Kicking Persian Posteriors and Taking Names

I just returned from the theater here (did you know that now they say here that a matinee is only a show that starts before 2:00 PM? Geez.) after watching the new Frank Miller Graphic Novel move 300. I thought I might "review" the film in case anyone was thinking of going to see it.

300 is, of course, the story of the battle of Thermopylae. I think my first and most overwhelming reaction to the movie is that I need to do a lot -- a lot -- more sit-ups.

I don't think the film claims or pretends to be a history, and I don't find its "artistic" variations objectionable on those grounds. I think the purpose of this movie is the visual theatrics, since it does originate from a graphic novel. The entire movie has a bronze tint to it, and except for the more personal scenes, it seems much more like paint in motion than actual filmed reality. But it is quite stunning and impressive, and I like the visual aspect very much -- it does lend it self well to this story, where the reality of it is less significant that the momentum. By reality, though, I would like to distinguish between grit-and-guts reality, which figures heavily in the film, and something more like reality of form or fact, which does not. And of course, as much as the art lends itself to this story, a story so magnificent lends itself very well to this fantastical art.

There is a lot of fantasy in the movie, with persian hordes looking to number in the several millions, with strange creatures at their disposal -- giants, deformed gians, weird ugly Immortals (a brigade which actually existed, though they weren't quite so much like ninjas, I suspect.) At times, because of the fantasy in it, I was reminded of movies like Hero and Crouching Tiger.

The only major annoying thing in the movie was the ending, which dragged out a little, and there was a Spartan surviver who led the Battle at Plataea who gave a pre-battle pep talk. BLAH!!! The grittiness of Leonidas at the Gates was thrilling at times, but this ending speech at Plataea was just miserable. Anyone who has seen this movie has surely seen at least one movie with a similar speech (Braveheart, and then there were four such speeches in The Lord of the Rings). This one was just a cliche, and he had such a ridiculous and nasal voice.

Anyhow, what you expect is what you get -- lots of crazy imagery, shouting dudes with crazy abs, lots of intense battle scenes. But I do think that the segments of battle and the segments among the Spartan troops were the best, and were not as shallow as they might pretend. I think the movie does capture, sometimes better than other times, the characteristics of warriors, and I think portrays very well a list of a few things that really embody soldiering.

First, an adversity-proof loyalty to leadership.
Second, an adversity-proof loyalty to subordinates.
Third, an unwavering and passionate conviction in the righteousness of cause.
Fourth, the ability to focus, not suppress, emotions like anger.
Fifth, a desire for survival and self-preservation that must always be superceded by:
Sixth and Seventh, a committment to the man next to you, and most importantly of all, a relentless spirit of aggression and viscious ferocity.

And a note -- the best battle sequence, by far, is the first one, during the first Persian onslaught. It is very difficult to watch, and very gritty, but if you watch what's going on, it's amazing. Besides the Gulf War film Bravo Two-Zero, it's the best battle scene I know of in cinama.

In reference to objectionable content, there is obviously a lot of blood, but it is not realistic blood, nor pornographic gore like in Kill Bill. When a spear hits someone, the blood appears as paint splattered on the film reel -- kind of like blood would appear in a comic book, or Graphic Novel (it's intentional, of course). I didn't find the violence objectionable, except in the case of children, who should not watch this film.

There were three segments of nudity, of which two were sexual, and I will enumerate and briefly describe what happens for the sake of anyone who's deciding if they should watch this movie. The first nude scene involves the weird trance of the Oracle, who wears some kind of very, very loose article of clothing that's about as transparent as saran wrap, so not much remains hidden. The second scene is more objectionable -- it is a brief sex scene between Leonidas and the queen, and it gets fairly graphic quickly but briefly. The third segment is, I think, the most objectionable of all. It involves the inside of Xerxes tent, wherein a lot of opium and orgies seem to be going on, and there are a lot of weird things that flash on the screen. No actual sex is shown, but there's a lot of flesh, and clearly a lot of deviant things implied and almost shown, as Xerxes plies a Greek to trechery with sex slaves. None of these three things are objectionable themes, but they show too much.

Overall, I liked the film a great deal, but I won't necessarily recommend it to anyone, and definitely discourage any non-adults from seeing it.

Tata.