first of all... GREETINGS TO EVERYONE FROM BERLIN FILM FESTIVAL Well... the most foolish thing one can do is to take this film seriously. Whoever wants to learn history should opt for a library. And I don't care if a flim is accurate or not. I want to see a good film. After all, the film does not claim to be historically precise: Its an adaptation of the homonym Frank Miller comic - Zakk Snider declared that the martial style the Spartans is of his own invention, because it looked "cool". No problem! Spectacle sells the film, and spectacle it offers. Generously. Replicating the same pallet that we meet in the pages of the prototype, 300 is a film that "traps" you optically. The battles are mesmerising, the colours intense, the violence gloryfied. Two things though: First of all, the film speaks English. Only that the Spartans speak with a british accent, and the Persians with an american one. Draw your own conclusions from that. Secondly, and more importanly, the film cannot hide its fascist roots. I am a Greek, but I was very annoyed by the portrayal of the Persians as anthropomorphous beasts, absolute culture-less. Some could argue that the comic was like that too. Maybe so, but comics are one-dimensional by nature. Films should take the power of image with much more responsibility. The Greeks are not so much supporters of Culture but of the Law (with capital L). And the film sees everything from their point of view, like as if it's saying, one culture is better than the other. Make now this small change: Instead of Sparta, place Berlin: English, Russian, Americans are ready to battle with 300 nazis who decide to die in glory... Yestarday I saw Letters From Iwo-Jima. Now there is some real greatness... from a man who even fought at that battle!
Leaving any cultural or political influence aside, is the film entertaining? How does it compare to the other recent Frank Miller adaptation Sin City? How does Zack Snyder's direction compare to his previous film, the Dawn of the Dead remake? Is the acting as hammy as the trailer suggests? Is it true that people were booing the film at the festival?
good word usage:banana: I'll definetly see this but I'm not expecting historical accuracy....just a decent adaptation of a Frank Miller story.
In regards to "responsibility" in film, I disagree whole-heartedly. It would be selling the product short big time. No one wants to see someone's imagination filtered through a politically correct standard. At least I don't. Meanwhile, it's funny you compared the Spartans to Nazis. How many time have Nazis been portrayed with the same lack of dimension as you pointed out in the Persians? Only with Nazis they're mindless raving facists who wear monicles. If you think you're going to be influensed negatively because a movie depicted a certain culture inaccurately, stop watching movies.
Well, the Persians were one of the most culturally and artistically gifted peoples of antiquity. It's unfortunate that the opressive nature of Islam took over.
I know, I was thinking the same thing!! Yeah, I know. Islam has caused more problems in the world than any other religion, movement, etc. It is too bad we can't rid the world of it!
They planned the whole thing. Duh. Seriously, shouldn't this kind of prejudicial bullshit be kept in Off-Topic? Personally, I would like to hear more of what Chaostar, or anyone else for that matter, has to say about the film.
I thought the same thing, but at the rate they are going is it really that far off? Cant wait to see 300, looks amazing.
Ya... and Muslim Extremists did all of that... key word there... "Extremists"... most muslims are actually ok... but punched in american propaganda won't change that... for some people... sad really...
I thought the same thing..lol. I still want to see this because it's Frank Miller's ideas and I thought Sin City was pretty damn sweet.
Oh geez, please. Rip on "punched in american propaganda"? From what?? Where? Do you know how divided our congress is? Come on, you have to know there are as many far left liberals here as there are extreme 'muslim hating neo-cons' here. Our media goes to great pains to not bash muslims, and even our government does the same. Didn't you hear about that one town, I think in Michigan, that allowed this mosque there to use loudspeakers over the neighborhood for their call to prayer? We're talking at five in the freaking morning here, yet we still allow it out of cultural diversity awareness? And yet, we still get a bad rap for 'american propaganda'? Again, from where?? Give us, the U.S. of A., that is, a fucking break already. You want to condemn fascist, evil, baby eating neo-cons, fine, but to just make a blanket statement about 'america' in general like that? No wonder some of us 'americans' badmouth you Canadians. -grumble grumble- Anyway, back on topic... Well, I'd actually make the argument that perhaps, and especially since the movie (and yes, the comic) is from the Spartan point of view, that that is how the Spartans saw the Persians. I've yet to see the movie, but just from what you've said, and what I know of the historical events, I think it's quite 'correct' to portray the Persians as the Spartans would have seen them, not how they realistically were. I mean, back then, did the Spartans understand the Persians as one of the "most culturally and artistically gifted peoples of antiquity" as Rockmjd describes them? I think it's quite possible that they did not. And what with the overwhelming numbers that they marched with and the fear and awe that created, it's easy to see how a people could come to look upon them as monstrous.
Ok. First of all, Shannafey, take notice that the Persians speak with american accent as I've stated before. This is an interesting political element. Second, I confess to have a problem with the ethics of the image in cinema. 300 is a very entertaining film, even if the battles become monotonous after the first hour. But when a film looks everything from the Spartan prespective, it becomes a gloryfication of war and nothing more. And this for me is sad and dangerous. Especially these days. I actually had a very interesting chat with Sarrah Polley just now and she told me some very WEIRD stories from the shooting of Dawn Of The Dead. That Snyder guy seams like a real basket case and he really pushed his extreme right-winged agenda with 300. I must say that when I talk about the Ethics of the Image I am concerned with something that is more important that just politics. A film like Fahrenheit 9/11 is also guilty of doing that, for the opposite side of things. Yes, politically I am attached to the left, but that does not mean that if the Cause is "the right one" we should not pay attention to the Means. And because I feel that nothing has more power in this world than The Image, I demand responsibility from the ones who are handling and contructing it. Don't take it the old fashined way. Someone mentioned POLITICALLY CORRECT. IT IS NOT ABOUT THAT AT ALL. For example, SALO is a very responsible film in what it says and how it is contructed. It is not shocking for the sake of it, it has a deep point to make about the nature of the world but also about the human nature as well. So does HENRY or CLEAN SHAVEN. But if a film used the same images just for the sake of it then there would be a problem. MURDER SET PIECES is a good example of the cinema I hate with a passion. It is irresponsible to the 9th degree. So is 300. It shouldn't matter what you vote. When someone tries to oppress you and oppose you by manipulating The Image, you should react. That's what I think. Of course, you go back in film history and you see propaganda masterpieces from both sides. POTEMKIN.... TRIUMPH OF WILL.... But these are just ecseptions to the rule. And Leni and Eisenstein were geniuses. Snider is not.... BUT if you don't care about all this theorotical mumbo-jumbo of mine, you will have a great time with the film. :fire: :fire: ***film critics... don't you just hate them??? :fucked:
