Addendum to previous post
Mar. 11th, 2007 02:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
uberreinigerApparently I was misguided in my praise of 300. Apparently it is not a feel-good movie with a timeless message of courage. Apparently it is a piece of racist, anti-Islamic propaganda generated by the Military Industrial Complex to build up public support for an invasion of Iran.
Why? Because in the movie heroic beautiful white men with good family values battle hordes of dark-skinned bad guys who are depicted as decadent, subhuman C.H.U.D.'s.
Seriously, this shit is all over the internet. There are even Muslim groups petitioning to have the film banned. To which I say to all of it "WHAT THE FUCK!?"
I'm sick of this every time a movie comes out. I'm sure all of you are too so if you want to skip the rest of this entry (assuming you're even still reading,) that's fine. It's mostly for me to get my mad out.
Anyway, yeah. Uh-huh, Frank Miller totally set out with a comic book he wrote pre-9/11 that was inspired by a technicolor Spartan movie he saw as a child to promote an invasion of Iran in 2007.
300, as previously stated is not a historical retelling nor does it aspire to be. But they do get some historical things right. Greeks were lighter skinned than Persians in general. Xerxes forces did include vassal troops from many conquered nations, many of whom were quite dark-skinned. So yes, a bunch of pretty white boys DID beat up on a bunch of dark-skinned barbarians. IT HAPPENED. DEAL WITH IT. As for decadence, yes the historical Xerxes was a decadent man. In fact, in the years following the Greco-Persian war he allowed his empire to deteriorate because he was spending all his time involved in the soap operas of his harem. Look it up. I ain't yer damn Wikipedia.
As for the subhuman C.H.U.D.'s, while they remain completely non-historical it is worth pointing out that they are depicted in the film as neither black nor white, just this sickly mottled grey kind of color.
Now, for the Iranian invasion agenda. Umm... considering how the U.S. is all about invading other countries these days using our Most Powerful Military on Earth don't you think that a movie in which a handful of scrappy upstarts thwart the invasion of the then-Most Powerful Military on Earth kind of sends the wrong message? Next, let it be stated that Persia is NOT Iran. The fact that they occupied the same real-estate means nothing. That would be like interpreting a film made about the destruction of the United States as being about the destruction of the Cherokee Indian tribe.
How come nobody got mad like this over The Lord of the Rings? It was the same thing. You had beautiful, handsome, porcelain-skinned elves and hobbits beating the tar out of snarling, cannibalistic black-skinned orcs! Come to think of it, Elrond's citadel of elven purity would have really been spruced up with some nice WWII-style propaganda posters. You know, ones depicting screaming elf maidens being ravished by leering orcish brutes with stern elvish text warning the reader "DON'T LET IT HAPPEN HERE! (buy war bonds.)" Then for the next DVD release of The Return of the King we could digitally alter the scene where Sam and Frodo sneak the orcish mess hall so that the orcs' filthy meals are replaced with fried chicken and watermelon.
Whoa. I think I might have went too far there. I guess I shouldn't even mention the idea of having the scene in Felloweship where the Uruk-hai leader is spawned altered so that when he emerges from his muddy cocoon he looks around and asks "Whera all da elf women at?" Wait. Blast! I just did!
Why? Because in the movie heroic beautiful white men with good family values battle hordes of dark-skinned bad guys who are depicted as decadent, subhuman C.H.U.D.'s.
Seriously, this shit is all over the internet. There are even Muslim groups petitioning to have the film banned. To which I say to all of it "WHAT THE FUCK!?"
I'm sick of this every time a movie comes out. I'm sure all of you are too so if you want to skip the rest of this entry (assuming you're even still reading,) that's fine. It's mostly for me to get my mad out.
Anyway, yeah. Uh-huh, Frank Miller totally set out with a comic book he wrote pre-9/11 that was inspired by a technicolor Spartan movie he saw as a child to promote an invasion of Iran in 2007.
300, as previously stated is not a historical retelling nor does it aspire to be. But they do get some historical things right. Greeks were lighter skinned than Persians in general. Xerxes forces did include vassal troops from many conquered nations, many of whom were quite dark-skinned. So yes, a bunch of pretty white boys DID beat up on a bunch of dark-skinned barbarians. IT HAPPENED. DEAL WITH IT. As for decadence, yes the historical Xerxes was a decadent man. In fact, in the years following the Greco-Persian war he allowed his empire to deteriorate because he was spending all his time involved in the soap operas of his harem. Look it up. I ain't yer damn Wikipedia.
As for the subhuman C.H.U.D.'s, while they remain completely non-historical it is worth pointing out that they are depicted in the film as neither black nor white, just this sickly mottled grey kind of color.
Now, for the Iranian invasion agenda. Umm... considering how the U.S. is all about invading other countries these days using our Most Powerful Military on Earth don't you think that a movie in which a handful of scrappy upstarts thwart the invasion of the then-Most Powerful Military on Earth kind of sends the wrong message? Next, let it be stated that Persia is NOT Iran. The fact that they occupied the same real-estate means nothing. That would be like interpreting a film made about the destruction of the United States as being about the destruction of the Cherokee Indian tribe.
How come nobody got mad like this over The Lord of the Rings? It was the same thing. You had beautiful, handsome, porcelain-skinned elves and hobbits beating the tar out of snarling, cannibalistic black-skinned orcs! Come to think of it, Elrond's citadel of elven purity would have really been spruced up with some nice WWII-style propaganda posters. You know, ones depicting screaming elf maidens being ravished by leering orcish brutes with stern elvish text warning the reader "DON'T LET IT HAPPEN HERE! (buy war bonds.)" Then for the next DVD release of The Return of the King we could digitally alter the scene where Sam and Frodo sneak the orcish mess hall so that the orcs' filthy meals are replaced with fried chicken and watermelon.
Whoa. I think I might have went too far there. I guess I shouldn't even mention the idea of having the scene in Felloweship where the Uruk-hai leader is spawned altered so that when he emerges from his muddy cocoon he looks around and asks "Whera all da elf women at?" Wait. Blast! I just did!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-03-11 08:51 pm (UTC)I think we're overdoing the color/race/religion thing lately, all being paranoid about it.
By the way, they did say Lord of the Rings (books, I don't remember about the movie) was 1) a chauvinistic 2) racist piece. Exactly because all the good guys are... white, but mostly because the bad guys are described as "the dark people from XXX"
As per 300, all I know about it is Scot's review (and the original story, I guess), but it seems to me than trying to draw racial conclusions from it is a bit far fetched...
Also, if it comes to it...Sparta was somewhere in Southern Greece, I think. Which would make Spartans somewhat dark skinned. So if anyone's out for white supremacy with it, tough luck :P
no subject
Date: 2007-03-11 08:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-11 09:50 pm (UTC)one
and another
I personally think often people see what they're looking for in these things, no more and no less.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-11 09:48 pm (UTC)Secondly, having a harem is not decadent. In those days, the easiest way to make peace with other nations was to marry a princess. A harem allowed peace to be made that way with many countries. Xerxes was not a decadent man, but a king in a time when kings were expected to live a certain way.
Now, I have not heard of this film of which you speak, so can't judge whether it is racist warmongering rubbish or a jewel that shines like the exquisite "Kingdom of Heaven." However, bearing in mind the recent Mel Gibson atrocities, "The Passion of the Christ" and "Apocolypto", I can understand any American film dealing with historical matters coming under suspicion.
Incidentally, the Lord of the Rings films were accused of being pro-war, despite the fact that they, like the books, were anti-war in every possible way.
Orcs are not black and Elrond's home can hardly be claimed to involve elven purity, since he was only half-elven, his foster child was human, he welcomed dwarves and hobbits. Elven women are also not in much danger from Orcs, as they can fight as well as the elven men. To anyone who would accuse Tolkien or his elves of racism, I can only suggest, "Avo thano rûth vi gûr alfirin." And frankly, anyone who doesn't know what that means isn't qualified to hold an opinion. ;)
no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 05:26 am (UTC)I wasn't indicting harems as a whole either. But like everything else you can do it to excess. Xerxes has been accused of having done so when he should have been running his empire.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 01:04 am (UTC)That's what I heard.
Self-imposed vicitim complexes are one of the saddest and most pathetic psychological disorders alive and well today.
These kinds of ridiculous outcries of "oppression" make me want to see the movie even more. I hope it makes everyone else feel the same.
Some people need to get over themselves.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 05:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 05:52 am (UTC)That's not how the Iranians see it. I went to the movie with one of my coworkers, who grew up in Iran and moved here within the past 5 years. He has never, since i've known him, refered or thought of himself as Iranian. He would tell you that he is Persian. As is the same case with every Persian i've met out here in the bay area, which is quite a few.
He didn't take it too seriously, but i know he didn't appreciate the depiction of the Persians. He was quick to point out that Xerxes himself didn't look remotely persian, and wasn't too keen on the harem of mutated girls. Like i said, he understood it was a movie and didn't take it too seriously, but that doesn't mean he liked it much.
Although i did get the impression after seeing the movie that it could definately be seen as a pro-Iraq war propoganda piece (and one of my muslim coworkers, a film student none-the-less, came to the same conclusion independantely). That's nto to say it was intended that way, but there is no doubt that the sentiments it inspired definately leaned in taht direction.
I thought the movie was ok, for my own opinion. I definately enjoyed it. The story was weak, the characters pretty cardboard, and I kept expecting them to be in braveheart. i mean, what the heck was with Leondis' scottish accent? They tried way too hard to be epic with every single one of their speeches.
It looked great. The fight sequences were badass, and the visual style was definately spot-on.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 07:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 02:49 pm (UTC):)
And if it was supposed to be propaganda for a war with Iran, I must have missed it. I could see the film as being being related to the Iraqi War in a way (not particularly pro- or anti-, just related to it). My guess is that people will read into it what they want, and just trash what doesn't fit with that viewpoint...
So, if it was a propaganda piece, the harem represented... big oil? Or free trade? Xerxes is nuclear proliferation, no doubt about that. And Leonidas has to has to be either the statue of liberty or Air Force One. Not sure what Ephialtes (the hunchba- uh, spinally endowed person) represents... I'm just going to randomly say the U.N. for that one.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 04:19 pm (UTC)Personally, I agree with some of the critics. It would have been a far better movie if they'd gotten rid of the scenes they added that weren't in the book. The scenes of the Queen working the politics in Sparta while her husband was at war cause much of the complaints about warmongering and they are the weakest of the movie. It's actually ok to make a movie that doesn't have a strong female lead.
Of course, the book didn't have sex scenes either...leave it to Hollywood...