Iran angered over films 'The Wrestler' and '300'

[HAL 9000 96]

I for one respected 300 as a piece of entertainment. Although it is quite common sense to remind ourselves the Greeks were just as brutal and imperialistic once bound by empire as the Persians were.

Somehow linking that to modern day people is beyond retarded. A little more than a few years have passed.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I couldn't stand it - the OTT machismo and more slow motion than a Jerry Bruckheimer / Michael Bay production.

While it depicts ancient events - it is a stylised version of them which was written in the modern time.

Its more of a problem I have with Frank Miller's politics than the director - but I really hated the slow motion. Its like someone masturbating on camera.

Kinda why I'm dreading Watchmen - I saw a trailer showing the scene where Rorschach escapes from jail and I started thinking that without the slow-mo the movie might have been under 2 hours.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Paul Daniels

[Waldo 0]

I'm just glad to see Iran takes time away from hanging homosexuals to review a movie or two.

COMEDY GOLD!!!!

[HAL 9000 96]

I couldn't stand it - the OTT machismo and more slow motion than a Jerry Bruckheimer / Michael Bay production.

While it depicts ancient events - it is a stylised version of them which was written in the modern time.

Its more of a problem I have with Frank Miller's politics than the director - but I really hated the slow motion. Its like someone masturbating on camera.

Kinda why I'm dreading Watchmen - I saw a trailer showing the scene where Rorschach escapes from jail and I started thinking that without the slow-mo the movie might have been under 2 hours.

please remove Bruckheimer and Bay from this post. thanks.

[Der Bücherwurm 1]

I couldn't stand it - the OTT machismo and more slow motion than a Jerry Bruckheimer / Michael Bay production.

While it depicts ancient events - it is a stylised version of them which was written in the modern time.

Its more of a problem I have with Frank Miller's politics than the director - but I really hated the slow motion. Its like someone masturbating on camera.

I no longer understand the need to be PC 24/7. 300 is just a film adaptation of a graphic novel geared towards awkward teenage boys with no girlfriend. So is it really that surprising that the heroes would be muscled gods and the villains monsters? It wouldn't have mattered which ancient event or people they chose to depict in a comic book and it's subsequent film adaptation. The heroes would have looked like every homosexual's wildest fantasy and the villains like goblins.

[HAL 9000 96]

Must be why I went with my guy friends to go see it.

Oh I'm hearing heavy guitar riffs coming from another thread...

[KiKi 0]

Who cares about the plot of 300.....Gerard Butler's hot.....

[Pooky 3,784]

Its not only an opinion held by Iranians.

It presents a stylised picture of the ancient world that depicts the ancient persians (a very rich and diverse culture) as sub-human beastmen, while the Greeks are all shown as perfect physical specimens.

Its quite obviously promoting fascist archetypes.

Not quite. It shows the Spartans as physically perfect specimens, because the men were as close to that ideal as possible. If they weren't, they didn't survive being abandoned in the wild when they were young, as was the Spartan tradition. Survival of the fittest was the Spartan way.

The Greeks, on the other hand, occasionally got fat and lazy. The Persians? I can't say.

The whole thing is a heroic distraction anyway. The real victory over Xerxes' Persians was won in a sea battle, when the Greek navy took the Persians to the cleaners, destroyed their materiel support and generally sank everything in sight. Unlike the heroic but wasted Spartans, the Greeks knew how and where to fight at sea a lot better than the Persians did.

[Ban Hammer 13,343]

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Let's see:

• the films were made under US auspices
• Iran has no diplomatic relations with US, and films imported from US are banned there

No legs to stand on, given the above.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its not only an opinion held by Iranians.

It presents a stylised picture of the ancient world that depicts the ancient persians (a very rich and diverse culture) as sub-human beastmen, while the Greeks are all shown as perfect physical specimens.

Its quite obviously promoting fascist archetypes.

Not quite. It shows the Spartans as physically perfect specimens, because the men were as close to that ideal as possible. If they weren't, they didn't survive being abandoned in the wild when they were young, as was the Spartan tradition. Survival of the fittest was the Spartan way.

The Greeks, on the other hand, occasionally got fat and lazy. The Persians? I can't say.

The whole thing is a heroic distraction anyway. The real victory over Xerxes' Persians was won in a sea battle, when the Greek navy took the Persians to the cleaners, destroyed their materiel support and generally sank everything in sight. Unlike the heroic but wasted Spartans, the Greeks knew how and where to fight at sea a lot better than the Persians did.

That doesn't change the point though - why subtexts were added that make a technologically and philosophically advanced civilization look like monsters from Lord of the Rings. Its actually more pronounced in the movie than it is in the comic book - which I think has something to do with Miller's involvement in the adaptation.

That the Spartans were the Ancient Greek equivalent of totalitarian fascists, and that its only told from the perspective of the the last stand at Thermopylae kind of accentuates that theme. Its the theme I think is objectionable.

Of course its not as though Miller based the movie on historical record - it was inspired by that old sword and sandal flick "The 300 Spartans". Even so... why the fascist subtexts? Its possible to tell the story without that.

I no longer understand the need to be PC 24/7. 300 is just a film adaptation of a graphic novel geared towards awkward teenage boys with no girlfriend. So is it really that surprising that the heroes would be muscled gods and the villains monsters? It wouldn't have mattered which ancient event or people they chose to depict in a comic book and it's subsequent film adaptation. The heroes would have looked like every homosexual's wildest fantasy and the villains like goblins.

Has nothing to do with political correctness - its about having an awareness of the content of the material you're being exposed to.

My problem with '300' isn't historical accuracy - its about the fundamental themes in the story.

[alienlovechild 75]

It presents a stylised picture of the ancient world that depicts the ancient persians (a very rich and diverse culture) as sub-human beastmen, while the Greeks are all shown as perfect physical specimens.

Its quite obviously promoting fascist archetypes.

The Greeks left behind idealized statues and the Spartan elite were raised professionial warriors so they were in good shape.

The Persians were also widely hated by their subjected peoples. They're weren't beasts but we're looking at the battle from the 21st century where all the lands behind the Greeks are now democratic and most the region in front of them, the Middle East remains despotic which isn't because of the movie.

You can take issue since the Greeks practiced slavery (so did a lot of cultures) the summary below is generally correct.

"So almost immediately, contemporary Greeks saw Thermopylae as a critical moral and culture lesson. In universal terms, a small, free people had willingly outfought huge numbers of imperial subjects who advanced under the lash. More specifically, the Western idea that soldiers themselves decide where, how, and against whom they will fight was contrasted against the Eastern notion of despotism and monarchy — freedom proving the stronger idea as the more courageous fighting of the Greeks at Thermopylae, and their later victories at Salamis and Plataea attested.

Militarily, the fame of Thermopylae is also justified, on the basis of the first two days fighting. The performance of the defenders is used as an example of the advantages of training, equipment, and good use of terrain as force multipliers."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae

[Saddle Bronc 124]

To reinforce my earlier post....

Iran protesting about these films is like Pakistan protesting negative portrayals of it in post-1966 Bollywood films; by officially banning all Indian films from being shown in Pakistan after 1965 war (although pirated versions are available), it basically cut any locus standi for protesting negative portrayals.

Same way with Iran and these films (made under US auspices, and officially banned in Iran anyway).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It presents a stylised picture of the ancient world that depicts the ancient persians (a very rich and diverse culture) as sub-human beastmen, while the Greeks are all shown as perfect physical specimens.

Its quite obviously promoting fascist archetypes.

The Greeks left behind idealized statues and the Spartan elite were raised professionial warriors so they were in good shape.

The Persians were also widely hated by their subjected peoples. They're weren't beasts but we're looking at the battle from the 21st century where all the lands behind the Greeks are now democratic and most the region in front of them, the Middle East remains despotic which isn't because of the movie.

You can take issue since the Greeks practiced slavery (so did a lot of cultures) the summary below is generally correct.

"So almost immediately, contemporary Greeks saw Thermopylae as a critical moral and culture lesson. In universal terms, a small, free people had willingly outfought huge numbers of imperial subjects who advanced under the lash. More specifically, the Western idea that soldiers themselves decide where, how, and against whom they will fight was contrasted against the Eastern notion of despotism and monarchy — freedom proving the stronger idea as the more courageous fighting of the Greeks at Thermopylae, and their later victories at Salamis and Plataea attested.

Militarily, the fame of Thermopylae is also justified, on the basis of the first two days fighting. The performance of the defenders is used as an example of the advantages of training, equipment, and good use of terrain as force multipliers."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae

By that rationale though - the movie is propagandising the issue. It was ok to do that in LOTR (although similar criticisms have been made about the Orcs in that) because it was made clear that the creatures weren't human - but this movie deals with a real historical event and the historical heritage of two distinct civilizations. You can't defame someone's heritage simply to make a point about the modern world.

Otherwise - we'd surely have no objection to nazi propaganda cartoons showing jews and gypsies to be thieves and cheats throughout history.

As I said though - the movie is simply too dumb to take that particularly seriously, but the subtext is definitely still in there.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

To reinforce my earlier post....

Iran protesting about these films is like Pakistan protesting negative portrayals of it in post-1966 Bollywood films; by officially banning all Indian films from being shown in Pakistan after 1965 war (although pirated versions are available), it basically cut any locus standi for protesting negative portrayals.

Same way with Iran and these films (made under US auspices, and officially banned in Iran anyway).

The objection isn't invalidated just because you object to the people raising the argument. The only valid argument is whether a person has seen the movies in question or not - in which case they can't have much of an opinion about the content. Certainly Iran IS trying to score some political points with the argument - but there IS a point to be addressed, even if the subject matter is ultimately inconsequential.