My husband received movie tickets for his birthday and decided he wanted to see a movie that didn't come out until recently. We both have an interest in the ancient world, so I thought 300 might be interesting. What I found was a movie so mired in propaganda that the message was loud and clear. Support our troops, fight for freedom, or we all die! Here are just a few of the parallels I found:
Leonidas lead a small group of free troops against the vast minions of slaves serving Xerxes (who thought himself a god), just like the small number of troops we have in Iraq are fighting against untold numbers of insurgents faithful to Allah. The Greek troops have racial features closer to our own and the Persian troops looked, well, like Persians. The weapons of war were tried and true on the Greek side - the sword and spear (guns and knives), the phalanx (tanks), the shield (body armor) - while the Persian weapons were sneaky and strange - unusual animals (IED's), Immortals (suicide bombers), and fear. Finally, Spartan women are free to make their own decisions, as long as those decisions support the men in upholding and pursuing liberty, democracy, and freedom, unlike the Persian women who are slaves to their men and their god.
After leaving the theater I found myself asking a lot of questions. Why would Hollywood choose to tell this story now, especially when there were battles that were so much more spectacular? Is it because support for the Iraq war is beginning to fade? Since it was the Queen who ultimately convinced the Greeks to fight, and it is women who carry on social traditions, is Hollywood trying to convince women to be strong, to support our troops, or even to join the military? Who knows? Every war has propaganda. It seems this movie is part of ours.
3,280 US soldiers killed in Iraq
24,476 US soldiers wounded in Iraq
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I read a review that said, "300 will likely be a masturbatory experience for the Ann Coulter crowd. " Not being a big movie fan, that tells me all I need to know.
I dont read reviews. I have long given up on the self-importance of critics and if I think amovie might be interesting, I feel it is necessary to judge for myslef. While the battle scenes in this movie WERE excellent, the propaganda was unyielding and nauseating. We were both disapointed because he just wanted to see a good battle, and I thoughtit might be historically interesting. He enjoyed the gore, and the display of persia's annimal strength, which was pretty coool. The message left a lot to be desired, though I think I will write more on the role of Spartan women.
I think it has a lot more to do with the fact that Sin City by the same author (Frank Miller) made a boat load of money and there is the pile on effect going in. Combined with the general movies made from comic books/graphic novels being generally successful at this time and it is a go.
I don't deny that there are other factors at work here, but this movie is pro-democracy and anti-arab.
Sounds like right wing agit-prop to me, United. I haven't seen it and don't plan to until it reaches AMC. Your description does not fit historical Sparta, whose democracy was limited to the elite 10% and whose women were chattel.
300 is a remake of another movie, called "The 300 Spartans". Miller saw it as a child. Wikipedia entry here.
It was released in August 1962, two months before the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviet missile deployment to Cuba had started in May 1962, though it is not clear when the U.S. actually knew (officially it was not until the U2 photos in October).
But the propaganda war was in full swing, and The 300 Spartans is often viewed as part of that.
I haven't seen it, but John and my friend Cillic have both seen it and they both had the same reaction: It was gay snuff. Enough homoeroticism to make Mark Foley blush... Maybe that's why the neocons will like it... ;)
All big-budget (and some small budget) movies are propoganda of some sort. Film makers are showing their world view, either realistically or fantastically.
I have no desire to see this, except maybe free on cable.
But movie reviews are so entertaining--especially the snarky ones. BBC critics are the best, for the sheer pleasure of reading whether you've ever heard about the movie or not.
To win you over: "300 is not a complicated film. It's going to be widely ridiculed and rightly so, because viewed with the slightest critical distance it becomes extremely funny..." Yes?
Tomcat,
I was a little surprised by how right wing it was, but I guess I shouldn't have been.
Bud,
Thanks for the information. Now I have to see the original to see how different it is. I'm waiting for them to do a remake of Reefer Madness - not the musical, to reinforce the drug war, though they probably wouldn't mention that hemp would go a lot way to solving a lot of our environmental problems, especially errosion.
Laura,
We have a long standing agreement. We don't go to movies enless we get fre tickets for birthdays, etc... My mom gets a lot of comp'd tickets through her job. This time she gave him the tickets, so he got to pick the movie. It would NOT have been my first choice, though there are few movies out in the past year that I would have chosen anyway. I understand artistic licence and all that, but this was just obscene.
Jessica,
Okay. Point taken. I'll start reading Brittish reviews!
I've not seen the movie, but is there anything in it in particular that would prevent you from seeing it as an allegory of the battle between the forces of Reason (sparta) and Fundamentalists? I mean, regardless of what was intended by the makers, could this movie be re-interpreted?
The Spartans, seemingly overwhelmed by religious kooks (who actually serve man, despite claims of diety), fight back using simple weapons (logic, reason, facts) while the Persians deal (futilely) in the supernatural. Hell, if nothing else I'd love to see a prominent blogger work this out in better detail, then post it, just to see the Evangelistas freak out.
Dave,
That's a really good point. I have to admit my vision was a little clouded, and there could be something there. I'll see if I can turn it into something.
United We Lay said:
"I don't deny that there are other factors at work here, but this movie is pro-democracy"
Pro-democracy? Are you serious? Leonidas marched to a part of GREECE to stop an INVADING FORCE despite the cowardice and greed and political retardation of democracy. Theron is great example of the "greatness" of Democracy in action. Theron is just ought to make some money off of something that wasn't his. Leonidas as king viewed the people as his and the land as his. Property view of a people is what makes monarchies less violent and more careful compared to a democracy.
I am by no means a Monarchist, but I agree with what Hans-Hermann Hoppe wrote in Democracy: The God that Failed, that, "If one must have a state, defined as an agency that exercises a compulsory territorial monopoly of ultimate decision making (jurisdiction) and of taxation, then it is economically and ethically advantageous to choose monarchy over democracy"
Democracy has made everyone's property vulnerable to public confiscation. Kings of old would have been overthrown in short order if they had tried to grab 40 percent of people's earnings, or told them how big to make their toilet tanks, or determined how schools taught every subject. One reason we put up with it now is the myth that says we are governing ourselves. That is why we turn a blind eye to petty tyrannies in our midst as well as to war atrocities when they are imposed by "our" government.
Also this is A REPUBLIC, not a democracy, our founders spoke rather poorly of Democracy. Thomas Jefferson said:
"Democracy is nothing but mob rule where 51% may take away the rights of the 49%"
James Madison said:
"Democracy is the most vile form of government."
Ben Franklin said:
"Democracy is two wolfs and lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Before I go any further I'd like to State I am a Libertarian and a very constant one at that. I'm the most extreme variant of Libertarianism which is Anarcho-capitalism. Before anyone of you say it is a contradiction, Murry Rothbard was one of the founders of the Libertarian party and he was an Anarcho-capitalist as well, and he wrote the Libertarian manifesto.
Any way on to all this 300 is neo-con propaganda.
"300 will likely be a masturbatory experience for the Ann Coulter crowd."
Oh yes I just love Ann she is my favorite :rolls eyes: I googled and found that article heres another piece from it:
"Cruel, militaristic Sparta is the ideal; weak, artsy Athens is mocked, particularly in a scene where Athenian soldiers are revealed to be potters, sculptors, poets.
Brave men who leave what they love to defend their country? Bah! Weaklings, according to this flick. As a tribute to a particular world view, 300 could play on a double bill with Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will."
They weren't mocking citizen militia, they were merely showing that the Spartans, dedicated to the PROFESSION of soldier/warrior were more fit for the reason they trained regularly. I love how he first praises the people from Athens for fighting for their county but in the next breath condemns the Spartans for the same thing. Remember now Leonidas marched to a part of GREECE to stop an INVADING FORCE, he did not preemptively strike Persia. I think people just see what they want to see. I don't get how anyone can see this as pro-iraq war. We invaded Iraq. Xerxes invaded Greece, Xerxes , representatives threatened with slavery and death if they would not bow before Xerxes. If you see this as pro-iraq war you are clearly are just seeing what you want too see.
Do you know what I saw when I watched this movie? I saw a story that was based off of one my favorite stories from history. I saw a movie that is laced with the themes of loyalty, honor and pride. The pride of free men to resolve to live free or die in spite of the brute force of the numbers of tyranny. What a inspiring story. Watching the movie made me think of some of the last paragraphs from Ayn Rand's novel anthem:
Perhaps, in those days, there were a few among men, a few of clear sight and clean soul, who refused to surrender that word. What agony must have been theirs before that which they saw coming and could not stop! Perhaps they cried out in protest and in warning. But men paid no heed to their warning. And they, these few, fought a hopeless battle, and they perished with their banners smeared by their own blood. And they chose to perish, for they knew. To them, I send my salute across the centuries, and my pity.
Theirs is the banner in my hand. And I wish I had the power to tell them that the despair of their hearts was not to be final, and their night was not without hope. For the battle they lost can never be lost. For that which they died to save can never perish. Through all the darkness, through all the shame of which men are capable, the spirit of man will remain alive on this earth. It may sleep, but it will awaken. It may wear chains, but it will break through. And man will go on. Man, not men.
Here on this mountain, I and my sons and my chosen friends shall build our new land and our fort. And it will become as the heart of the earth, lost and hidden at first, but beating, beating louder each day. And word of it will reach every corner of the earth. And the roads of the world will become as veins which will carry the best of the world's blood to my threshold. And all my brothers, and the Councils of my brothers, will hear of it, but they will be impotent against me. And the day will come when I shall break all the chains of the earth, and raze the cities of the enslaved, and my home will become the capital of a world where each man will be free to exist for his own sake.
For the coming of that day shall I fight, I and my sons and my chosen friends. For the freedom of Man. For his rights. For his life. For his honor.
I may be a bit late coming to this, but realize that "300" the graphic novel was written in 1998, a good three years prior to 9-11 and well before the Iraq war. The film is an adaptation of the novel.
Probably the reason Hollywood would want to make a movie of 300 would be to capitalize on the success of Sin City and nothing more. Generally speaking, Hollywood is a left-leaning propaganda machine.
Post a Comment