300

[Blackbird]

There was at least one other factor, I confess, with my not viewing the third of the series: I didn't want to get drawn into the local debate over whether or not the movie was the best or the worst Star Wars movie. George Lucas had already pretty much killed my interest in Star Wars with the Phantom Menace and Send In The Clones (or whatever it was called). If I was disappointed with The Revenge of the Sith it would have been too much. (Hell, I'm getting ready to sell my Star Wars role playing game books! I'm that disillusioned with the series... )


B.

Oh ....so much temptation to get into how I feel about ROTS...But I won't. For everyone's sake. It's better this way. Sentence fragments FTW.

[CapSmashy]

A comment found in a movie thread, that was right on...

"its bu11sh1t, its similar to the stuff the nazis used to do with the jews. writing stories about them, and showing them with big noses and making them look subhuman so the germans wouldn't care that their leaders were going to kill them. same thing u show a bunch of persians with angry faces, noserings, and overall savages than the US public won't care that their military is going to flatten the whole iranian nation. its propaganda, and just an interesting fact frank miller is a jew, its a shame greeks are letting their history be used like this. fact of the matter is greeks are more similar to ancient persians than europeans who were like wild savages. even ethnically ancient greeks, persians, armenians, macedonians, babylonians are pretty much related to each other. but watching this movie, people will think greeks were blond haired blue eyed and persians were arabic/indian/african. which is bullsh1t. (not that there is anything wrong with those people) either way this is racism and its so obvious, i can't believe hollywood is letting this happen, to the greeks don't let the ur leonidas be used to advance someone elses agenda

kerr to u on Feb 14, 2007"

Blah, blah, blah frakin blahblahblah.....

The depiction of the Persian Army and Spartans for the movie were taken directly from the page's of Frank Miller's graphic novel 300. The nose rings, angry faces, etc etc etc, were all from his illustrations drawn up nearly 10 years ago.

As for the propoganda angle, its total fabricated I wanna whine and cry about something bullshit because the graphic novel was released in 1999 and the movie was adapted directly from its pages. Costumes, script, set design, everything. In the exact same manner they stayed 100% accurate to the comic pages for the production of Sin City, they did so for 300.

And blond haired and blue eyed Greeks? Did the moron that wrote that drivel even see the movie?

As for the rest, as in my last post, if you want historical accuracy, watch a History Channel documentary. If you want entertainment, go see a movie. If you want to try and make accusations of some message the movie is trying to make, you had better at least do you basic homework for the facts before you start spewing a bunch of ridiculous nonsense about propaganda.

Are there elements of propaganda that can be carried over to what is happening today? Sure there are. I can take elements of Gladiator, Troy, Apocalypse Now, Patton, Platoon, Lawrence of Arabia and any other war movie you care to mention and twist and bend pretty much any major scene in it to suit my purpose of it being nothing but a propaganda machine for someone.

Would a movie depicting Rabis looking just like priest in this movie ever get distributed? NO! Maybe these Jews should remember the blood legacy of the 1600's when christians were spreading that Matso's were made with the blood of christian children.

Irrelevant as this has zero do to do with the subject.

So which warriors in Xerxes army was the jews. Hard to tell since they look just like the arab back then unlike the white skinned arians of today.

Okay...one more time...History Channel for historical accuracy. Graphic novels and movies for fun and eye candy.

If this is such a major issue for you, were just as adamant about the subject material in 1999 when the graphic novel was released? I'm sure Miller and Varley would have appreciated the boost in sales protest brings (not that it needed any).

The criticism of this movie is just building. Take a look at the european blogs!

And again, so what. Where was there criticism in 1999 when the original images were published? Oh, they didn't care then? Why should I care what they have to say today?

[cowboyangel]

The story left out or minimized the contribution of the Thespians during Xerxes' invasion. I'd like to know more about the politics behind the Spartan council's decision not to back Leonides until it was too late. Ms Headey did a fantastic job as Queen Gorgon. The Greek army of today still uses some of the famous quotes from the battle as its mottos, like the one about the shower of arrows and being ok with that because the Spartans could then 'fight in the shade'. Movies are now multi-market adventures, there's a video game of this thing out...notice how the look of the movie was very much done in the mode of video gaming. I'd give it an A for artistic direction and a C+ overall, except for the queen..she gets an A+.

[mojo]

I saw it last night and I really enjoyed it. I was prepared to hate it just because of the level of blood and guts but even that was done in a more artistic and stylized manner than I had anticipated. There were lots of subleties with music and sound as well.

A movie like this will reach people who never would have otherwise known anything about the 300, or the Spartan culture. Despite it's historical irregularities, it has a powerful and noble message.

This is well acted and is a cinematic success in it's blending of real film footage with computer enhancement. (What's not to like with all that eye candy?) It reminded me of plays by Berthold Brecht who would use devices to keep the audience reminded that it is a story, in order not to be swept up in the action on stage.

[gyre]

Good graphics should look real wherever they are used.
If there is no interest in accuracy , why not get off your ass and make up a story?

The iranians seem upset at the movie.
That's the most interesting thing about it so far.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

[quote="cowboyangel"]The story left out or minimized the contribution of the Thespians during Xerxes' invasion. I'd like to know more about the politics behind the Spartan council's decision not to back Leonides until it was too late. quote]

From what I remember from college, the Spartans were to slow the advancement so that the athenians, Myceneans and other greeks that had great navys could sneak behind the persians and cut off their supply sea route by destroying their ships.

In The movie, the Thespians were wrongly called Arcadians. They fought well, but Leonide and spartans in general were very mule headed. Great fighters, but never knew how to accept losing a battle to win a war.

But, why insult the religion in depicting it as evil and disturbing when the spartans drew so much of their courage, strength positive thought from it against the persians.

Also, the oracle was altered. According to Herodotus, Sparta consulted the oracle at Delphi (not a local oracle), which gave this prophecy:

O ye men who dwell in the streets of broad Lacedaemon!
Either your glorious town shall be sacked by the children of Perseus,
Or, in exchange, must all through the whole Laconian country
Mourn for the loss of a king, descendant of great Heracles.
He cannot be withstood by the courage of bulls nor of lions,
Strive as they may; he is mighty as Jove; there is naught that shall stay him,
Till he have got for his prey your king, or your glorious city.

In other words, either one of the kings had to die in battle defending Sparta, or Sparta itself would fall. Leonidas, then, went to Thermopylae not in spite of the oracle, but to fulfill the oracle's prophecy.


Here's a bit more info according to one great greek writer:

The 700+ Thespians were at the last stand, when they knew that the Persians had encircled them. According to Herodotus, there were about 6000-7000 Greeks (his term) in the initial stage of the battle -- the 300 Spartans and the 700 Thespians, plus Arcadians, Corinthians, Thebans, Phocians and others. The Phocians, who were supposed to be guarding the "goat path," as they call it in the movie, were apparently taken by surprise and were routed or killed, and the Thebans were taken hostage. Most of the other Greeks retreated, but the Thespians remained with the Spartans to the end.

A NATION CHALLENGED: HOLLYWOOD; White House Sets Meeting With Film Executives to Discuss War on Terrorism
By RICK LYMAN
Several dozen top executives in the film and television industry plan to meet on Sunday morning with Karl Rove, a senior White House adviser, to discuss what Hollywood can do to aid the war effort.

Now check this out:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6446183.stm

is there more to this story- Christian Bush & Jewish Revenge


AIIZ

ps- http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/ ... ce-300.php

[Apollonaris Zeus]

A comparison of the fact and fantasy

http://bayareanewsgroup.com/multimedia/ ... 031407.pdf

300 more premiers today (thursday) in Greece. The gods tell me the critique won't be pretty.


AIIZ

[Ugly Dougly]

The nose rings, angry faces, etc etc etc, were all from his illustrations drawn up nearly 10 years ago.

So it is historical. Thanks for clearing that up.

[benenergy]

Sure is cool what they can do with a green room and a bunch of computers. There's some cool stuff on Wired about how they made it. Why shoot anything on location any more?

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Despite it's historical irregularities, it has a powerful and noble message.

Yes as noble as Blood Libel and some idiots thought that was true too!

Some people wonder, if it was Xerxes that GW Bush is portrait as.

AIIZ

[Blackbird]

Some people wonder, if it was Xerxes that GW Bush is portrait as.

AIIZ

No.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Are you sure, blkbrd?

The persians were the SUPERPOWER of that time!

We are the SUPERPOWER of today!

The persians were the Imperialists!

We are the Imperialists of Today!

Did not Xerxes allow the individual countries autonomy?

We allow our conquered right to autonomy!

Did not Xerxes as for warrior tribute?

We demand warrior tribute!

Are you with me on this Blackbird or you against me!

AIIZ

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Sparta? No. This is madness


'300': Full-bore gore The Spartan warrior movie 300 is not for the meek, despite its visual virtues and high thrill quotient. It's a total-immersion battle experience for eaters of red meat, worshippers of the male physique and lovers of extreme violence.An expert assesses the gruesome new epic

Mar 11, 2007 04:30 AM
The battle of Thermopylae was real, but how real is 300?

Ephraim Lytle, assistant professor of hellenistic history at the University of Toronto, has seen the movie and offers his view.

History is altered all the time. What matters is how and why. Thus I see no reason to quibble over the absence in 300 of breastplates or modest thigh-length tunics. I can see the graphic necessity of sculpted stomachs and three hundred Spartan-sized packages bulging in spandex thongs. On the other hand, the ways in which 300 selectively idealizes Spartan society are problematic, even disturbing.

We know little of King Leonidas, so creating a fictitious backstory for him is understandable. Spartan children were, indeed, taken from their mothers and given a martial education called the agoge. They were indeed toughened by beatings and dispatched into the countryside, forced to walk shoeless in winter and sleep uncovered on the ground. But future kings were exempt.

And had Leonidas undergone the agoge, he would have come of age not by slaying a wolf, but by murdering unarmed helots in a rite known as the Crypteia. These helots were the Greeks indigenous to Lakonia and Messenia, reduced to slavery by the tiny fraction of the population enjoying Spartan "freedom." By living off estates worked by helots, the Spartans could afford to be professional soldiers, although really they had no choice: securing a brutal apartheid state is a full-time job, to which end the Ephors were required to ritually declare war on the helots.

Elected annually, the five Ephors were Sparta's highest officials, their powers checking those of the dual kings. There is no evidence they opposed Leonidas' campaign, despite 300's subplot of Leonidas pursuing an illegal war to serve a higher good. For adolescents ready to graduate from the graphic novel to Ayn Rand, or vice-versa, the historical Leonidas would never suffice. They require a superman. And in the interests of portentous contrasts between good and evil, 300's Ephors are not only lecherous and corrupt, but also geriatric lepers.

Ephialtes, who betrays the Greeks, is likewise changed from a local Malian of sound body into a Spartan outcast, a grotesquely disfigured troll who by Spartan custom should have been left exposed as an infant to die. Leonidas points out that his hunched back means Ephialtes cannot lift his shield high enough to fight in the phalanx. This is a transparent defence of Spartan eugenics, and laughably convenient given that infanticide could as easily have been precipitated by an ill-omened birthmark.

300's Persians are ahistorical monsters and freaks. Xerxes is eight feet tall, clad chiefly in body piercings and garishly made up, but not disfigured. No need – it is strongly implied Xerxes is homosexual which, in the moral universe of 300, qualifies him for special freakhood. This is ironic given that pederasty was an obligatory part of a Spartan's education. This was a frequent target of Athenian comedy, wherein the verb "to Spartanize" meant "to bugger." In 300, Greek pederasty is, naturally, Athenian.

This touches on 300's most noteworthy abuse of history: the Persians are turned into monsters, but the non-Spartan Greeks are simply all too human. According to Herodotus, Leonidas led an army of perhaps 7,000 Greeks. These Greeks took turns rotating to the front of the phalanx stationed at Thermoplyae where, fighting in disciplined hoplite fashion, they held the narrow pass for two days. All told, some 4,000 Greeks perished there. In 300 the fighting is not in the hoplite fashion, and the Spartans do all of it, except for a brief interlude in which Leonidas allows a handful of untrained Greeks to taste the action, and they make a hash of it. When it becomes apparent they are surrounded, this contingent flees. In Herodotus' time there were various accounts of what transpired, but we know 700 hoplites from Thespiae remained, fighting beside the Spartans, they, too, dying to the last man.

No mention is made in 300 of the fact that at the same time a vastly outnumbered fleet led by Athenians was holding off the Persians in the straits adjacent to Thermopylae, or that Athenians would soon save all of Greece by destroying the Persian fleet at Salamis. This would wreck 300's vision, in which Greek ideals are selectively embodied in their only worthy champions, the Spartans.

This moral universe would have appeared as bizarre to ancient Greeks as it does to modern historians. Most Greeks would have traded their homes in Athens for hovels in Sparta about as willingly as I would trade my apartment in Toronto for a condo in Pyongyang.

[Steven bradford]

It's certiainly inspiring some of the funniest reviews here in america, from New Times Phoenix to the New York times.

But I like this Entertainment Weekly commentary the best, which isn't really a review, but a review of this type of film making:http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20015210,00.html


I know I'll mainly be going to see it for the hot man on man action. Why so many straight men are going to see a movie about greeks who en masse hit the chest waxing salons before going to war, that's another question.

[diane o'thirst]

AIIZ — Ye Gods and little fishes, you see conspiracies in everything. And if anyone dares to suggest you need to get a life you go off like a 12-year-old drama queen.

Frankly, I'm tired of it. And I'd wager that I'm not the only one who's had it up to here with your ravings.

Do you sit around home all day, cruising the Internet for offenses against the almighty Gods and Goddesses of Hellas? Do you lose sleep at night because someone, somewhere, is enjoying a movie, or a song, or a game? Is your life so fragile that you're threatened by a movie? Have you even seen it? Or did you just assume, "Oooh, Greek guys with no shirts on, blood, war, it's bad!" Did you go into the theatre prepared to hate it, and self-fulfilled your own prophecy that it was Bushite propaganda?

People are also saying that the Iranians are offended by this movie. There's an Iranian community up in Toronto that's trying to get it banned in their city. You know what makes me laugh? The Iranian minister of culture complaining that 300 is offensive to Iranian culture. I'm sorry but I wasn't aware Marduk, Ea, Bel and Astarte were still worshipped there.

So if 300 is such a war propaganda film then how come half of Eugene went to see it on opening night and loved it? I saw a lot of my friends from Saturday Market and the Oregon Country Fair there. I saw a bunch of them at the anti-war rally this afternoon. I suppose we're all hypocrites, or whatever your mispelling-du-jour is.

Are you Iranian? Because you're acting like they did when the Mohammed cartoons came out. You're on this stupid little jihad against <i>a movie.</i>

Bottom line: [plonk]

[Blackbird]

Thanks, Diane. You said what I was thinking.

[diane o'thirst]

Another thing that cracks me up (in a very ironic sense) is that opera company in Germany cancelling performance of the opera Xerxes because they'd received threats of suicide bombers. Specifically, Xerxes was shown in one scene where he displays the heads of Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed, suggesting that he's better than them. Very in character, but the oldest of those three wouldn't be born for another 500 some-odd years.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Dear Diane, don't take this personally nor my critique of the movie. I had been looking forward to this movie ever since I heard about. When I read all the negative comments by people who make a living commenting on movies, I just thought they had to be wrong much like your opinion of my comments here. But I did go to the movie and then I relized that they were right and I was wrong. I kept an open mind.

So I didn't take their comments personally nor should you and your comments about me. I don't post here to win your approval or anyone elses. if it means anything to you, your view of the movie is in the majority. My opinion is with all those profession movie critics and historians.

But hey, I thought Borat was offensive, to me, to jews and to the people of a nation that I can even remember or spell.

I'm sure you and Eugene thought it was great.

But don't take that personally.

AIIZ

[K-mom]

But I don't think you should laugh about the incident in Germany. Maybe it seems silly in Oregon but that kind of stuff is very real across the ocean. It's a sad time when art is compromised because of religious fanaticism.
Since the topic is films, did you (or anyone) see the film 06/05? Based on the story of Theo Van Gogh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_G ... _director)

[K-mom]

sorry, I just noticed you added the (ironic sense) bit after saying it cracked you up.
yeah, there's definitely some irony in there...

[dana]

The story left out or minimized the contribution of the Thespians during Xerxes' invasion. I'd like to know more about the politics behind the Spartan council's decision not to back Leonides until it was too late. quote]

From what I remember from college, the Spartans were to slow the advancement so that the athenians, Myceneans and other greeks that had great navys could sneak behind the persians and cut off their supply sea route by destroying their ships.

I hope all of you guys asking for the historical details managed to actually catch the history channel tonight. It covered this whole series of wars.

OK I confess I was doing a bit of channel surfacing, but I did manage to catch a lot of things brought up on this thread. The Greeks were somewhat caught unprepared and the Spartans were buying time for their armies to prepare for the Persians push to Athens. The oracle does give them two different prophecies to guide their actions. One has been mentioned. The other was that the Greeks should pull back from Athens, which is abandoned, to hide "behind a wall of wood". They interpret that last bit as signifying that they should make the best use of the wooden ships of their navy to disable the Persian advance as well as letting the Persians know that they will not be able to retreat with their full army because their ships are being decimated.
The 300 are aided by another thousand Greeks. They actually manage to stave off this hugely outnumbering army for 3 days. They do it through tactics, better training, superior armor and weaponry, and careful use of terrain. A narrow passageway is more easily defended by fewer men. The Spartan's armor is kind of cool - an "early form of kevlar" with multiple layers topped by bronze plate. The phalanx formation provides this impervious wall of shields and helmets of the first rank of soldiers, through which the next rank thrusts spears into the lightly protected Persians.
Herodotus makes a strange observation on the third day, which favors the idea of the King truly sacrificing himself in obeisance to the oracle. Rather than staying in the narrow portion of the passage, the Spartans move out into the wide part and are quickly slaughtered.

So, yeah A.Z. you do go off on some odd rants, but the more I've found out about the ancient Greeks, the more I share your fascination. I just wish I could step back there in time and see what it was really like. (Not the wars so much, but the rest of their society.)

Oh, and apparently the dark brooding skies may be somewhat historically accurate. Major storms helped to sink part of the Persian fleet.

Now I'll have to go see the film. I loved the graphics of 'Sin City' - pulp comics brought to the big screen. If you like those kinds of tweaked graphics, Linklater's 'Dream' movie is pretty cool also.

(OK, back to work for me....)

[dana]

Oh yeah, one other thing.
So the story of this battle is told by Herodotus, who is Greek and speaks as if he is right there close to the action. How can that be if the Persians eventually kill all of the defending Greeks? Does he somehow get the story from the Persians after the fact? Otherwise he'd be slaughtered with the rest of them. Or is he merely propagating myth?

[Blackbird]

Oh yeah, one other thing.
So the story of this battle is told by Herodotus, who is Greek and speaks as if he is right there close to the action. How can that be if the Persians eventually kill all of the defending Greeks? Does he somehow get the story from the Persians after the fact? Otherwise he'd be slaughtered with the rest of them. Or is he merely propagating myth?

It kind of shows this. In the movie, he injures his eye and goes back to Sparta to ask for reinforcements (or something). He isn't there when "The 300" are all killed. He is telling the story when they go back to battle with however many thousand men, to inspire the men. This is part of why the story is so outlandish and exaggerated.

[dana]

Oh yeah, one other thing.
So the story of this battle is told by Herodotus, who is Greek and speaks as if he is right there close to the action. How can that be if the Persians eventually kill all of the defending Greeks? Does he somehow get the story from the Persians after the fact? Otherwise he'd be slaughtered with the rest of them. Or is he merely propagating myth?

It kind of shows this. In the movie, he injures his eye and goes back to Sparta to ask for reinforcements (or something). He isn't there when "The 300" are all killed. He is telling the story when they go back to battle with however many thousand men, to inspire the men. This is part of why the story is so outlandish and exaggerated.

Actually I was talking about the historical record. (Still haven't seen the movie.) Herodotus speaks as if he actually witnesses the demise of the 300.

I get more of A.Z.'s points from the history. But the Persians invade in revenge for having one of their great cities and holy sites razed many years previous by the Greeks. When they first spy out the Persians, they realize that not only do they have a massive army, but their society is in some ways more advanced than the Greeks.
The Greeks win out eventually by carefully orchestrated tactics (maybe luck too.) They pull back to defend several different strategic points to their advantage, and even willingly give up Athens, whatever it takes to stretch out the Persians and make them vulnerable. Prior to these wars the Greeks are largely at war with each other, but coming together to fight the Persians unites them. The historians felt that the fact of surviving this war, was what made possible the eventual propagation of Greek thought to the world (Democracy, philosophy, etc.) The story really does become the stuff of myth and legend!

[Apollonaris Zeus]

What! me RANT!

Totally unheard of behavior for me

Anyway, those are good points Dana and intellectually stimulating.

I do have a thesis that if the Greek did join forces with Xerxes that the greeks and their culture would have existed in much the same way as they did before. Many historians agree with this conjecture. The Greeks lost the war in thermophilae and won the war with Xerxes, but they lost the war with the romans because of the constant internal warring amongst themselves.

This where I was going when I had asked Joel half a year ago, to expound about the comparisons of the Peloponnisian war to Iraq war and how the factors of infighting and a drawn out war weakens great nations. Xerxes unification of all these nations might have prevented the peloponnisian war. This war weakened the greeks, destoyed the democracy of the Athenian Alliance (read coalition). this allowed the Romans to conguer the divided Greek once democratic nations now tyrant states (installed by sparta now read Iraq which Iran will overtake) and the Intellectual Greek Movement and in turn made way for the evenual Dark Age of Man.

Xerxes empire, like his fathers empire that he inherited were advance for the time. They didn't plunder and pillage like the greeks or other nations before, but allow autonomy. They weren't freak monsters of DARKNESS. They freed the Jews in Israel and allow Israel to continue independantly. The Greeks would have the same freedom under Xerxes. Yes, Persian was advance and under them the Greek belief of democracy, justice and education would have made an impact and perhaps change the persian empire into a democratic state or democratic alliance of many nations. This is just speculation of course.

End of Rant!

AIIZ

PS- Diane, when a person tells you to run because you are being HACKED, then they are a Damer as in being Hacked to Death? Only a play on words of which a big boy like Helitack understand. But only Heli knows for sure?

[theCryptofishist]

Why shoot anything on location any more?

Because there is something beautiful about actual real life specifics rather than generic made-up scenery.

[K-mom]

[quote="theCryptofishist"]Because there is something beautiful about actual real life specifics rather than generic made-up scenery.[/quote]

Agreed. I have a friend who worked on that new movie Shooter coming out sometime soon (could be out now; I usually miss these kind of things being without tv).
Anyway he was saying a big part of movie making process was actually travelling around to all the different cities rather than masking one city as all the others.
Apparently one scene was even shot on the top of a glacier here in CA. Heard it was a pretty brutal shoot!

[BAS]

One which is kind of funny is to see when a television show tries to substitute part of the West Coast for Wisconsin! The landscape just does NOT look the same, esp. out in the countryside. (The television show "Picket Fences" didn't do too bad of a job, except that "No Parking" zones in Wisconsin are yellow, not red (I think red means it is reserved for emergency vehicles, and blue mean taxis and/or buses.) And, one time when they were supposed to be out by a dairy farm, it was obvious that the hills were different than those in Wisconsin, and the layout of the farms is different.) Of course, the television show "Supernatural" made a very glaring boo-boo when they had a part of one episode take place in downtown Fitchburg, Wisconsin. You see, there is no downtown Fitchburg! Fitchburg was/is a loose collection of streets, houses, (and later) industrial parks which did not want to be absorbed by the City of Madison-- so they incorporated as a city in the early 1980s. (Which reminds me of another error-- they had some old looking buildings in the episode-- I don't think that there is a building in Fitchburg older than the early 1970s..., unless a farmhouse is still standing somewhere.)

I don't mind scenes done with computer generated background or scenery, esp. for science fiction or fantasy or anything else which doesn't take place in the (supposedly) real world. But there are times when using the actual location is far superior!

(And, yes, I know that with the kind of budget restraints a television show has, going to the actual location is too expensive. That's why me and my friends make fun of the errors, rather than get upset by them.)


B.

[dana]

What! me RANT!

Totally unheard of behavior for me
AIIZ

PS- Diane, when a person tells you to run because you are being HACKED, then they are a Damer as in being Hacked to Death? Only a play on words of which a big boy like Helitack understand. But only Heli knows for sure?

Zeus, if you can't go off on a rant on the eplaya, where can you?!!!
(for some reason they always try to cart me off when I do it on the street corner....)

Zeus I like your posts, rants and all. But I can see how someone like Dianne or Blackbird might take offense. There's a few folks on the eplaya that make it hard to tell when they're "being in character", being too obscure, having a bit of a joke, etc. Like when you had the rant going and ended it by asking if she was "with you or against you" - I assumed you were being ironic and making a point. (The point being that both Hollywood and our lovely brilliant politicians like GWB tend to make the heroes and villains all black and white, all good or evil and you better take the right side... or something like that.) or were you serious??

As far as any "Hollywood" conspiracy, you really only made that as an oblique comment. I can't see Hollywood exec's as doing anything more sinister than making very definite decisions about what will sell. If they plan to invest millions in a movie, you can damn well bet that they think long and hard about what kinds of villains the American public will get into, because that is the villain the audience gets to take pleasure in when the good guy wacks em at the exciting climax. Sure, George feeds us the same shit. But no direct relationship between them.

I was thinking about what you wrote about - if Greek civilization stayed strong and persisted to become an even stronger influence in the modern world. Somehow it seems that the greatest civilizations all have their time, then vanish, or maybe in a way go "underground", become only a part of the mass unconscious (or individual's). As if they had their time and are simply done. Personally I'm just crazy enough to believe strongly that civilizations like Lemuria and Atlantis have come and gone. Been there, done that?


Rant on!!

[diane o'thirst]

I'm not offended, just annoyed. And I'm *really* annoyed at people reading shit into this movie, especially the whole Spartans = America, Persians = Iran thing. First of all, Persia was a Pagan civilization and the mullahs of today would kill everyone on that field for infidels. Persian Empire <b>does not</b> equal Iran.

The truth is, I'm deeply frightened by the prospect of Bush going to war against Iran, especially since the Bush Administration says that they weren't opposed to NUKING Iran. I (and everyone born before 1990) grew up in the shadow of nuclear war and I don't want to go through that again. Am I a hypocrite because I went to see 300 — twice — and also went to two rallies protesting the Iraqi War? "Hypocrite": Aughties, "Racist": '80s/'90s, "Manicheistic": '60s/'70s, an over-used and misapplied verbal barb. Usually thrown by a jerk wrapped up too tight in their own dogma to understand that people fly in the face of labels and don't always adhere to an expected paradigm.

Whatever happened to just going to see a movie and forgetting about the socio-political repercussions? I went because I like an adrenalin-soaked (*not* testosterone — the female characters in this film were every bit as strong and confident as the men were) movie every now and again, I went because there were Friesian horses and killer effects, I went because I dig sword-and-sandal epics. 300 is a popcorn film, like Indiana Jones and Conan the Barbarian.

Maybe I'm being touchy but I really do think that the PC brigade's ranting about this movie is equivalent to the Islamic brouhaha over the Danish cartoons of last year. The only real difference is, nobody's died because of this movie.

Eh, well. Big deal. The movie's popular, lots of people are talking about it, so some are bound to be cranks and there's lots here for conspiracy theorists, a decidedly un-humourous lot, to glom onto. Sorry, but I just snapped there.

Just one request: Can we dispense with the "Persia = Iran" rhetoric now?
[unplonk]

Edit: No, I didn't take any of that personally. I think what happened is you might have been expecting something historically-accurate and you got, basically, a computer-animated graphic novel. Everything larger than life, played for "coolness" factor. Am I correct?

I went to see 300, knowing it wouldn't be historically-accurate: they didn't say things like "Tonight We Dine In HELL!!" because as you and I both know, AIIZ, Hell isn't a Pagan concept. It's an Abrahamic one. With that in mind, I went to see it and came out with a great big grin because it gave me everything I was expecting and then some.