Anti-Rec: 300
Jan. 31st, 2007 12:33 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityofoneOkay, I normally don't post reviews of the movies I see early for work, because a) I'm lazy, and b) I figure no one cares. But this movie made me SO VIOLENTLY ANGRY that I feel I have to say something, and I really, really want you to care. And to not see it.
This was the most disgusting piece of pro-Iraq war propaganda I have ever seen. Now, I know the comic was published in 1998, but the movie was made in 2006 and is coming out in 2007, and that reading is very, very clear to me. I may be overreacting, but, well, I don't think I am.
The basic plot of the movie is: a representative of Persia comes to Sparta and demands that the Spartan king, Leonidas, submit to the Persian king Xerxes. (Who looks like a Goa'uld, by the way. This was the one thing in the movie that made me laugh, and I don't think it was supposed to.) Leonidas refuses and, well, kills the messenger. Then, ignoring the advice of the oracles, who are depicted as physically mutated men who prey on young girls, and the law, backed by a council who are portrayed as cowardly, corrupt politicians, Leonidas gathers 300 of his best soldiers and goes to bravely take on the Persian army. There's lots of talk about how "Freedom isn't free, it must be paid for, and the price is blood!" and how the Spartans must think of their wives and sons, and how they go to fight to spread freedom and stop the slavery of the Persians. Okay, yick. I think that's pretty clear propaganda right there, and it alone would have bothered me. But this movie takes it EVEN FARTHER.
The Persian army is depicted as an army of monsters. They are all less than human: they're all horribly mutated in one way or another, hunchbacked and grotesque. They're not white. They're sexual perverts! (And while we get jokes about boy-loving men [this from Spartans, mind you—Spartans who are all dressed in very manly and heterosexual giant leather jockstraps], of course what we see is women engaging in some form of pantomime lesbianism—because why not titillate while also casting moral judgment?) Obviously, they deserve to be brutally slaughtered. It must be the will of God.
Never has a film made me feel so physically ill to be in the theater watching it. And it wasn't all the beheadings, although those were copious. I felt like I was being made to watch a Leni Riefenstahl movie, or the very worst bits of Birth of a Nation. And then there was even more to feel sick about, like the fact that the sole female character's only role seemed to be to allow herself to get raped by her husband's rival—and this was presented as heroic. What a vile, vile piece of trash.
I left the theater and I was angry. I was SO ANGRY. BossMan didn't like it either, but he didn't seem to feel violated the way I did. Again, I may be overreacting, and I almost want to ask some of you to see it so you can tell me if I am. But really, I'd love to ensure that NOBODY sees it. I don't want it to make a cent of money. I don't want some stupid kid somewhere to see it, and like the extreme violence and disgustingly depicted sex, and subconsciously make connections to what's going on in the Middle East. The United States is not the "heroic" Spartan army thrust into epic battle with the "monstrous" Muslims...I mean ancient Persians. And I am sickened that a film such as this could be made—and made so clearly to attract young boys—in order to make even the slightest case that this is so. I feel sick, and I feel furious.
But there's nothing I can do about it, and tomorrow I have to interview David Wenham and try to think of a polite way of asking him how he feels about being in a piece of vile propaganda trash. You know, mixed in with the questions about how much he worked out before donning his giant leather jockstrap and whether he knows Russell Crowe.
I just...I just don't know.
ETA: If you feel strongly about this and want to link to it and spread the word, I would appreciate it. It may do a little good, who knows.
This was the most disgusting piece of pro-Iraq war propaganda I have ever seen. Now, I know the comic was published in 1998, but the movie was made in 2006 and is coming out in 2007, and that reading is very, very clear to me. I may be overreacting, but, well, I don't think I am.
The basic plot of the movie is: a representative of Persia comes to Sparta and demands that the Spartan king, Leonidas, submit to the Persian king Xerxes. (Who looks like a Goa'uld, by the way. This was the one thing in the movie that made me laugh, and I don't think it was supposed to.) Leonidas refuses and, well, kills the messenger. Then, ignoring the advice of the oracles, who are depicted as physically mutated men who prey on young girls, and the law, backed by a council who are portrayed as cowardly, corrupt politicians, Leonidas gathers 300 of his best soldiers and goes to bravely take on the Persian army. There's lots of talk about how "Freedom isn't free, it must be paid for, and the price is blood!" and how the Spartans must think of their wives and sons, and how they go to fight to spread freedom and stop the slavery of the Persians. Okay, yick. I think that's pretty clear propaganda right there, and it alone would have bothered me. But this movie takes it EVEN FARTHER.
The Persian army is depicted as an army of monsters. They are all less than human: they're all horribly mutated in one way or another, hunchbacked and grotesque. They're not white. They're sexual perverts! (And while we get jokes about boy-loving men [this from Spartans, mind you—Spartans who are all dressed in very manly and heterosexual giant leather jockstraps], of course what we see is women engaging in some form of pantomime lesbianism—because why not titillate while also casting moral judgment?) Obviously, they deserve to be brutally slaughtered. It must be the will of God.
Never has a film made me feel so physically ill to be in the theater watching it. And it wasn't all the beheadings, although those were copious. I felt like I was being made to watch a Leni Riefenstahl movie, or the very worst bits of Birth of a Nation. And then there was even more to feel sick about, like the fact that the sole female character's only role seemed to be to allow herself to get raped by her husband's rival—and this was presented as heroic. What a vile, vile piece of trash.
I left the theater and I was angry. I was SO ANGRY. BossMan didn't like it either, but he didn't seem to feel violated the way I did. Again, I may be overreacting, and I almost want to ask some of you to see it so you can tell me if I am. But really, I'd love to ensure that NOBODY sees it. I don't want it to make a cent of money. I don't want some stupid kid somewhere to see it, and like the extreme violence and disgustingly depicted sex, and subconsciously make connections to what's going on in the Middle East. The United States is not the "heroic" Spartan army thrust into epic battle with the "monstrous" Muslims...I mean ancient Persians. And I am sickened that a film such as this could be made—and made so clearly to attract young boys—in order to make even the slightest case that this is so. I feel sick, and I feel furious.
But there's nothing I can do about it, and tomorrow I have to interview David Wenham and try to think of a polite way of asking him how he feels about being in a piece of vile propaganda trash. You know, mixed in with the questions about how much he worked out before donning his giant leather jockstrap and whether he knows Russell Crowe.
I just...I just don't know.
ETA: If you feel strongly about this and want to link to it and spread the word, I would appreciate it. It may do a little good, who knows.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-01-31 08:57 pm (UTC)Do you at least get to write a review where you can tear the thing to pieces? Or just the interview? I mean, that would still be a chance to criticize, but personally, I wouldn't really want to do that in an interview with an actor.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-01-31 09:06 pm (UTC)You're right that the interview would not be the right place. And yet, I still want to say something...maybe I'll just ask him if he thinks the film has a message? Really neutral, leaving it at that?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-01-31 10:26 pm (UTC)Personally, I'd love to see what he says to that. Do you think asking him if he thinks the film has a message with regard to current politics would already go too far?