300 - Yet Another Blog Review
Warning Spoilers Ahead!
So I saw 300 last week, and I must admit I was really looking forward to it as I have long been a fan of Frank Miller's art and storytelling (though I haven't read Sin City and frankly find that material a bit much - like eating your cheerios in whiskey for breakfast). I actually bought the graphic novel a couple of years ago, and it certainly is a stirring and graphically impressive exaggerated retelling of the Battle of Thermopylae. It was in fact published in 1999, long before 9/11 or our current entanglement in Iraq and ongoing threats of war with Iran. And I did see the movie Sin City and at the very least I was fascinated and even awed by the way the images on the big screen matched the panels, look, and feel of the graphic novel (which I did peek at before seeing the movie).
But what can I say about 300? Off the bat, I will admit that the adrenalin crazed inner 13 year old boy loved the movie, just as in my adolescence I loved Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers (which a party pooper friend of mine informed me was a trashy sci-fi tribute to fascism). But the 40 year old Buddhist minister came away deeply troubled. As one admitted fan of Frank Miller said of his work: "The more I think about it, the less I like it." By the way I took that from the comments section on a blog entitled "Why Frank Miller is a fascist writer." But let's leave aside Frank Miller himself for a moment and even leave aside the fact that 300 was written in 1999. How did the movie 300 itself strike me?
To begin with, have you ever seen those Marine Corps recruitment ads that they used to play on t.v. and before movie previews (maybe they still do, I just haven't seen one in a while)? The one's where the young man is suddenly transformed into a knight or some other kind of warrior and must battle monsters and jump through flames and who knows what else? Then they get transformed into a US Marine in full dress. 300 felt like a 2 hour version of those Marine Corps recruitment videos. The Spartans even bellowed a kind of roar that sounded equivalent to the Marines "Ooo-rahh!" several times in the movie. And seriously you almost feel like you can get testosterone poisoning from just sitting there watching the whole thing.
On the other hand, I think I also began to understand the joke from that old comedy movie Airplane where the pilot keeps asking questions like, "Billy, do you like to watch gladiator movies?" Not that there wasn't some seriously gratuitous female T&A (even a rather overdone and grotesque orgy scene that some reviewers compared to Caligula) to keep us hetero types happy. Oh, and who knew that the ancient Greek Oracle was also an exotic dancer! Something for everyone!
But the more disturbing subtexts (What am I saying - they were overt-texts) of the movie was the us vs. them mentality that divides everything into black and white. And I mean this rather literally. Other reviewers have already pointed this out, but it is glaringly obvious that the "heroes" of the story are white Europeans (and to be fair so were the historical Spartans) while the enemies are all Africans, Middle-Eastern men and mutants!?!?! Perhaps there were some Africans serving in the Persian army in the 5th century BCE. And of course the Persians were Middle-Eastern. But I doubt Xerxes was a giant modern primitive, or that his armies contained orcs (they show an Immortal with his mask off and its basically an orc) and ogres (this is hard to miss). Talk about dehumanizing the enemy. For that matter, the ancient Persians probably did not look too different from their Greek counterparts - the Persians were as much descendants of the ancient Aryan tribes as the Greeks unless I am mistaken. This was not a European vs. Arab conflict - but the movie certainly seems to convey the image that this is Europe vs. Asia (and Africa judging by appearances) . In fact, both the graphic novel and the movie say of the Spartans that they are about to fight "all the hordes of Asia." Wow! Maybe it was true historically that the Persians were bringing a massive force (some historicans seriously suggest 2 million) from the Asian continent, but to use that term now makes me think of terms from the early 20th century like "Yellow Peril." Have we really retrogressed that much as a culture? Are we really fighting the "hordes of Asia" in our War on Terror? I don't think so, in fact, as far as alliances and enemies go - Asia seems to be a realy mixed bag right now. Iran and North Korea are actually our only declared enemies, whereas our allies are Japan, Pakistan (kinda sorta), Saudi Arabia (their royal family anyway), China is an important trade partner, and so on and so forth. This fighting against "all the hordes of Asia" may have been historically the case, and it may play well in the Red States (think of of all the people Borat made unwitting clowns of) but is this kind of rhetoric really helpful at this time? Even as propaganda?
Does it even need to be said that apart from its apparent demonization of the "other" (meaning all those who are not white Europeans) the movie glorifies war in a way that probably hasn't been seen since the 1940s, or at least since John Wayne died? One reviewer called it "warnography." Even more disturbing to me than its glorification of war (because really the Spartan sacrifice was laudible - and perhaps they did save Western civilization) was the villainization of all those who opposed the war. The movie even more than the graphic novel (because the whole Theron subplot is absent from the graphic novel) portrays all those who argue for war as in the pay of the enemy. In the case of the clergy who argue that one should trust in the gods rather than war, they are not only traitors but are portrayed as greedly leprous old lechers. And the politician Theron is not only a traitor but a rapist. And just to nitpick - since all the gold coins the Persians bought off these traitors with had the stamp of Xerxes in it, where in Greece did they think they were going to spend it? Or did they plan on just spending it after the Persians wiped everybody out? If I were a lecherous old leprous pagan priest selling out my home and country I'd demand unmarked coins and then hightail it out of town. I guess the point is that peace-mongers are not only corrupt traitors but stupid and shortsighted as well.
Oh, and Ephialtes! The humpbacked traitor! The more I think about this subplot (which granted was based on history though I don't know if Ephialtes was actually a grotesque monster) the more it bothers me. The point of it seems to me that Ephialtes soul was as twisted as his body, and therefore should really have been dropped off a cliff as a baby the way his parents were supposed to. WTF! So I guess the Spatans aren't just standing up for truth and justice and democracy, but also for eugenics, abortion, and infanticide!
Oh and of course the constant cry to defend truth and justice and democracy against "mysticism and tyranny." All this seems a little odd coming from the Spartans. Granted, these guys were defending the proto-democracy of all the Greek City States, but the graphic novel had a line that really put this in better perspective than the movie. At one in the point in the graphic novel King Leonidas says to his men, "Leave democracy to the Athenians." So basically these guys are the US Marines.
Now how about Frank Miller himself. Turns out the guy really is a flag waving patriot who is at the least a raving Libertarian and believes that our enemies are an existential evil straight from the 6th century. Frank Miller may not be a racist or a fascist, but he is certainly not one for nuance. I think I will write a separate blog about Frank Miller himself.
So what is my final verdict on 300? Well, it certainly is quite a spectacle. The imagery is quite arresting - the graphic novel is quite literally brought to life and that is something to see. And on one level it is certainly a rousing war story. But if you think about it - it's message is really disturbing - glorification of war, demonization of the enemy, villification of anyone who speaks for peace, and so on. While an East Coast middle class liberal intellectual like myself can laugh off this kind of stuff, I worry that there are many in this country (the one's who were taken in by Borat) who will take this movie with a deadly seriousness. And it really bothers me that this may be exactly what Frank Miller intends.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
So I saw 300 last week, and I must admit I was really looking forward to it as I have long been a fan of Frank Miller's art and storytelling (though I haven't read Sin City and frankly find that material a bit much - like eating your cheerios in whiskey for breakfast). I actually bought the graphic novel a couple of years ago, and it certainly is a stirring and graphically impressive exaggerated retelling of the Battle of Thermopylae. It was in fact published in 1999, long before 9/11 or our current entanglement in Iraq and ongoing threats of war with Iran. And I did see the movie Sin City and at the very least I was fascinated and even awed by the way the images on the big screen matched the panels, look, and feel of the graphic novel (which I did peek at before seeing the movie).
But what can I say about 300? Off the bat, I will admit that the adrenalin crazed inner 13 year old boy loved the movie, just as in my adolescence I loved Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers (which a party pooper friend of mine informed me was a trashy sci-fi tribute to fascism). But the 40 year old Buddhist minister came away deeply troubled. As one admitted fan of Frank Miller said of his work: "The more I think about it, the less I like it." By the way I took that from the comments section on a blog entitled "Why Frank Miller is a fascist writer." But let's leave aside Frank Miller himself for a moment and even leave aside the fact that 300 was written in 1999. How did the movie 300 itself strike me?
To begin with, have you ever seen those Marine Corps recruitment ads that they used to play on t.v. and before movie previews (maybe they still do, I just haven't seen one in a while)? The one's where the young man is suddenly transformed into a knight or some other kind of warrior and must battle monsters and jump through flames and who knows what else? Then they get transformed into a US Marine in full dress. 300 felt like a 2 hour version of those Marine Corps recruitment videos. The Spartans even bellowed a kind of roar that sounded equivalent to the Marines "Ooo-rahh!" several times in the movie. And seriously you almost feel like you can get testosterone poisoning from just sitting there watching the whole thing.
On the other hand, I think I also began to understand the joke from that old comedy movie Airplane where the pilot keeps asking questions like, "Billy, do you like to watch gladiator movies?" Not that there wasn't some seriously gratuitous female T&A (even a rather overdone and grotesque orgy scene that some reviewers compared to Caligula) to keep us hetero types happy. Oh, and who knew that the ancient Greek Oracle was also an exotic dancer! Something for everyone!
But the more disturbing subtexts (What am I saying - they were overt-texts) of the movie was the us vs. them mentality that divides everything into black and white. And I mean this rather literally. Other reviewers have already pointed this out, but it is glaringly obvious that the "heroes" of the story are white Europeans (and to be fair so were the historical Spartans) while the enemies are all Africans, Middle-Eastern men and mutants!?!?! Perhaps there were some Africans serving in the Persian army in the 5th century BCE. And of course the Persians were Middle-Eastern. But I doubt Xerxes was a giant modern primitive, or that his armies contained orcs (they show an Immortal with his mask off and its basically an orc) and ogres (this is hard to miss). Talk about dehumanizing the enemy. For that matter, the ancient Persians probably did not look too different from their Greek counterparts - the Persians were as much descendants of the ancient Aryan tribes as the Greeks unless I am mistaken. This was not a European vs. Arab conflict - but the movie certainly seems to convey the image that this is Europe vs. Asia (and Africa judging by appearances) . In fact, both the graphic novel and the movie say of the Spartans that they are about to fight "all the hordes of Asia." Wow! Maybe it was true historically that the Persians were bringing a massive force (some historicans seriously suggest 2 million) from the Asian continent, but to use that term now makes me think of terms from the early 20th century like "Yellow Peril." Have we really retrogressed that much as a culture? Are we really fighting the "hordes of Asia" in our War on Terror? I don't think so, in fact, as far as alliances and enemies go - Asia seems to be a realy mixed bag right now. Iran and North Korea are actually our only declared enemies, whereas our allies are Japan, Pakistan (kinda sorta), Saudi Arabia (their royal family anyway), China is an important trade partner, and so on and so forth. This fighting against "all the hordes of Asia" may have been historically the case, and it may play well in the Red States (think of of all the people Borat made unwitting clowns of) but is this kind of rhetoric really helpful at this time? Even as propaganda?
Does it even need to be said that apart from its apparent demonization of the "other" (meaning all those who are not white Europeans) the movie glorifies war in a way that probably hasn't been seen since the 1940s, or at least since John Wayne died? One reviewer called it "warnography." Even more disturbing to me than its glorification of war (because really the Spartan sacrifice was laudible - and perhaps they did save Western civilization) was the villainization of all those who opposed the war. The movie even more than the graphic novel (because the whole Theron subplot is absent from the graphic novel) portrays all those who argue for war as in the pay of the enemy. In the case of the clergy who argue that one should trust in the gods rather than war, they are not only traitors but are portrayed as greedly leprous old lechers. And the politician Theron is not only a traitor but a rapist. And just to nitpick - since all the gold coins the Persians bought off these traitors with had the stamp of Xerxes in it, where in Greece did they think they were going to spend it? Or did they plan on just spending it after the Persians wiped everybody out? If I were a lecherous old leprous pagan priest selling out my home and country I'd demand unmarked coins and then hightail it out of town. I guess the point is that peace-mongers are not only corrupt traitors but stupid and shortsighted as well.
Oh, and Ephialtes! The humpbacked traitor! The more I think about this subplot (which granted was based on history though I don't know if Ephialtes was actually a grotesque monster) the more it bothers me. The point of it seems to me that Ephialtes soul was as twisted as his body, and therefore should really have been dropped off a cliff as a baby the way his parents were supposed to. WTF! So I guess the Spatans aren't just standing up for truth and justice and democracy, but also for eugenics, abortion, and infanticide!
Oh and of course the constant cry to defend truth and justice and democracy against "mysticism and tyranny." All this seems a little odd coming from the Spartans. Granted, these guys were defending the proto-democracy of all the Greek City States, but the graphic novel had a line that really put this in better perspective than the movie. At one in the point in the graphic novel King Leonidas says to his men, "Leave democracy to the Athenians." So basically these guys are the US Marines.
Now how about Frank Miller himself. Turns out the guy really is a flag waving patriot who is at the least a raving Libertarian and believes that our enemies are an existential evil straight from the 6th century. Frank Miller may not be a racist or a fascist, but he is certainly not one for nuance. I think I will write a separate blog about Frank Miller himself.
So what is my final verdict on 300? Well, it certainly is quite a spectacle. The imagery is quite arresting - the graphic novel is quite literally brought to life and that is something to see. And on one level it is certainly a rousing war story. But if you think about it - it's message is really disturbing - glorification of war, demonization of the enemy, villification of anyone who speaks for peace, and so on. While an East Coast middle class liberal intellectual like myself can laugh off this kind of stuff, I worry that there are many in this country (the one's who were taken in by Borat) who will take this movie with a deadly seriousness. And it really bothers me that this may be exactly what Frank Miller intends.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
posted by Ryuei at 12:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home