[blessingx]

I'm not sure I buy all of it, but since other reviews have been posted, and the film is obviously quite popular here, I thought some might be interested in this review. Even if you disagree, actually even if it's wrong, it's interesting placed in this proposed historical and cinematic context and from the other perspective. Found on GreenCine.

 

[lmilhan]

Thanks for the link.

But I am going to have to be honest here...

I don't know if it is because it is too early, and I didn't yet consume my morning carb and caffine boost, but after the 2nd paragraph my eyes began to cross out of sheer boredom over the nonsense I was reading. And it isn't because I am not intellectually capable of comprehending what the author is trying to convey - not by a long shot.

I suppose a dissertation based on a movie based on a comic book adaptation that is very loosely based on something that might have happened many moons ago, and trying to make comparisons with war/politics that are currently going on in today's world may be interesting to some, but it is lost on me.

I seriously doubt that Frank Miller meant for '300' to be a history lesson, and to be taken so seriously. I think '300' is meant to be taken as a 'switch your brain off' and watch kind of movie. If I wanted an accurate history lesson, I would watch a movie that actually claims to be historically accurate, or watch a program on the history channel, or read a history book, or go and see the 'King Tut' exhibit that is currently on display in Philadelphia (which I just did last weekend - highly recommended). If I wanted to get myself all depressed over what is currently going on in the world, I would just turn on the evening news, or pick up a local newspaper, or just stop and take a look around.

If I want to watch a movie that is pure CGI eye candy, where 'under dog' warrior heroes dismember hoards of enemies in beautifully choreographed matrix-like slow motion action shots, with buckets of blood, limbs and heads flying in every direction while a heavy metal soundtrack blasts through the theater speakers, then I go and watch a movie like '300'. After which I blast 'Manowar' through my PS-1s, as I chug a frosted mug of my favorite beer.

I am sure there will be some fans (or anti-fans) of '300' who will want to dig for a deeper fabricated meaning than what was intended by the director/writer, but I certainly am not one of them.

I took '300' for what it was, just another 'popcorn' flick cranked out of Hollywood that is light on story, and heavy on CGI, violence and action. A movie that is just trying to stay afloat atop the constant cesspool of other movies that are constantly being crapped out of Hollywood's bowels. Approaching it with those expectations, I must admit that I enjoyed it. I felt it was one of those movies that entertained me well enough to think that it was worth the matinee price, and decent enough 'filler' to hold me over until another 'filler' comes out, or an exceptional movie is released (very rare these days).

For those who actually make it all the way through that article and find it interesting: I will indeed keep an eye on this thread to see if some interesting debates and or discussions develop. And I will also be keeping an eye out for the 'cliffs notes' version of that article. Which I suspect that once revealed will get this thread locked down faster than one can say 'Bush is evil!'

 

[Redo]

The guy needs to lighten up a bit, he must have been really angry at many things when writing this article.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmilhan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the link. But I am going to have to be honest here... I don't know if it is because it is too early, and I didn't yet consume my morning carb and caffine boost, but after the 2nd paragraph my eyes began to cross out of sheer boredom over the nonsense I was reading. And it isn't because I am not intellectually capable of comprehending what the author is trying to convey - not by a long shot...

I appreciate your modest response.

Following the 300 popularity (both before release and after here), I certainly find it interesting its largest supporters are quick to buffer it against any context. Almost making it critical proof except the lesser light technical discussions. This is a sure sign of weakness in my book, but lets take a more superficial example. Surely no one looks for historical accuracy in National Treasure, yet still for it to succeed, or very least be enhanced, some audience pre-conceived notions help, no? If there's a belief, however subconsciously, in the importance and possibly uniqueness of the American Revolution its cause is helped. The ramifications of the action are greater. Maybe not more than that, but at least that. At least for some audiences. Arguably, the core of its chase is the New World protecting the Old (either for the New Worlds survival or the Olds secrets). 300 may boil down to the expectation of a severe underdog and the overwhelming importance of a battle. Why not look at the creation of that story or possible myth and how its viewed from the other side? Coupled with a hard to believe coincidence of it being conceived for the screen and released during a war at least slightly related (in many American and potentially elsewhere minds - independent to actual relation) to one side of said battle, why not look at the tradition and popularity of the story? You may feel 24 is popular on television because it’s a great action show, but many suspect there are at least a few other variables at play with its popularity now.

And if I can make one small request, please spend at least as much time reading the review as typing a response.

 

[Vicomte]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif And if I can make one small request, please spend at least as much time reading the review as typing a response.

Done.

 

[xnothingpoetic]

300 was a mediocre film at best.

 

[humanflyz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif I appreciate your modest response. Following the 300 popularity (both before release and after here), I certainly find it interesting its largest supporters are quick to buffer it against any context. Almost making it critical proof except the lesser light technical discussions. This is a sure sign of weakness in my book, but lets take a more superficial example. Surely no one looks for historical accuracy in National Treasure, yet still for it to succeed, or very least be enhanced, some audience pre-conceived notions help, no? If there's a belief, however subconsciously, in the importance and possibly uniqueness of the American Revolution its cause is helped. The ramifications of the action are greater. Maybe not more than that, but at least that. At least for some audiences. Arguably, the core of its chase is the New World protecting the Old (either for the New Worlds survival or the Olds secrets). 300 may boil down to the expectation of a severe underdog and the overwhelming importance of a battle. Why not look at the creation of that story or possible myth and how its viewed from the other side? Coupled with a hard to believe coincidence of it being conceived for the screen and released during a war at least slightly related (in many American and potentially elsewhere minds - independent to actual relation) to one side of said battle, why not look at the tradition and popularity of the story? You may feel 24 is popular on television because it’s a great action show, but many suspect there are at least a few other variables at play with its popularity now. And if I can make one small request, please spend at least as much time reading the review as typing a response.

Sure, audience pre-conceptions and a broader collective psyche no doubt help or hinder the popularity of something, but I think that the author of that article goes too far in claiming that this is somehow representative or true of America as a whole.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or an academic to see some kind of Euro/western-centrism in 300, but to say that it's true of every American who have watched and possibly enjoyed the movie is kind of over-reaching don't you think?

I didn't go watch 300 because I have been subconsciously influenced by the myth of the Battle of Thermopylae as standing in for a sense of western superiority. I watched the movie because I had nothing better to do on that particular Saturday night.

Conversely, I didn't like 300 not because of its alleged Euro-centric message but because the movie didn't measure up to the standards set by other good movies. I like Birth of A Nation and Triumph of the Will not because they endorse the values that I endorse, but because they are just good movies on a technical level, loosely defined by cinematic studies.

Personally I'm slightly offended that the author of the article thinks that every American who has watched 300 and liked it must be somehow subconsciously giving into his inner sense of Western superiority that has been nurtured by the myth of the Battle of Thermopylae.

Maybe he was just trying to make it a point, but he exaggerates too much: give Americans more credit. It is in fact possible to recognize that the movie takes (whether explicitly or implicitly, intentionally or inadvertently) a pro-Western stance while still enjoying it or not enjoying it on other levels. Not all of us Americans are jingoistic, chauvinist nationalists who want think of the Middle East as our sworn enemies.

 

[warrior05]

I won't critique the review because I honestly stopped after the first paragraph.

I see no problem with a movie that is born from a storied event (whether factual or perceived as such) and is created with a HEAVY dose of artistic license. I watched some of the added features of the DVD and Frank Miller said himself, "No one has accused me of being a realist." I think movies like 300 are given far too much credit in regards to historical relevance. I watch movies like this purely for escapist entertainment. Though it may inspire me to do a bit of research to gain a more realistic perspective on what is being presented. The marketing of this movie has been geared more towards an adaptation of Miller's graphic novel than the "true story" of the Battle of Thermopylae.

 

[virometal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redo /img/forum/go_quote.gif The guy needs to lighten up a bit,

or attend 28 Days later. That will make him feel better. As an American, I see a-lot more negative comment than positive about our culture in populist cinema. Maybe it's justified, but leave it to paid by the word professors to extrapolate an obvious point with so much filler.

300 is a John Wayne movie. Mr. Dabashi doesn't have to worry. The Native Americans have guns too, and the world's going free market. I look forward to his I told you so essay fifty years from now after the Sun has set in the West.

 

[larryminator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warrior05 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I won't critique the review because I honestly stopped after the first paragraph. I see no problem with a movie that is born from a storied event (whether factual or perceived as such) and is created with a HEAVY dose of artistic license. I watched some of the added features of the DVD and Frank Miller said himself, "No one has accused me of being a realist." I think movies like 300 are given far too much credit in regards to historical relevance. I watch movies like this purely for escapist entertainment. Though it may inspire me to do a bit of research to gain a more realistic perspective on what is being presented. The marketing of this movie has been geared more towards an adaptation of Miller's graphic novel than the "true story" of the Battle of Thermopylae.

There you go. People sometime forget that the purpose of movie of this kind is firstly to procure FUN, not a lesson of history. Every movie can be interpreted, analysed, criticized, but this is just giberish. Hey it's a movie, an entertainment. I think this review is going too far in generalizing the point of view of western superiority.

When I watch that kind of movie, I shut my brain off and enjoy the show. I don't think about the Battle of Thermopylae, I'm watching a movie and following the story of the movie. Yes it is violent, yes the guys are bodybuilders, so what? They are not the typical american bodies, but does that affect me? I'm not thinking about it.

I just watched it yesterday and I love this movie. There's an unbeliable poesy in this movie that's I've never seen in any other movie (it reminds me a little of Sin City). The wind effect, the combat effect, the angles of camera, the costumes, the way the story is told. It is in fact a masterpiece if you ask me. The story is simple, but the way it is film is just unbelievable.

 

[blessingx]

Here's a different take:
Kung Fu Monkey's 300 and Viewpoints.

 

[humanflyz]

@blessingx:

You give us various interesting perspectives but have yet to give us YOUR own take. What gives?

 

[saboteur1]

My take:

300, at its core, is a bunch of half naked men having swordfights.

 

[warrior05]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here's a different take: Kung Fu Monkey's 300 and Viewpoints.

Personally, I think people like Kung Fu Monkey are just looking to be controversial for the sake of a sense of self worth.

 

[Illah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmilhan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the link. But I am going to have to be honest here... I don't know if it is because it is too early, and I didn't yet consume my morning carb and caffine boost, but after the 2nd paragraph my eyes began to cross out of sheer boredom over the nonsense I was reading...

I agree, the guy started going off on a thesaurus-fueled rant whereby he assumes more description equals more impact. Boil that essay down!

The core of the statement:

300 is a historically inaccurate, machismo, perhaps even homo-erotic film that is dismissive of other cultures and glorifies Western superiority as well as warfare and violence.

And I feel the same way. IIt's such a cheeseball Hollywood film aimed at teh Internets and jocks who believe that Grecians lifted loads of weights, slimmed down to 8% bodyfat, and believe that bare chests and ripped abs are superior to body armor when you're outnumbered 1000:1.

It's just seems so ridiculous. It's like visual candy similar to **** in the sense that you just stare and get some carnal thrill rather than an emotional or intellectual stimulus.

The evidence is in what most people remember about the film:

1. Great effects.
2. Great battles.
3. SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

--Illah