Everyone with a blog and a dream thinks they are a pundit these days.
Political pundits are paraded about on CNN and FOX News daily to rant and rave about one side or the other. Film critics, myself included, are pundits in their own right. The only difference is that we play within the politics of Hollywood, a world that is arguably less detrimental to society and usually less serious. I mean, who can say that talking about an exit strategy for Iraq is anything comparable to Katie Holmes' exit strategy? We get to talk about the disturbing, depraved world of celebrity and the schlock that gets put in front of moviegoers everywhere. Real pundits, well, they talk about more important things - or so I'm told.
Another thing that real pundits get more of than the pundits of the silver screen is hate mail. Despite the fact that readers will get very angry when I torch the latest Sandra Bullock movie because I "just don't get it," the amount of hate mail I get cannot compare to that of, say, Rush Limbaugh - and deservedly so.
But there are those issues that cross over, uniting the world of film with the world of politics, bringing more angry people into the mix. Lets take, for example, an article that I wrote about two weeks ago, titled "The Anti-300 Debate?" It referred to a petition that was put forth by an Iranian doctor who said that the recently released film 300 was both historically inaccurate and "fraudulent and distorted, and its broadcast guarantees the violation of undeniable international legal rights."
My rebuttal, as a member of the film community, was simply that it is "just a movie," a spectacle created for the mindless enjoyment of college kids everywhere who revel in simple themes like insurmountable odds, gratuitous female nudity, and comically gory action. I couldn't understand how someone, anyone, could be so offended by a simple film. But I had obviously spoken too soon, as I seemed to have awakened a segment of my readership that I didn't even know I had.
In just 12 days the article received over 110 comments, something of a small wonder considering this is my personal blog, a site that attracts less than 1,000 visitors per day. It became apparent then, and even more so when I read an article in Newsweek by Evan Thomas, that this was a broad and heated political issue.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Astute Observation
One strange thing pointed out to me by a friend (an indian who just arrived in this country), is that it is odd that the persians / bad guys are mostly depicted as being black, when persians are actually white... I was surprised by his observation, and i think perhaps there is a problem with the integrity of this particular film and director...
2 - Eric Olsen
AO, I noticed this in the film and it troubled me briefly as well, but then I realized the film was emphasizing the "100 nations" aspect of the Xerxes army - it wasn't just Persians.
Neil, spectacular job on this - very logical, informative, and fun to read as well!
3 - Deano
I noted on another review - historical accuracy is not the focal point of this movie (nor in Miller's graphic novel).
It was very ironic that the movie spent an inordinate amount of time speechifying around Spartans not wanting to bend knee to the Persians and laying claims to Spartan freedom, while ignoring the historical fact that the Spartan society was largely supported by large numbers of Heolot slaves - the reason Sparta was able to devote so much of its resources to developing a professional military in the first place. Fear of slave uprisings was an ongoing problem in Sparta.
The Iranian contraversy is somewhat amusing as I suspect the vast majority of movie-goers probably wouldn't associate ancient Persia with Iran in any case....
4 - chris
Have you also considered the fact that most Americans don't realize that Persians are known as Iranians today? Not a very effective propaganda tool if your target audience can't identify the villains in real life.
5 - GS
"For a lesser educated America, these look like political statements ripped right out of our own headlines,"
Someone once said....
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."
But I am sure your educated enough to know who said that.
If the ancient story resonates in our times even through the artistic prism of this creative film. I think it does so for a damn good reason.
Maybe Americans are not so ill educated as you might like to think, and this films political messages mapped onto our times are not so easily dismissed.
But what do I know? just ill educated right?
Freedom ISN'T free.
6 - Ray
At least they have ripped abs and giant elephants. Who wouldn't want them?
7 - animulder
this film was never meant to be historically accurate. It is a movie based on a comic that was based on another movie about a historical battle. it is a work of fiction. So to start picking it apart for historically accuracy is kinda silly. So if you realize hey this is a comic book movie, just like say daredevil and batman... (frank miller wrote for both these books) So sit back relax and enjoy the show.
8 - seth
I like how no one seems to complain about the use of hand grenades...
9 - Matt
There is one thing you didn't cover in your article that essentially renders most arguments that this movie is some sort of political commentary on the war on terror false.
As you mentioned The movie is almost a cell by cell copy of the graphic novel penned by Frank Miller. However, Miller's political leanings in the war on terror are moot because the book was published in 1998. There had been no 9/11; the US had not invaded Iraq or Afghanistan; and there was no talk of war with Iran. Any message seen in the story that is relevant to today's political climate is purely a figment of the critic's imagination.
10 - Robin
Fact: You're an idiot.
11 - Dan Peters
Persians were actually dark skinned/black, not entiely white, since they were from the middle east/mesopotamian area, so by chance the bad guys(persians) are black, big deal this is not a flaw in the flim or director, its the most historicly accurate thing they could have done.
12 - Sunsneezer
Just as the stories told through the film (and comic) by Dillios, the movie actually works at presenting some form of war logic in a positive light.
Basically, you have this great storyteller who exaggerates reality and makes up parts of it to motivate a people to fight and die.
Dillios, Snyder, Miller are telling stories about disobeying authority, about absolutely soulless enemies, about the greater good.
It may not be obvious propaganda or not even knowingly have a political agenda, but to impressionable minds it can contribute to shape ideas some can be against.
Still, I feel this is the essence of all great art.
13 - Kevin
Honestly, accuracy and film rarely go together. How many excellent novels have been turned into movies only to be either poor in quality or poor in accuracy?
The people who get upset are irrational, sort of like how I deal with the sad dismemberment of the LotR. I've only slept through two movies while watching them the second time: The second Harry Potter and the FotR.
Kevin
14 - orig_club_soda
Why do we have to sugar coat this? At that period of time nations brutally murdered each other. And then told Ulysses-like tales of the battles. They may not have been Lord of the Rings-type monsters, but the Persians didnt walk around like free-love hippies helping people more than anything else. Even hundreds of years later the nation of Islam spread through military might, not enlightenment.
15 - Rolando
Like I said elsewhere, Iran's president does far more damage than any movie could ever do...
16 - Spencer
Well I know personally when I saw the movie, and teh credits rolled I said to myself.
"man that was a good movie, that one guy severed another guy's leg with his sword"
But then again, what do I know.
17 - Brian
This film is fascist art, plain and simple. It is beautiful, but then so were Nazi aesthetics.
300 glorifies euthanasia and the reckless warmongering by a strongman leader (who come complete with a "destiny") in the face of (so-called in the film) democratic laws. The perfection of the male form reflected an absolute moral superiority. The "enemy" comprised just about every non-white nation, in addition to which they were also deformed and monstrous and, apparently, queer. The film ends with Leonidas represented as a Christ figure upon his death.
Mr. Miller, if you know anything about film or film theory, you know that representation is always political, especially when you have the Hollywood cultural machine behind it. Dismissing the fascist nature of this film by focusing on narrative devices or historical exegesis is insufficient and simple-minded.
Nothing is "just" anything. Despite what many people want to believe, or want us to believe, the world is culturally complex. To ignore this fact is to reveal oneself to be ignorant or a scoundrel.
18 - Candide
Neil, first let me say that if you speak the way you write, I would listen to you all day! Your cadence is perfect and a pleasure to read.
About the article, your logic was flawless and there in lays the rub, logic and politics are mutually exclusive.
Psychology on the other hand is one of politics’ favorite bedfellows.
When someone is looking to pick a fight, they will grasp at anything no matter how flimsy to make it appear that they were justified in throwing the first punch.
There is nothing that works better to get others to rally to your aid than playing the victim.
and # 10 that is an opinion not a fact. Facts can be proven.
19 - pkay
okay this movie is from a comic book maybe we should have a long debate over spider man. a man who's a spider. maybe stan lee knows something we don't. noooo!!!! its just a movie if ppl want to believe it let them.
20 - Surrounded by Conservatives
Fact: The Persian Army employed Axe handed mutants, which are sadly extinct today.
Anyone who believes the crazy conspiracies are fit for the nut house, but with that said - this movie is just coming out at a bad time (in terms of politics, good time in terms of movie schedules releases - no movies out now so big profits for a blockbuster like this).
In the wake of the Iraq war and the soon ousting of a President and his war-bent regime, it is only too fitting that a movie like this should come out. NOT because theres some sort of conspiracy, but because a movie such as this could cause ignorant individuals to get a false image of what the Persians and by extension Iranians believe - eg: highly suggestible types might interpret the fictional dialogue as actual threats. Believe me there are actually a lot of idiots that would see a movie like this and use traits displayed in the movie as arguments to attack Iran (stupid as is it is - the individuals are to be blamed not the movie).