300

[The Anarchist Prince]

Anyone else looking forward to it? It's based on Frank Miller's Graphic Novel, and got a 10/10 on IGN (IGN sucks ass at reviews though) I'm seeing it opening day.

[Pow R. Toc H.]

It looks cool. Thats what will draw most people to it. The plot and storyline could make no sense and suck alot of ass, but it'll still make alot of money because of how it appears. Yeah, I guess I'll probably go see it.

Im more excited about Grindhouse coming out.

[The Anarchist Prince]

Eh, it's "based" on a true story. Although no details from the battle are actually 100% accurate. But it was King Leonidas's 300 Personal Bodyguards against 100's of thousands of Persians on the final day of the battle. If they develop the actual story of what led to the battle, the movie will be great.

[bcbm]

I wanna see it. Oh yeah.

[Guerrilla22]

I'm going to see it the first day it comes out.

[Red October]

when does it come out?

[Janus]

when does it come out?
March 9, 2007.

[Jesus Christ!]

I'm in the midst of reading the graphic novel and if the movie is half as good as the graphic novel it will be amazing. Possibly bump V for Vendetta off my favorite movie of all time spot?

[ahab]

my buddy who is obsessed with mythology said it looks like its going to be &#39;historically&#39; incorrect, although I dont understand how mythology is history <_< I still think it looks kickass, so im gonna see it

[Janus]

&#39;historically&#39; incorrect
Well, based on the trailer, they already have the figures wrong. Most modern estimates place the Persian army at around 200,000 rather than 1 million. Also, some of the Persian soldiers/characters look remarkably "orcish".

[The Anarchist Prince]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 02:25 am

&#39;historically&#39; incorrect
Well, based on the trailer, they already have the figures wrong. Most modern estimates place the Persian army at around 200,000 rather than 1 million. Also, some of the Persian soldiers/characters look remarkably "orcish".
It&#39;s based on a graphic novel that loosley follows the story of the Spartans. Anyway, I&#39;ve heard ranges of troops from 150,0000 to 1,500,000. Who knows?

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

Personally, I&#39;m miffed that they messed around with history in a big way (although even the original account did that this film just turns it into fantasy)

and of course we have to take into account the fact that it&#39;s amovie about a small amount of Europeans killing countless stereotyped Middle-Easterners. Seems a bit dodgy and pandering to current sentiment.

[Phalanx]

I&#39;m definately going to see it when it comes out. It looks great, and the music is awesome. It&#39;s not supposed to be accurate, either. Sin City wasn&#39;t realistic either, but it still was a great movie.

[Janus]

It&#39;s based on a graphic novel that loosley follows the story of the Spartans.
Yeah, I got that part.


Anyway, I&#39;ve heard ranges of troops from 150,0000 to 1,500,000. Who knows?
The 1 million+ is the number put forth by the ancient Greeks. Modern estimates have put it closer to 200,000 based on more rational and objective analysis of the factors and variables.

[Jesus Christ!]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 07:55 pm
and of course we have to take into account the fact that it&#39;s amovie about a small amount of Europeans killing countless stereotyped Middle-Easterners. Seems a bit dodgy and pandering to current sentiment.
yea my friend mad a joke about this saying, " well isn&#39;t the whole point that white people can easily out fight and kill massive amounts of dark people?"

[The Anarchist Prince]

Originally posted by Jesus Christ&#33;+February 18, 2007 12:09 am--> (Jesus Christ&#33; @ February 18, 2007 12:09 am)
[email protected] 17, 2007 07:55 pm
and of course we have to take into account the fact that it&#39;s amovie about a small amount of Europeans killing countless stereotyped Middle-Easterners. Seems a bit dodgy and pandering to current sentiment.
yea my friend mad a joke about this saying, " well isn&#39;t the whole point that white people can easily out fight and kill massive amounts of dark people?" [/b]
:mellow:


It&#39;s based off of history. I see little racial undertones in the movie itself. I know it doesn&#39;t exactly follow the true story, but honestly don&#39;t try to put it into a racial context or something.

[Andalou]

I&#39;ll keep the same stance I&#39;ve had for it since I first saw the trailer: Better a fun, innacurate epic than another Troy or Alexander.

[Plan9]

Sin City was overrated and Frank Miller is a well-known reactionary piece of crap. I&#39;m not adverse to movies with graphic over-the-top comic-book violence, but there must be some point to it, some clever dialogue or character development. 300 looks like all flash and no substance, which means it will probably do nothing except glorify violence and reinforce existing stereotypes (violence solves everything, women are helpless sex objects, men must be mindless brutes, etc). how any person who identifies himself with leftist progressive-thinking can support this trash is beyond me.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 07:25 am
Also, some of the Persian soldiers/characters look remarkably "orcish".
Really? fuck.

Ive allways rooted for the Persians over those snooty "civilized" greeks. Persian culture in general was allways more interesting, and they were nowhere near as cruel as mainstream history portrays them, remember, History is written by the victors, and in this case the victors were a bunch of Slave-owning, wife-beating, aristocratic, plutocratic men who enjoyed sex with young boys (while sex between two grown men was oddly enough a taboo).


At least Persia wins Thermopylae

[The Anarchist Prince]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 06:35 am
Sin City was overrated and Frank Miller is a well-known reactionary piece of crap. I&#39;m not adverse to movies with graphic over-the-top comic-book violence, but there must be some point to it, some clever dialogue or character development. 300 looks like all flash and no substance, which means it will probably do nothing except glorify violence and reinforce existing stereotypes (violence solves everything, women are helpless sex objects, men must be mindless brutes, etc). how any person who identifies himself with leftist progressive-thinking can support this trash is beyond me.
:mellow:


uhhhhhhh....opinions?

[chimx]

uhhhhhhh....opinions?

Yes: "lollerskates"

[Nachie]

I want to see this movie real bad, BUT also I heard that in order to make it, they had to cancel a film version of Stephen Pressfield&#39;s Gates of Fire, which is one of my all-time favorite books (maybe my all-time favorite book, period) and would have been a much more faithful and potentially interesting dramatization of events.

Frank Miller&#39;s looks pretty though, and definitely lends itself better to Hollywoodification. The part where Leonidas almost kills Xerxes is pure ridiculous comic bookery.

[The Anarchist Prince]

Do people understand this isn&#39;t based so much on the battle, but the graphic novel?

[Nachie]

I haven&#39;t read the whole thread, but if that question was in response to my post then the answer is "yes".

I would still prefer to see a film version of Gates of Fire rather than 300, though.

[Janus]

Really? fuck.
Based on the trailer yes. Some of the Persian characters have unpleasant features as opposed to the Greeks.

[Phalanx]

Ive allways rooted for the Persians over those snooty "civilized" greeks. Persian culture in general was allways more interesting, and they were nowhere near as cruel as mainstream history portrays them, remember, History is written by the victors, and in this case the victors were a bunch of Slave-owning, wife-beating, aristocratic, plutocratic men who enjoyed sex with young boys (while sex between two grown men was oddly enough a taboo).

Why? The Persians were bent on expanding their empire at the expense of millions of people. And who said Persians weren&#39;t wife-beating, slave-holding, aristocratic paedophiles? I&#39;m willing to bet a significant portion of the Persian royalty fit at least some of those catagories.

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 11:27 pm

Really? fuck.
Based on the trailer yes. Some of the Persian characters have unpleasant features as opposed to the Greeks.
Yup, the sort of vibe I got was about heroic greeks and savage Persians, or something along those lines. Also, I felt like the Persians were "othered" and the audience was supposed to identify with the Greeks- which is all too often how it is... (having the audience identify with the Europeans at the expense of the "others" whoever they may be)

But yeah- I was stoned at the time iirc...

[Janus]

Also, I felt like the Persians were "othered" and the audience was supposed to identify with the Greeks- which is all too often how it is... (having the audience identify with the Europeans at the expense of the "others" whoever they may be)
That&#39;s definitely one reason but I think it&#39;s also because movie producers love to glorify the underdogs: Spartacus, Gladiator,etc.

[SittingBull47]

Hell yes, it&#39;s fucking 300. you bet I&#39;ll be there with a dozen people opening night. Frank Miller is a genius, and there&#39;s a reason that battle went down in history.

People piss and moan about it looking "stupid", wherein they don&#39;t understand it&#39;s based off of Miller&#39;s graphic novel (which was near perfect).

[MiniOswald]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 11:35 am
Sin City was overrated and Frank Miller is a well-known reactionary piece of crap. I&#39;m not adverse to movies with graphic over-the-top comic-book violence, but there must be some point to it, some clever dialogue or character development. 300 looks like all flash and no substance, which means it will probably do nothing except glorify violence and reinforce existing stereotypes (violence solves everything, women are helpless sex objects, men must be mindless brutes, etc). how any person who identifies himself with leftist progressive-thinking can support this trash is beyond me.
Speaking of shit films, is your name taken from the ed wood film there?

[Rizzo]

the movie is loosely based on the battle of Thermompally(did I spell it right?) just by seeing the commercials however, it&#39;s clear that the story line has been warped into something the producers of the movie beleive will be more entertaining, which, apparently is more importent than historical accuracy. I feel that the real events are rather inspiring, so it kinda pisses me off that they would change it.

[Red October]

i just saw it. it was AMAZING. i dont really give a shit if it was historically accurate or not, it kicked ass. massive pwnage&#33;

[OneBrickOneVoice]

it wasn&#39;t that good. Just lots of action in slow-motion. I think the plot should have been developed better. I also think they should&#39;ve stayed in their little hut at the end.

[Clarksist]

That movie is so fucking entertaining. Not a "great" movie, but it will make you feel so badass after watching a two hour movie put together like a trailer.

[Phalanx]

I thought it was absolutely excellent. Beautiful to look at (awesome scenery art), special effects were great, absolutely nothing wrong with the writing, and the first clash really showed the terror being in a phalanx.

[Red October]

i&#39;ve heard of people *****ing about supposed racism towards the persians in 300, but thats total bullshit. its a mythologized account of the battle, hence the enemies they fight are mythologized as well.

[Ze]

In response to Red October, if it was &#39;mythologized&#39;, then why not have mixed ethnicities in the Spartans, remove the fact that they killed their own babies, and take out the bullshit about fighing for freedom? Style over substance, no thanks. Mortal Kombat is played out. From another forum I read:

"Did anyone else sense a bit of pro-war progandanda from watching this overhyped movie? The only things missing were "Support the troops" ribbons and "deploy more troops" bumper stickers on the back of the Spartans&#39; chariots."

[Phalanx]

In response to Red October, if it was &#39;mythologized&#39;, then why not have mixed ethnicities in the Spartans, remove the fact that they killed their own babies, and take out the bullshit about fighing for freedom? Style over substance, no thanks.

Because the Spartans weren&#39;t mixed ethnically. Persians were, as they had troops from all over their empire, from Nubia to Persia, and everything in between. And they did mention that they killed their own babies, in the start of the film. Did you even watch it?

[Ze]

Originally posted by Tatanka [email protected] 12, 2007 08:09 pm

In response to Red October, if it was &#39;mythologized&#39;, then why not have mixed ethnicities in the Spartans, remove the fact that they killed their own babies, and take out the bullshit about fighing for freedom? Style over substance, no thanks.

Because the Spartans weren&#39;t mixed ethnically. Persians were, as they had troops from all over their empire, from Nubia to Persia, and everything in between. And they did mention that they killed their own babies, in the start of the film. Did you even watch it?
You didnt answer my question at all. Reading comprehension must be a lost art, so you&#39;re calling out red october out on his bullshit?

[Rev29]

Tatanka Iyotank is right in what he said. Greece at this time was really the only free nation there was. Leonidas was the king, but really had no power. They were in sense fighting for freedom. Tho i doubt, if Persia took over Greece the Greeks would just lay down and take it. Im sure they would continued fighting.

[Phalanx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 03:34 pm
You didnt answer my question at all. Reading comprehension must be a lost art, so you&#39;re calling out red october out on his bullshit?
You&#39;re severely lacking in mytholigical knowledge, dumbass. The Persians were displayed how Greek mythology displayed them. It wasn&#39;t part of Greek mythology to deny that they killed their own babies or tell themselves that they were ethnically mixed.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 03:41 pm
Tatanka Iyotank is right in what he said. Greece at this time was really the only free nation there was. Leonidas was the king, but really had no power. They were in sense fighting for freedom. Tho i doubt, if Persia took over Greece the Greeks would just lay down and take it. Im sure they would continued fighting.
Get real, the Spartans were about as democratic as a slave plantation. Do you even know who the Helots were?

[Phalanx]

Tatanka Iyotank is right in what he said. Greece at this time was really the only free nation there was. Leonidas was the king, but really had no power. They were in sense fighting for freedom. Tho i doubt, if Persia took over Greece the Greeks would just lay down and take it. Im sure they would continued fighting.

No, Sparta wasn&#39;t democratic at all, I was just saying that the Persians were no better, because they had millions of slaves across their empire. Athens, however, was one of the most progressive areas of the ancient world. Yes, they did have a large underclass, but compared to the rest of the ancient world they were a shining example of human progress.

[Rev29]

And i didnt say they were democratic, i said they were free. Nor was i saying Sparta was the free nation, i meant Greece in general.

[Red October]

i the film doesnt skip over the unpleasant areas of spartan society. it shows how they killed babies and brutally brainwashed the boys in their society.

[Guerrilla22]

Yeah some of the rhetoric was a little ridiculous, but it was a very good film none the less.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by manic [email protected] 12, 2007 06:45 pm
Get real, the Spartans were about as democratic as a slave plantation. Do you even know who the Helots were?
Yeah, they were completely missing from the movie, and by assumption the Graphic Novel as well. They make it out as if 300 WWF-looking chiseled peices of Masculine Hegemony set out alone against the swarthy swarms of the East. Hmmm, something about tens of thousands of Helots serving the Spartiates seems to be missing.

Funny how they make a movie about Western Civilizations triumph over the evil unhuman Persians comes out at this particular moment in History.

I enjoyed the movie, but I am a fan of propaganda. This one reminded me of Alexander Nevsky in a way, seems to be about a completely seperate story, but if you look at the movie from a historical point of view (IE the release dates), a different meaning comes to mind.

[Phalanx]

Yeah, they were completely missing from the movie, and by assumption the Graphic Novel as well. They make it out as if 300 WWF-looking chiseled peices of Masculine Hegemony set out alone against the swarthy swarms of the East. Hmmm, something about tens of thousands of Helots serving the Spartiates seems to be missing.

Helots didn&#39;t fight at the Battle of Thermopylae. It was ridiculous that every Spartan looked like they were on roids, but it&#39;s not like the film was supposed to be accurate. Forget accuracy and judge it on if it was a good film or not.

[Blue Collar Bohemian]

This movie is racist, homophobic, and disgustingly pro-war.

[Ze]

which freedom to own slaves fighting, baby killing, fight-before-talking, white power spartan deleted my post in this thread?

anyways, video games get tired after awhile.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Tatanka [email protected] 13, 2007 03:00 pm
Helots didn&#39;t fight at the Battle of Thermopylae.
Did I say they fought? They accompanied the Spartiates and served them while they were campaigning, and without the Helots, the Spartiates would have died much faster than they did.

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 04:21 pm
which freedom to own slaves fighting, baby killing, fight-before-talking, white power spartan deleted my post in this thread?

anyways, video games get tired after awhile.
Some posts were lost in the past few days, so I don&#39;t think it was deliberate. It definitely wasn&#39;t me.

[Red October]

Originally posted by Blue Collar [email protected] 13, 2007 10:50 am
This movie is racist, homophobic, and disgustingly pro-war.
no, its mythology. appreciate it as an entertaining movie, not as a political tract.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

the trailer for it makes it seem awesome.

but, since its about 300 Spartans fighting 1 million plus enemy guys, the battle is going to be over really fast, and the rest of the film is going to be filler.

i imagine anyway.

[Red October]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 06:21 pm
the trailer for it makes it seem awesome.

but, since its about 300 Spartans fighting 1 million plus enemy guys, the battle is going to be over really fast, and the rest of the film is going to be filler.

i imagine anyway.
nope, there is still lots of battle. i wouldnt say it has much "filler" at all.

[Knight of Cydonia]

all i remember from this "battle of Thermopylae" (this movie is showing this battle isn&#39;t it? which is the battle of Spartan vs Persian) is the word "death to the last man" :D

[Red October]

Originally posted by knight of [email protected] 13, 2007 06:31 pm
all i remember from this "battle of Thermopylae" (this movie is showing this battle isn&#39;t it? which is the battle of Spartan vs Persian) is the word "death to the last man" :D
yep, its pretty much non-stop deathage until all the greeks are dead.

[FOREVER LEFT]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17599641/?GT1=9145

Iranians outraged over hit movie ‘300’
Blockbuster depicting Persian siege called an ‘obvious insult’


Updated: 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
TEHRAN, Iran - The hit American movie “300” has angered Iranians who say the Greeks-vs-Persians action flick insults their ancient culture and provokes animosity against Iran.

“Hollywood declares war on Iranians,” blared a headline in Tuesday’s edition of the independent Ayende-No newspaper.

The movie, which raked in &#036;70 million in its opening weekend, is based on a comic-book fantasy version of the battle of Thermopylae in 480 B.C., in which a force of 300 Spartans held off a massive Persian army at a mountain pass in Greece for three days.


Even some American reviewers noted the political overtones of the West-against-Iran story line — and the way Persians are depicted as decadent, sexually flamboyant and evil in contrast to the noble Greeks.

In Iran, the movie hasn’t opened and probably never will, given the government’s restrictions on Western films, though one paper said bootleg DVDs were already available.

Still, it touched a sensitive nerve. Javad Shamghadri, cultural adviser to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said the United States tries to “humiliate” Iran in order to reverse historical reality and “compensate for its wrongdoings in order to provoke American soldiers and warmongers” against Iran.

The movie comes at a time of increased tensions between the United States and Iran over the Persian nation’s nuclear program and the Iraq war.

But aside from politics, the film was seen as an attack on Persian history, a source of pride for Iranians across the political spectrum, including critics of the current Islamic regime.


Click for related content
Iran, U.S. back off from confrontation



State-run television has run several commentaries the past two days calling the film insulting and has brought on Iranian film directors to point out its historical inaccuracies.

“The film depicts Iranians as demons, without culture, feeling or humanity, who think of nothing except attacking other nations and killing people,” Ayende-No said in its article Tuesday.

“It is a new effort to slander the Iranian people and civilization before world public opinion at a time of increasing American threats against Iran,” it said.

Iran’s biggest circulation newspaper, Hamshahri, said “300” is “serving the policy of the U.S. leadership” and predicted it will “prompt a wave of protest in the world. ... Iranians living in the U.S. and Europe will not be indifferent about this obvious insult.”





© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[Phalanx]

In real life, the battle lasted three days-long enough for the Greeks to build up defenses on the isthmus of Corinth. The Athenians weren&#39;t so lucky and had their city burned to the ground.

Of course it&#39;s pro-war. Greece was facing destruction at the hands of the largest empire on earth at the time.

[Pow R. Toc H.]

This movie was fuckin kick ass. I dont get how it was homophobic or racist but it was definitely pro-war and pro-sparta.

I now take comments from the movie and use them in everyday life.

For example:

While Having Intercourse

MY SEMEN WILL BLOCK OUT THE SUN&#33;&#33;&#33;

than we shall fuck in the shade.

[Red October]

http://photos-023.ak.facebook.com/ip002/v66/16/57/503115348/n503115348_37023_1628.jpg

http://photos-089.ak.facebook.com/ip002/v67/159/11/1398781339/n1398781339_30442089_3966.jpg

http://photos-828.ak.facebook.com/ip002/v65/11/115/38315442/n38315442_31505828_2938.jpg

[Comrade J]

No idea if it&#39;s been posted and I can&#39;t be bothered to read the thread, but here&#39;s a link to the movie, just click play and off yer go&#33;

300 (http://makeyourmillionforfree.50megs.com/-/movies/300.html)

[Blue Collar Bohemian]

The movie is homophobic because the Spartans scoff at the Athenians and label them "Boy-Lovers" while in actuality the Spartans also participated in homosexual relationships of their own.

Its racists because we are forced to watch as 300 white skinned men slaughter wave upon wave of faceless brownskined men.

[Plan9]

I knew this was going to be another mediocre cgi-fest with tons of stupid Frank Miller dialogue, but lenin (http://leninology.blogspot.com) articulates the main point of contention very well:


Already the skies have been filled with such phrases as "gorgeous slaughter", "how fucking cool was that?", "best film ever", "Wholesale human slaughter never looked so pretty", "one-fifth history, four-fifths something that looks cool", "This movie is about the decapitations, severed limbs and blood splattering all over the screen. Yet, it works", "the movie&#39;s just too darned silly to withstand any ideological theorizing. And &#39;silly&#39; is invoked here, more or less, with affection".

Obviously, I pinched most of those phrases from the thumbs-up reviews at Rotten Tomatoes. Most sympathetic reviewers have focused on how "rousing" and electrifying the slaughter is, how beautiful the machismo is, how alluring and artful the genocide is. At the same time, those who are sensitive to the charge of revelling in celluloid fascism are keen to assure readers that there is nothing ideological involved. That would be dirty and crass agitprop, while this is fun. The slogan that accompanies the film&#39;s title is "Prepare for Glory". The glory happens to be the last stand of Spartan "free men" against an anachronistic race of tyrannical mystics, effete warriors, transexuals, biomorphically perverse midgets, black people, lesbians etc. All the characters are digitally enhanced in ways that permit the level of editorialising through physical forms that is usually only available to the cartoonist.

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2007/03/gor...-slaughter.html (http://leninology.blogspot.com/2007/03/gorgeous-slaughter.html)

[Simotix]

Originally posted by Blue Collar [email protected] 15, 2007 06:12 am
Its racists because we are forced to watch as 300 white skinned men slaughter wave upon wave of faceless brownskined men.
That was by far the most ignorant message I have ever read on this board. You are just trying to sound "hard" and anti-nazi. If you actually saw the movie, you would know that there was probably zero people with a skin head and it was about defending your country.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I haven&#39;t seen it an I don&#39;t want to see it. All of these historical epics banalize historical events. They says much more about Americans than about the ancient Greeks. If this is based on a graphic novel, the the graphic novel is probably crap too.

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by Simotix+March 25, 2007 03:08 am--> (Simotix @ March 25, 2007 03:08 am)
Blue Collar [email protected] 15, 2007 06:12 am
Its racists because we are forced to watch as 300 white skinned men slaughter wave upon wave of faceless brownskined men.
That was by far the most ignorant message I have ever read on this board. You are just trying to sound "hard" and anti-nazi. If you actually saw the movie, you would know that there was probably zero people with a skin head and it was about defending your country. [/b]
Err, nobody mentioned skinheads at all smartarse.

Also, since when is patriotism valued amongst the left?

[Abakua]

That film is two hours plus of a heavily accented scotsman shouting sparta and men falling over in slow motion.

What a bag of wank.

[Comrade J]

I&#39;m going to see it tonight with some friends

[Patchd]

Oh, it was fucking great&#33; Brilliant movie, I actually bothered paying to go see this one.

[Vargha Poralli]

Saw it. Expected so much after all these hypes. But much disappointing. :( . The movie is not up to the show that has been marketed.

[Hiero]

Here is a picture of a carving of Xerxes, or Darius as wikipedia has stated. Though it looks similar to pictures I have seen from my course portraying Darius or Xerxes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Tresury_relief.JPG

Here is Xerxes from the movie.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2f/300-_Leonidas_and_Xerxes_discuss_surrender.jpg

Looks like a cheap collection of Arab and African design, nothing like the real Xerxes.

Anyway the movie is based on the comic, the comic is obviously based on the Herodotus account. All of which are created for a eurocentric audience. I don&#39;t know why people are defending it from this criticism. Also I have seen a poster, are their elephants fighting in the movie?

I am going to see it this thursday at Imax.


And i didnt say they were democratic, i said they were free. Nor was i saying Sparta was the free nation, i meant Greece in general.

Free in what way?

Sparta and Athens were city state imperialist. The "nation" of Greece was divided into city states that were loyal to Athens or Sparta, and were under their control in alliance. These states were a collection of Monarchs, Tyrannies, oligarchies or Athenian democracies. If a state betrayed Sparta or Athens, they paid a heavy penalty, as was the case at Melos.

Greece was free in the sense, that most of the time it didn&#39;t come under "barbarian" occupation, untill Macedonia under Alexander and then Rome. However city states were often under the influence of Athens or Sparta. I think you are putting modern terms and ideas to an ancient time.

[seraphim]

Could it be any more camp? I mean really, could it? I think not.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 12:23 pm
Also I have seen a poster, are their elephants fighting in the movie?
Man...the elephants are among the most realistic parts of the persian army. They have blade-armed giants and the ghosty/ninja Immortals (which sucks, because i love the real Immortals). At one point they have this huge fucking Rhinocerous charging agains the chiselled white guys, and they say "Xerxes brought forth a terrible beast from the darkest corner of his empire"..............What the Christfuck? I believe this was a Kipling-esque bashing of Africa&#33;

[Lenin II]

It was a really good movie that came just short of being great. In this case, I mean it came short literally—the movie was too short&#33; It was missing a third act. It had two beginning act and an ending sequence, but there was no big climactic battle&#33; The ending made it seem anticlimactic. But whatever. Still a good movie, glad I saw it. I think the supposed “parallels” between the Persian war and the Iraq war are nonsense. In this case, Persia actually WAS a threat to Sparta and directly invaded with 1,000,000 troops, something that can hardly be compared to Iraq.

I don’t think it was racist. I mean, Stormfront people will eat up the white pride pro-euro stuff, but what do they know? Plus the movie made the Persians look incredibly powerful and impressive as well, not like savages as I expected it to. They just made it look like the Persians loved their face piercings.

Was it just me, or did a lot of the Persians look black? I thought they were supposed to be Middle Eastern. The “god,” the messenger who gets thrown down the hole, that guy with the bullwhip, the guy who showed up during the bribery scene—all of them were black. Is it really that hard to find Middle Eastern people, or were they just afraid that making Arab the enemy would seem too much like they were catering to recent anti-Muslim sentiments?

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Blue Collar [email protected] 13, 2007 03:50 pm
This movie is racist, homophobic, and disgustingly pro-war.
See my previous post about that. And as far as being pro-war, war is not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, technically a leftist revolution would be war. And I doubt that any movie that has an army of 300 chisled men walking around in leather speedos can be called anti-homosexual.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 10:57 am
I doubt that any movie that has an army of 300 chisled men walking around in leather speedos can be called anti-homosexual.
Perhaps not, but it is certainly spreading false images of masculinity and aiding the genderization process which breeds sexism, homophobia, and the patriarchy which promotes both. I mean fuck, they all looked like stone cold steve austin with a big stick and a scottish accent. Oh, and they were also killing hoards of evil black people, that sucks ass too.

[Red October]

it is true that the movie xerxes looks nothing like the real one. but to be fair, he isnt black or persian looking in the movie. he looks sort of greyish and 8 feet tall.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 05, 2007 02:09 pm
it is true that the movie xerxes looks nothing like the real one. but to be fair, he isnt black or persian looking in the movie. he looks sort of greyish and 8 feet tall.
...And ridiculously gay. Did you really overlook that little bit?

[Hate Is Art]

Originally posted by Pow R. Toc [email protected] 14, 2007 04:51 pm
This movie was fuckin kick ass. I dont get how it was homophobic or racist but it was definitely pro-war and pro-sparta.

I now take comments from the movie and use them in everyday life.

For example:

While Having Intercourse

MY SEMEN WILL BLOCK OUT THE SUN&#33;&#33;&#33;

than we shall fuck in the shade.
You&#39;ve never had sex have you?

[Red October]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+April 05, 2007 10:29 pm--> (EwokUtopia @ April 05, 2007 10:29 pm)
Red [email protected] 05, 2007 02:09 pm
it is true that the movie xerxes looks nothing like the real one. but to be fair, he isnt black or persian looking in the movie. he looks sort of greyish and 8 feet tall.
...And ridiculously gay. Did you really overlook that little bit? [/b]
he didnt really strike me as gay. he just seemed really creepy, but not gay. he had tons of women in his harem, andi didnt notice any male sex slaves.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Red October+April 06, 2007 03:26 pm--> (Red October @ April 06, 2007 03:26 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 10:29 pm

Red [email protected] 05, 2007 02:09 pm
it is true that the movie xerxes looks nothing like the real one. but to be fair, he isnt black or persian looking in the movie. he looks sort of greyish and 8 feet tall.
...And ridiculously gay. Did you really overlook that little bit?
he didnt really strike me as gay. he just seemed really creepy, but not gay. he had tons of women in his harem, andi didnt notice any male sex slaves. [/b]
He was totally androgynous. The makeup was a dead giveaway. Compared to all the Greek-boys, he was the most effeminate character in the film.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Hate Is Art+April 06, 2007 03:20 pm--> (Hate Is Art @ April 06, 2007 03:20 pm)
Pow R. Toc [email protected] 14, 2007 04:51 pm
This movie was fuckin kick ass. I dont get how it was homophobic or racist but it was definitely pro-war and pro-sparta.

I now take comments from the movie and use them in everyday life.

For example:

While Having Intercourse

MY SEMEN WILL BLOCK OUT THE SUN&#33;&#33;&#33;

than we shall fuck in the shade.
You&#39;ve never had sex have you? [/b]
:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Red October]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+April 06, 2007 03:17 pm--> (EwokUtopia @ April 06, 2007 03:17 pm)
Originally posted by Red [email protected] 06, 2007 03:26 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 10:29 pm

Red [email protected] 05, 2007 02:09 pm
it is true that the movie xerxes looks nothing like the real one. but to be fair, he isnt black or persian looking in the movie. he looks sort of greyish and 8 feet tall.
...And ridiculously gay. Did you really overlook that little bit?
he didnt really strike me as gay. he just seemed really creepy, but not gay. he had tons of women in his harem, andi didnt notice any male sex slaves.
He was totally androgynous. The makeup was a dead giveaway. Compared to all the Greek-boys, he was the most effeminate character in the film. [/b]
he was kind of androgynous, but he still didnt seem that gay. some of the spartans seemed alot gayer than him. other than being sort of androgynous, there isnt a whole lot of indication that xerxes is homosexual. very creepy, but not gay.

[Ander]

Most overrated movie ever.

For all the hype I heard at school and online I was extremely disappointed. A few cool battle scenes but other than that, nothing special.

What&#39;s so special about a movie shot entirely on blue/green screen? Special effects stop being special when they are used throughout the entire film.

Not to mention the cheesy acting.

[Mujer Libre]

For those of you who say this film doesn&#39;t have racist undertones- here are some comments from rank Miller himself. Not related to the film, but it gives a good idea of where the graphic novel was coming from:

Originally posted by Frank Miller quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald April 6&#045;8

For some reason, nobody seems to be talking about who we&#39;re up against and the sixth century barbarism they actually represent. These people saw people&#39;s heads off. They enslave women; they genetically (sic) mutilate their daughters. They do not behave by any cultural norms that are senible to us. I&#39;m speaking into a microphone that never could have been a product of their culture. And I&#39;m living in a city where 3000 of my neighbours were killed by thieves of airplanes they never could have built."
Yes, islamic fundamentalists are shit. But way to extrapolate to an entire culture- or even- to a multitude of cultures....

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Mujer Libre+April 10, 2007 02:13 am--> (Mujer Libre @ April 10, 2007 02:13 am) For those of you who say this film doesn&#39;t have racist undertones- here are some comments from rank Miller himself. Not related to the film, but it gives a good idea of where the graphic novel was coming from:

Frank Miller quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald April 6&#045;8

For some reason, nobody seems to be talking about who we&#39;re up against and the sixth century barbarism they actually represent. These people saw people&#39;s heads off. They enslave women; they genetically (sic) mutilate their daughters. They do not behave by any cultural norms that are senible to us. I&#39;m speaking into a microphone that never could have been a product of their culture. And I&#39;m living in a city where 3000 of my neighbours were killed by thieves of airplanes they never could have built."
Yes, islamic fundamentalists are shit. But way to extrapolate to an entire culture- or even- to a multitude of cultures.... [/b]
When it&#39;s all said and done, the dumber a person is, the more racist they are.

[Comrade J]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 08:12 pm
Most overrated movie ever.

For all the hype I heard at school and online I was extremely disappointed. A few cool battle scenes but other than that, nothing special.

What&#39;s so special about a movie shot entirely on blue/green screen? Special effects stop being special when they are used throughout the entire film.

Not to mention the cheesy acting.
Quoted for truth. It&#39;s not an awful movie, it does have a few interesting scenes, but in general it&#39;s pretty dull and I don&#39;t see what the hype is about.

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by Mujer Libre+April 10, 2007 02:13 am--> (Mujer Libre @ April 10, 2007 02:13 am) For those of you who say this film doesn&#39;t have racist undertones- here are some comments from rank Miller himself. Not related to the film, but it gives a good idea of where the graphic novel was coming from:

Frank Miller quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald April 6&#045;8

For some reason, nobody seems to be talking about who we&#39;re up against and the sixth century barbarism they actually represent. These people saw people&#39;s heads off. They enslave women; they genetically (sic) mutilate their daughters. They do not behave by any cultural norms that are senible to us. I&#39;m speaking into a microphone that never could have been a product of their culture. And I&#39;m living in a city where 3000 of my neighbours were killed by thieves of airplanes they never could have built."
Yes, islamic fundamentalists are shit. But way to extrapolate to an entire culture- or even- to a multitude of cultures.... [/b]
Fuck&#33;

I always really liked Frank Miller&#39;s comics...I can&#39;t believe he&#39;d say something so idiotic and racist. Damn.

I think I&#39;ll still go and see the film at some point though.

[Ander]

If you want a Frank Miller based movie, stick with Sin City (which happens to equal pure, pure ownage).

[Led Zeppelin]

This movie sucked big time.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 05:24 am
This movie sucked big time.
Care to elaborate?

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by AndrewG+April 16, 2007 05:25 am--> (AndrewG &#064; April 16, 2007 05:25 am)
[email protected] 16, 2007 05:24 am
This movie sucked big time.
Care to elaborate? [/b]
Sure.

First, the sex scene at the beginning of the movie was completely redundant, there was no point to it at all. Yes, we get it, they were married, they have sex, so what? It didn&#39;t add anything to the story, it just added her breasts to the movie.

Second, the oracle scene was pretty pointless too. Its aim was to show more breasts, nothing more.

Third, the Persian king Xerxes was shown as some kind of dominatrix with a fetish for piercings. Furthermore, he was a fucking giant.

Even though the movie was not meant to be historically correct, at least the story could&#39;ve been made to fit history to a certain extent, after all, they used the battle&#39;s historical outcome as a fact for the movie.

So at the end where it was implied that the newly formed Greek army would win over the Persians because Sparta decided to join the war was ahistorical and stupid. They didn&#39;t win due to a land victory, they won due to a sea victory, and this was after Athens was set alight by Persian troops.

Oh, yeah, and the acting was horrible too.