300

[andygates]

Well, I've finally seen 300 and I think I agree with the detractors.  The "you can't trust appeasers / support the troops" subplot was entirely added and even used lines the American political right have used, verbatim; the "Hooah!" Spartans were really silly; the clean-cut = good, simpering dark pierced weirdo = bad schtick was way overplayed; and I hated hated hated what they did to Xerxes, who's just your overweening god-king in the original but turned into some sort of pervy Stargate mutant freakoid.  Oh, and they got rid of the whole Stelios/Stumblios thread and humoured-up the Spartans so they weren't such hard icy bastards, just to be sure we emoted.  And they conveniently underplayed the baby-killing psycho part of the Spartans to overplay the "flower of democracy" - even while saying "we do what we were bred to do" with no irony.

The war rhino was crap too.

In good: The shield clash was perfect, some of the fights were a delight, the Spartans' magic leather pants of invulnerability were nice eye candy. 

But mostly, the eye-candy left me cold.  I like silly war porn, I like comic-book cheese, but this did leave me with that dirty, you've-had-your-strings-pulled-by-Leni-Reifenstahl feeling.  I wanted to rave about it; I came out ranting instead. 

Now Wash Your Eyes.

Comments

[estaratshirai.livejournal.com]

I am, perhaps, going to have to break down and read the book, as you're not the first person who's suggested that my least favorite things about the movie are not there.

[thudthwacker.livejournal.com]

See, I thought the detractors were crazy. The massive, imperialist invading force are the bad guys. The good guys are the small band of olive-skinned folks using every guerrilla trick in the book to beat the invaders off. I will note that I never read the graphic novel; if the exposition really was tacked in attempting to be pro-USA propoganda, somebody should get their money back -- I came out surprised that the right-wingers weren't shouting that it was propoganda in the other direction.

I suppose I should also note that I went in fully intending to ignore any and all dialogue, as all it did was get in the way of the action sequences. I do the same thing in Jackie Chan movies.

[n-decisive.livejournal.com]

magic leather pants of invulnerability

Great description!

So, the pierced Persian didn't go over well with you, either, huh? I'd heard he didn't quite mesh...

[andygates.livejournal.com]

Well hell, Leni was a brilliant visual artist. It's not the skill I was objecting to, it was the blatant leverage of the story in a political direction. Kudos to your friend for the sumptuousness.

The faux-graininess, in particular, was sweet. When you've got a massive extreme close-up of Leonidas's eyes in battered helmet, all hyper-contrast and faked colour, the addition of the grain gives it all a very Sergio Leone feel. There's a hint of verite - that things looked simpler back then but this is how it really was, or some such bollocks.

Very pretty.

[simoneck.livejournal.com]

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I saw the film on sunday (know something about the history but haven't read the comic).

I thought the film was pretty well done. It seemed to be to be the story of Thermopylae, as told by the spartans. They were heroic and resolute, the enemy evil, nasty and twisted, the allies present but inconsequential, athenian navy not even mentioned.

They mentioned the baby killing, military upbringing part of sparta, which is more than I thought would be done. Short of repeated cutbacks to dying infants, I couldn't see what more they could do around that. And it fits in with the 'spartan view point' theme. It was mentioned but isn't significant and so wasn't raised again.

I don't really see the USA = Sparta thing either.
You can see it from either direction. Large force with overwhelming power failing in the middle east area due to small number of plucky warriors. Or Evil persians stopped by good western men, strong and true. Take your pick.

Freedom loving seems wrong from our perspective when applied to the Spartans, but I refer you back to 'from their view point'. The Spartans were free, the helots were just inconsequential slaves serving the free spartans.

It also had a side plot of what was happening back in sparta. As a film it had to say why only 300 were heading out rather than the full force, and in general there has always been some debate on that. Bribery of the council may not be the actual reason, but it's certainly been postulated before. And if a hollywood film is going to take that line then, as will all hollywood films, they have to have the bribed getting their comeuppance(not perfect, but hardly an offense).

Spartans basically naked, enemy heavily armoured was the thing that annoyed me most, since historically it was the exact opposite. But it was a minor thing really.

Injured guy (who's name I can't remember) leading the charge at Plantea was a nice touch. Didn't mention his year of alienation as a coward though.