern scholars acknowledge that Sparta's "freedoms" fed off the enslavement of its immediate neighbors and on its huge population of helot slaves. They did all the work in the militarized city-state. In fact, it was slave labor that allowed the Spartan male citizen to train and act as a full time military professional. The widespread use of slaves shows that the Greek concept of freedom was limited only to a select group. Herodotus spoke pretty well of the Persians and by the accounts of scholars the Persian empire was a fairly benevolent one. And Xerxes cannot possibly have been as, uh. . . . gay as portrayed in 300*. So, it is easy to mock the comic’s, and film’s, portrayal of Spartans saluting justice, law and freedom. But the truth is also that the Greek city-states were the first in the world to experiment with a truly radical new form of government - democracy. Had the Persians conquered them, those ideas, and the rest of Greek culture that forms the bedrock of what we call “Western civilization”, would not have survived to become, among other things, a constitutional republic like the United States.
* I mean, couldn't you describe 300 as Following a vigorous night of really heterosexual sex with his beautiful queen Gorgo, King Leonidas and his disciplined, ascetic Spartan gym rats, sneering at the Athenian “boy-lovers”, set forth in short leather shorts and capes to battle the multiracial sybarites of the Persian empire, led by a ten foot tall, heavily pierced Xerxes who seems to be channeling Grace Jones and hosts parties where people are smoking who knows what out of pipes and women are kissing each other!
Bazooka Joe71
Member
Just got back from the theatre, and all I can say is wow...That was incredible...It took machoism to a whole new level.
That was the book "The Alphabet of Manliness" in movie form.
I was only worried for a split second when Leonidas chucked his spear at Xerxes; if that would have connected and killed him, that may have been a bit too big of a stretch.
Absolutely fantastic movie...The best I've seen in quite a while.
That was the book "The Alphabet of Manliness" in movie form.
I was only worried for a split second when Leonidas chucked his spear at Xerxes; if that would have connected and killed him, that may have been a bit too big of a stretch.
Absolutely fantastic movie...The best I've seen in quite a while.
zero_chances
Member
I wanna see it, but i have no money
With regard to the "historical accuracy" of the movie, I wondered what Bettany Hughes (the British historian whose documentary on Sparta shows up on PBS from time) thought. Apparently, the director showed her the opening, and it got her seal of approval:
I think her comment is right on the mark. The movie is the modern equivalent of a campfire story about the battle. Very enjoyable.
I can't be emotional with what I feel about the Spartans because I'm trying to give historical reference. But you, what you've made, feels like it was made by Spartans.'
I think her comment is right on the mark. The movie is the modern equivalent of a campfire story about the battle. Very enjoyable.
telomerase
Member
At the time, people didn't think his monster stories were too unbelievable. But even Herodotus drew the line at believing that the Sun was in the North when the Phoenicians circumnavigated Africa
JJE
Member
Just saw it on the IMAX screen. Unfortunately, I had to see it with my annoying cousin-in-law, but it was still GREAT. Last IMAX movie I saw was V for Vendetta, which I just bought on DVD. I'm sure my tiny DVD library will include a copy of "300" in a few months.
Brian Dale
Member
Thanks for the insight and the link, Beau93,
and Welcome to The High Road!
and Welcome to The High Road!
dave_pro2a
Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
- Messages
- 447
Quote Zoogster: " It was expected that men be active pedophiles and mentors of a boy as it was believed to help create a stronger positive influance."
Well, the above comment by Zoogster means I'm free to discount his opinions about this movie -- because it shows his IGNORANCE on the topic.
I mean really, you do not know the various meanings and implications of "eros, philia, and agape." Go study some history and get back to us.
Greeks would not tolerate pedophila or homosexuality as we currently define those activities. Comparing what they did do, to our modern standards, is like comparing apples and oranges.
In fact, if a person displayed what we'd consider 'homosexual' traits, then they would have probably been oscterzied from the community. A man simply had to marry and have children to be considered a man, that was part of his natural purpose in life (both to his own nature, and to society).
Well, the above comment by Zoogster means I'm free to discount his opinions about this movie -- because it shows his IGNORANCE on the topic.
I mean really, you do not know the various meanings and implications of "eros, philia, and agape." Go study some history and get back to us.
Greeks would not tolerate pedophila or homosexuality as we currently define those activities. Comparing what they did do, to our modern standards, is like comparing apples and oranges.
In fact, if a person displayed what we'd consider 'homosexual' traits, then they would have probably been oscterzied from the community. A man simply had to marry and have children to be considered a man, that was part of his natural purpose in life (both to his own nature, and to society).
- Status
Similar threads
