Iran is displeased with Frank Miller.
My favorite recap of the hoofrah is probably this snippet from another Iranian news outlet:
In contrast to the reaction in Iran, 300 has earned largely positive reviews in North America, despite multiple decapitations and battlefield carnage.
I don’t think they really understand young American males.
#1 by Freakazoid on March 13th, 2007
They really don’t. Apparently, most young males don’t even know iran IS persia!
#2 by antibunny on March 13th, 2007
I was hoping this would happen. How dare they portray history (sort of) realistically!
#3 by Random Poster on March 13th, 2007
This is retarded on many many levels.
The next person who discusses this movie with me in person and comes up with “it was awfully pro war” or anything like it, I am going to kick them in the nuts.It is almost a panel by panel reproduction of the graphic novel..which was published in 1998 (checks calendar) nope…we weren’t in a war then..bite me you self pretentious pricks
It’s a frikkin Movie, based on a graphic novel which is based on a battle that has slid close to the realm of Myth.
GTF over it and enjoy the entertainment
#4 by Grausherra on March 13th, 2007
Freakazoid – you beat me to it. No one I know had a clue that there was a connection. Either I need smarter friends/co-workers, or its not something that comes easily to mind.
#5 by Engels on March 14th, 2007
The notion that the Iranian govt feels some form of connection to Xerxes’ persian empire is about as silly as Musolini harping back to Imperial Rome or the guy at the gyros stand down the way waxing nostalgic about the good ole days with Odysseus and Achilles.
#6 by Lacero on March 14th, 2007
I’d rather be compared to Persia than the Spartans, those guys were really messed up as children.
#7 by Rich Bryant on March 14th, 2007
Engels:
Of course they feel a connection. Mostly, they’re not Arabs, they’re Aryans (which is where the word “Iran” comes from). The state may be Shi’a muslim but there are sizable pockets of state-protected other religions, including Zoroastrianism.
They have some of the best museums in the world and they actually get taught history, because they actually have some history.
American teenaged boys might be poorly educated but that’s no reason to assume that the rest of the world is equally badly-served.
Man, if you ever want to talk about the original model for a federal empire with enshrined speration of Church and State, advanced human rights and technology? Look at Persia.
The film’s (reported) yelling about freedom isn’t in the comic, as i recall. The comic is much more about the ass-kicking you get if you go around invading other people’s countries.
But hey, it can’t be political if you like it….
#8 by Requiel on March 14th, 2007
Damn those American film-makers and their thinly veiled pro-Spartan agendas….
#9 by Lophat on March 14th, 2007
Yeah, the movie was great, but the added bits about the Spartans ushering in a new age of freedom and rationality sounded pretty silly, both based on what we as moviegoers had already seen of Spartan culture and upon later historical events (their conquest of the Peloponnessos). It also watered down Miller’s efforts to show the Spartan culture as one alien to our own present day culture.
On a related note, I went to a 300 panel last year at Comic-Con. Gerard Butler was complaining to the audience that his cloak, being made of heavy wool, chafed uncomfortably. At that point Frank Miller laughed and said, “Some Spartan YOU are! my cloak’s too heavy!” Classic curmudgeonly behavior
#10 by Boanerges on March 14th, 2007
Shouldn’t they be saying something more like
#11 by Jaera on March 14th, 2007
To be honest, I didn’t notice much violence in that movie. Or dialogue. Or plot. I was too busy watching the extremely buff men walk around in their underwear.
I’m pretty sure that film got 100% approval rating from women.
#12 by xzzy on March 14th, 2007
“The next person who discusses this movie with me in person and comes up with “it was awfully pro war” or anything like it, I am going to kick them in the nuts.It is almost a panel by panel reproduction of the graphic novel.”
I understand this, but in the climate we’re living in now, a lot of the movie came off as rabidly pro-American. Leonidas spouted off at every chance how what he’s doing is to preserve freedom. Could have pasted in Bush’s face and no one would notice.
Since the vast majority of moviegoers are probably ignorant of the original book, to the point they don’t even know one existed, all they can do is make judgements based on the movie and the timing of its release. Politicians spouting off in Iran are probably even more clueless.
The sheeple branding the film as pro-war is not all that big a stretch, whether it’s an accurate conclusion to make or not.
#13 by Axecleaver on March 14th, 2007
Well, he’s right about one thing. Hollywood has a better chance of conquering the world than our military, and he’s right to see it as a threat to their way of life.
But there’s nothing he can do about it.
#14 by Amber on March 14th, 2007
/nod. Hollywood doesn’t release a movie in a vacuum. You can bet that a big reason this film was produced was because of the political climate. The same can be said about V for Vendetta and even Good Night and Good Luck. These films weren’t produced because the studios had a political agenda, they were produced because Hollywood does a better than average job of keeping their fingers on the cultural pulse. Right now, anything that can be seen as paralleling “the war” is going to sell.
With regards to Iranians getting bent out of shape, it’s all posturing intended for local consumption. It’s their equivalent of the “support the war or you hate the troops” argument, and no amount of logical or critical thinking is going to change minds.
#15 by Engels on March 14th, 2007
Re: Rich Bryant’s “Of course they feel a connection”
I argue that the Iran of today is as removed from Xerxes’ Persia as America is removed from Athens of Pericles’ time. Both can be hailed as the foundation of our current civilizations, but taking umbrage at some movie depicting them one way or another is just silly.
There is such a thing as a collective memory of a culture that can date back far aways, but not over 2500 years back. It just isn’t remotely feasable, other than at a purely genetic level. We’re taught about ancient Greece in western culture, perhaps more than even Iranians are taught about the virtues of ancient Persia, but to get all uppity about a facile rendering of Herodotus’ account is nearly as pathetic as the director’s desire to have Leonidas yell about freedom.
#16 by Elrana on March 14th, 2007
Well, Spartans being a bunch of “immoral” soldiers by current Joint chief of staff standards. I am not sure it’s US propaganda!
I tend to think of 300 as a summer movie in advance. Fx,Fx,Fx, plot optional.
Nevertheless, everyone can see symbols where they want.
#17 by Heartless_ on March 14th, 2007
It’s funny how certain people always try to connect certain popular culture to current events. Especially with the current “me first” society. Just makes me laugh.
#18 by Boanerges on March 14th, 2007
I think Elrana puts it well. Sometimes it seems people get so lost in looking for a way to hitch their wagon to the success of others that they forget that sometimes a kiss is just a kiss and a war movie is just about war. In this case a real war with real people that happened some 1600 years ago. So far, the case for this being a s00p3r s3krit Iraq commentary is that Iraq and 300 are both about a war and freedom so we should “paste Bush’s face in there”. Of course we would also need to paste Bush’s face onto Gandalf from LOTR, William Wallace in Braveheart (and this was before Bush was even president) and just about every other war epic ever made where their leader happens to mention having values worth fighting for. 300 is a war movie with lots of CG and boobies. I don’t think they made it for any reason other than to get every person in America with a pair of balls to pay them money. In that, they have succeeded in grand fashion.
Since there’s not enough conspiracy in here I leave you with this. Apparently AO Scott of the NY Times said this in his review.
War commentary and Persian knocking with racist overtones!
#19 by Moorgard on March 14th, 2007
“Leonidas spouted off at every chance how what he’s doing is to preserve freedom. Could have pasted in Bush’s face and no one would notice.”
I think this is a perfect example of someone determined to find a certain subtext in a movie; without fail they are going to find it.
Call me a simpleton, but when I watched that film the only face I saw on Leonidas was Leonidas. If you want to see anyone else’s face there, that’s something you brought into the theater with you.
#20 by Wolfgangdoom on March 14th, 2007
Give me a break. The Iranians are desperately reaching for any reason to make America look bad and this is just one more example of their pitiful state. Take any of the movies released this year and run it by a panel of Iranians and they will reach the same conclusion: it is blasphemy. If a movie is funny, they say it bashes ethics in some way, violent? it endorses violence. Sexy? ZOMG the women need burkas! Grow up.
To me this is just another classic boo hoo story from a pitiful country who’s golden age has long since expired. Misery loves company and Iran is no exception.
#21 by Elrana on March 14th, 2007
@ Wolfgangdoom:
I might agree if the USA wasn’t suffering of the same bias. If any country disagrees with the USA, bring the mud gun!The US gov wasn’t desperately reaching for any reason to make Irak look bad enough to attack a few years ago? Have a slice of Yellowcake!
Using every possible lies/rumors/exageration/etc.. against his foe is human time-honored strategy. Nothing new under the Sun!
#22 by Grey79 on March 14th, 2007
It’s a shame the Persians in 300 are the only instance of an American movie depicting an ancient empire as decadent warmongers. If the Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Babylonians (and so on) had ever been depicted in a similar manner to the Persians of 300, the current complaints wouldn’t have any ground on which to stand.
Not that solid ground is required for a political statement.
#23 by O.G.N on March 14th, 2007
I found an article on this on an Iranian news site here:
http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=50330&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs
Considering they are accusing the film of historical inaccuracy there are a couple of nice quotes there. For instance:
The movie has fabricated the history with depicting a war between Iran and Greece, whereas, no Greek king dared to stand up to the Persian Empire or the Emperor Xerxes.
#24 by Jobrill on March 15th, 2007
“but to get all uppity about a facile rendering of Herodotus’ account is nearly as pathetic as the director’s desire to have Leonidas yell about freedom.”
- Actually, The Greek Poets writing about the Battle of Thermopylae were doing this LONG before the Director of the 300 was.
#25 by Axecleaver on March 15th, 2007
Maybe we should ask the Ayatollah Sistani. This website allows you to pose questions to the man himself. I learned a lot about Islamic law.
http://www.alulbayt.com/sistani/q&a.htm
#26 by Engels on March 15th, 2007
Jobrill,
I think you misunderstand me; sure, greek poets of antiquity lionized Leonidas, and the whole point of the 300 original comic was to do exactly the same thing. What you’re missing is the emphasis on freedom, which was not part of Herodotus’ account or Frank Miller’s account.
In today’s Orwellian climate, its this aspect of the film that I find manipulative and revolting, especially in light of Sparta’s complete lack of freedom from itself.
#27 by Dren on March 15th, 2007
Freedom is subjective. Just because somebody is yelling about freedom doesn’t mean it is the same freedom you and I know.
Just the fact that a force is coming to change your way of life can be called a loss of freedom. It doesn’t matter that you really weren’t all that free to begin with.
#28 by Engels on March 15th, 2007
Well, there is no King Harry “We Happy Few” speech from Leonidas on record, but suffice it to say that antiquity didn’t have this notion of ‘freedom’ we’re meant to feel when watching these scenes in the film.
Leonidas exhorting his men to freedom would be as anachronous as George Bush on a carrier with a banner stating “Pour Libations to Zeus”.
#29 by scottj on March 15th, 2007
#30 by Jeff Freeman on March 15th, 2007
Dammit. I was hoping this would be thing to finally bring us all together.
#31 by Aufero on March 17th, 2007
I enjoyed the movie a lot more after I realized it was a complete fantasy, and was mostly an excuse for cramming as much sex and violence as possible into an inspiring old story.
Not everything has to mean something.
#32 by Viz on March 27th, 2007
“Man, if you ever want to talk about the original model for a federal empire with enshrined speration of Church and State, advanced human rights and technology? Look at Persia.”
Man, I love this blah blah blah was first stuff. This isn’t a game of Civ. You don’t get to be judged on the basis of your average performance over the history of the world.