300: Rise of an Empire (film)

[Neil]

I love the original, so hope this one can deliver too!

http://media.aintitcool.com/media/uploads/2013/harry/bia8todcuaaui34_large.jpeg

[EvilNed]

The original was one of the most Nazi flicks I've seen since Triumph of Will. I was studying film history at the time, and 300 (the film) parallelled the nazi propaganda films of the 30's and 40's eerily.

[Neil]

Explain? When it was based on a comic book work of fiction loosely based on a true story?

[shootemindehead]

Eh?

What was nazi about it?

[EvilNed]

In Nazi germany, all the heroes were athletic, aryan über-mench defending western civilization against foreign invaders of a different ethnic background who were often portrayed as effeminate and/or homosexual. Things like eugenics were praised, and just like in 300, people of poor genes were likely to be a bad person inside.

What was so nazi about 300? What WASN'T nazi about it? The easterners are portrayed as orcs for fucks sake.

It's a scary piece of modern film history that echoes the pro-Aryan propaganda films of Nazi germany. Comic or no comic.

[Mike70]

I love the original, so hope this one can deliver too!

well, if this movie is about the much neglected Battle of Artemisium (which the Athenian navy was fighting concurrently with the Battle of Thermopylae - the Athenian navy prevented an amphibious landing behind the allied greek army's position) then i'd like to see it. BUT having read the synopsis, it all sounds like a mishmash. Marathon and Salamis are going to be worked into the story as well. maybe Marathon will be the starting point of this film because it happened a decade before the events in 300 and involved none of the same major players.

on an interesting note: the greek playwright Aeschylus fought at Marathon and Salamis. his description of the battle in "the Persians" was taken from his own experience. in fact, Aeschylus' epitaph simply said: "Aeschylus, the Athenian, Euphorion's son, is dead. This tomb in Gela's cornlands covers him. His glorious valour the hallowed field of Marathon could tell, and the longhaired Persians had knowledge of it."

[EvilNed]

Pretty sure this movie is going to be about the battle of Artemisium as much as 300 was a battle about Thermopylae. I.e.: Not at all.

[shootemindehead]

In Nazi germany, all the heroes were athletic, aryan über-mench defending western civilization against foreign invaders of a different ethnic background who were often portrayed as effeminate and/or homosexual. Things like eugenics were praised, and just like in 300, people of poor genes were likely to be a bad person inside.

What was so nazi about 300? What WASN'T nazi about it? The easterners are portrayed as orcs for fucks sake.

It's a scary piece of modern film history that echoes the pro-Aryan propaganda films of Nazi germany. Comic or no comic.

After studying the war for over 25 years, I am very well versed in the National Socialist period in Germany. It's my first love :kiss: . But, as far as '300' being "nazi", I'm afraid that's beyond me.

Off hand I cannot think of any German propaganda that portrayed their enemies as "effeminate" or "homosexual". It certainly wasn't as prolific as the "monster" propaganda image.

I don't really see any "nazi" connection at all in '300' to be honest.

[EvilNed]

I don't really see any "nazi" connection at all in '300' to be honest.

And this is what scares me the most.

Also, I'm not suggesting any connections are intentional. But it disgusts me that 80 years later, we're back to making things that villify the exact same things the nazis villified. In the exact same manner.

[AcesandEights]

I don't really see any "nazi" connection at all in '300' to be honest.

Generally speaking, Ned is correct. Though I wouldn't go overboard on the use of Nazism as a direct link, it's more by way of comparison of the ideals. It also drew a lot of comparisons to life in post 911 America. The ideas behind the valiant defense against the corrupt Eastern hordes is there. The ideas about defending the innocence and purity of Western civilization are there. The warrior ethos and looking down on those who are unable to live up to it are there. Uncompromising service to the state, check. Physical deformity as a measure of mental and ethical corruption are there.

To top it all off, and as a complete aside from the whole nationalism as foremost in thought and ideal, they bandy about the word freedom and proselytize about its defense and there is no mention of the Helots :rolleyes:

I seem to recall 300 being referred to as one of the more right-leaning films in a longtime when it came out, I understand why, which is also funny, because it was also the gayest mainstream film in recent years, as well; in probability the actual Spartans wouldn't probably mind such an epitaph.

[Neil]

Also, I'm not suggesting any connections are intentional. But it disgusts me that 80 years later, we're back to making things that villify the exact same things the nazis villified. In the exact same manner.
Huh? It's basically a work of fantasy threaded around a historical event?

I get the feeling people often just see what they want to see with stuff like this. I mean some people see consumerism in Dawn of the Dead... Personally I just see a bunch of zombies in a shopping mall Romero happened to be able to hire on the cheap!

[bassman]

Huh? It's basically a work of fantasy threaded around a historical event?


Precisely. I remember talking with Ned about this around the time the first '300' was released. It's not a historical documentary....

[EvilNed]

Huh? It's basically a work of fantasy threaded around a historical event?


Not trying to make you out as daft or anything, Neil, but that case can be made for dozens of films made throughout the years. The Russian epic Alexander Nevsky is about russians fighting off Teutonic knights and was produced during the leadup to WW2... But yeah, of course, it could just be a "historical film" or "fantasy film". That case can always be made. But it's rarely that simple.

300 is a film that could have been produced by Goebbels 80 years ago, and shown in nazi germany to thunderous applause. It shares the exact same themes as those films back then. You can go about and view as a "silly comic book film" all you want, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it promotes the exact same world view as the nazis did 80 years ago.

- - - Updated - - -

Another piece of trivia from the "great film" 300.

Here's the theme song for 300:

VAZsf8mTfyk

Sounds eerily similar to that of Titus, from 1999, doesn't it?

3gN4NWTDdp8

[Morto Vivente]

I seem to recall 300 being referred to as one of the more right-leaning films in a longtime when it came out, I understand why, which is also funny, because it was also the gayest mainstream film in recent years, as well; in probability the actual Spartans wouldn't probably mind such an epitaph.

I have to agree, 300 Spartans was incredibly homo-erotic. We all know homosexual relationships were accepted as a fundamental part of Ancient Greek culture throughout the Classical and Hellenistic eras. I respect the fact the Ancient Greeks were transparent about it rather than having Cerberus guarding the closet door 24/7. Their attitude was far more modern than the extreme hypocrisy prevalent in the Roman Republic. Gays in the military is anything but new, what about Fredrick the 2nd of Prussia and his army of lovers, it certainly raises some questions concerning the slogan “Make love, not war!” ;)

[bassman]

Hell....I thought it was just gay porn with violence.....

[shootemindehead]

Not trying to make you out as daft or anything, Neil, but that case can be made for dozens of films made throughout the years. The Russian epic Alexander Nevsky is about russians fighting off Teutonic knights and was produced during the leadup to WW2... But yeah, of course, it could just be a "historical film" or "fantasy film". That case can always be made. But it's rarely that simple.

300 is a film that could have been produced by Goebbels 80 years ago, and shown in nazi germany to thunderous applause. It shares the exact same themes as those films back then. You can go about and view as a "silly comic book film" all you want, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it promotes the exact same world view as the nazis did 80 years ago.

Sorry, I just can't agree. 'Alexandr Nevsky' was an anti-German, anti-Catholic, propaganda film, completely developed as such, much in the way that 'Kolberg' was for the Germans. These movies were made with propaganda in mind and as a goal.

'300' was a flashy CGI movie, based on a Frank Miller comic book. It was hardly developed as nazi propaganda. It's directed by a Jew, for god's sake!

In fact, I am actually hard pressed to come up with any actual German propaganda films that would compare with '300'.

Sorry man, I just don't see any "nazism" in it and I would certainly be primed to notice any given my reading habits.

[EvilNed]

'300' was a flashy CGI movie, based on a Frank Miller comic book. It was hardly developed as nazi propaganda. It's directed by a Jew, for god's sake!


You're obviously missing the point. I'm not suggesting 300 was made with nazism in mind. But it sure as hell turned out that way. Based on a comic book or not, the end result is what it is. And that is, unfortuneately, something rather vile when you take a step back and look at what it's trying to say (and even more so when compared to the nazis culture, mythology and ideology).

Zack Snyder may be a jew, but he has churned out a film that would bring a smile to Goebbel's face. Probably unintentionally.

In any case, i can't make myself any more clear than I already have. If you don't get what I'm saying now, then you never will. Maybe that's a good thing. I too wish I could view 300 as just a shitty action film with way too much testosterone. I can see so much more in it, however, and what I see makes me want to throw up.

[bassman]

when you take a step back and look at what it's trying to say

Gore, sex, violence and entertainment. That's all it was. You're trying too hard, man....

[EvilNed]

Gore, sex, violence and entertainment. That's all it was. You're trying too hard, man....

As I said, I wish that's all I could see...

[Morto Vivente]

IMO the only absolute is the relative. I've seen 300 a couple of times and didn't particularly like it, as a movie I found it garish. But that doesn't necessarily exclude that parts of it with or without forethought may have significant import for some individuals. You can apply Occam's razor to anything but when it comes to art I find it superficial and unreasonable. It's fair enough to say "Personally, I don't see it" but to say that something doesn't exist for someone else is a step too far for me.

It's obvious that the movie as a whole was a work of fiction loosely based on fact, however, elements of it were accurate as far as the historical/cultural record is concerned. The exposure of physically deformed children, the oracle at Delphi using substances to reach altered states of consciousness etc. Sure, your not going to pass your History of Spartan Conflicts exam, but just because there was an emphasis on style over content does not automatically ensure that there is no meaningful content whatsoever. Whether it has any meaning for someone depends on the individual and them alone..... Trying to objectify the relativity of art IMO is doomed to fail.

Personally I can see some of the aspects that Ned maybe referring to, such as the adoption of eugenics by both cultures, the extreme emphasis on military prowess, the training camps for young men and their extremely draconian attitudes in general. No wonder the Athenians constantly mocked the Spartans about their cauliflower ears !

[shootemindehead]

You're obviously missing the point. I'm not suggesting 300 was made with nazism in mind...

...In any case, i can't make myself any more clear than I already have. If you don't get what I'm saying now, then you never will. Maybe that's a good thing. I too wish I could view 300 as just a shitty action film with way too much testosterone. I can see so much more in it, however, and what I see makes me want to throw up.


Fair enough Ned, But I have to agree with Bass here. I think you're seeing something that really isn't there.

Ah well...

[EvilNed]

Having just recently rewatched Alexander, I remain adamant that it was the only good film to come out of the post-Gladiator epic craze. It's the only one of them that doesn't try to force modern day values onto it's characters to make them appeal to modern audiences (Spartas speech about freedoms and stuff like that). Also it goes to greath length to portray an accurate depiction of ancient Greece, Persia and India. Also, the action is much more verocious than any in 300. Mostly because it's not stylized - it's just brutal and hectic. It, more than any other film I've seen, manages to capture the utter chaos that would most likely erupt in such a situation.

Also: Rome (the series) was very good at this. The characters aren't time travellers from the 20th century who talk about freedom or equality. They exist in their own time.

[Morto Vivente]

Also: Rome (the series) was very good at this. The characters aren't time travellers from the 20th century who talk about freedom or equality. They exist in their own time.

I agree. I was a historical guide in Rome for several years and IMO the historical underpinning of the show was very accurate. One striking aspect (as you said) was the fact that they portrayed the mass psychology of the period without trying to tailor it towards modern attitudes. Obviously though for dramatic purposes the roles of some of the secondary character's were augmented or they were a pastiche of several historical figures. However the portrayal of Mark Antony was spot on, in fact possibly under played.

[shootemindehead]

On 'Rome', of which I enjoyed the first series immensely, the producers did go to great lengths to achieve an authentic look, which may have been its undoing, ironically. But I did feel that some characters were a bit too "modern". Polly Walker's Atia was straight out of Ab Fab and I wasn't that mad about James Purefoy's Mark Anthony either, I have to say, although I cannot put my finger on why. I understand that the producers studied Plutarch's writing as well for their representations.

'Alexander' could have been fantastic, but its casting was dreadful and some of the decisions with accents were truly bizarre. For me, it didn't work. but, the battle scenes were entertaining.

[AcesandEights]

Rome was excellent! It was a shame the way they had to scramble after the 1st season to cram what they could manage into season 2.

[Legion2213]

Hell....I thought it was just gay porn with violence.....

...That straight people could also enjoy...probably the most inclusive movie ever made. :D

Seriously though, not seeing any third reich-ism here.

[Neil]

Have to say when ever Eva Green put on an evil voices in any role it comes across so fake and hammy, it winds me up!

rrgSpvelFC4

[Neil]

Still a bit worried!

jIXh2RysX6A

[Neil]

Still worried about Eva Green... Just comes across too hammy for me!

jGEERBDelH8

[Neil]

Latest trailer...

8pi_Ugm4sV8

[Neil]

The reviews sadly aren't that great, suggesting it's a somewhat mediocre affair - http://www.colesmithey.com/reviews/2014/03/300-rise-of-an-empire.html


There is no pleasure to be taken from Themistocles’s winning strategy because Sullivan Stapleton’s portrayal is so painfully flat. Instead we wait patiently for Artemisia to return to the screen for her final curtain call. Eva Green so outclasses the brittle source material and plodding storytelling beneath her that rather than elevate the film, she abandons it.

C+

[rongravy]

I saw this last night. Whilst I did like it, I dunno...
I missed Gerard. This guy kind of paled in comparison. Also, not sure how long it is, but I was ready for it to be over awhile before it actually was. Not a bad movie, very gory, but definitely lots of slow mo shots. Slow mo of oars paddling in the water?!?
I could've done without it. I will say it was nice to watch it in a crowd, doubt it was all that in 3D, though.
Ehhhhhhhhh, see it if you must. I did, but my kid was bugging me to watch that The Wind Rises crap instead, so I win.

[Neil]

I saw this last night. Whilst I did like it, I dunno...
I missed Gerard. This guy kind of paled in comparison. Also, not sure how long it is, but I was ready for it to be over awhile before it actually was. Not a bad movie, very gory, but definitely lots of slow mo shots. Slow mo of oars paddling in the water?!?
I could've done without it. I will say it was nice to watch it in a crowd, doubt it was all that in 3D, though.
Ehhhhhhhhh, see it if you must. I did, but my kid was bugging me to watch that The Wind Rises crap instead, so I win.I've heard it's good in 3D... I'm going to see it Tuesday.

[Neil]

We read a few more reviews, and in the end decide to skip it as the general feedback was so poor!

[rongravy]

Ehhhh, thinking back, it wasn't horrible. I didn't want to give that impression.
I would now like to use my Teen Wolf/Teen Wolf, Too comparisons here, if I may. Both are great movies in their own right. The first, of course, has Michael J.
Hard to top THE guy in the role, but Jason adds his own freckly cheeked randiness to the equation the second go around. Unfortunately, the first is so kickass as to be undefeatable. Damn, I love those movies...

It(300 II) was actually pretty to look at. I also liked how blades just cut through people like butter.
I keep meaning to find a way to rewatch the first one, I'm just too lazy to drive across town to rent it.
Anyhoo, I didn't want to discourage anyone on my account of it. Who knows? Maybe I've just had Teen Wolf on my mind, and was just desperately searching for somewhere to hammer it in there, and make 'er fit.
Mind the splinters.

[AcesandEights]

I would now like to use my Teen Wolf/Teen Wolf, Too comparisons here, if I may.

I've been waiting over 20 years to read these words from someone...anyone. :p