Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Racist? I fail to see how. The movie was based on the graphic novel and was slightly accurate in some areas with respect to history albeit most of it was embellished - as a good action movie should be.
The battle of Thermopylae did indeed take place and a small contingent of Spartan soldiers led by Leonidas along with other Greeks did confront the forces of the Persian army unsuccessfully. However, there is much debate over many of the details.
When I watched the movie, from a filmmaker's perspective it was brilliant from a visual point (spartans, oracle underwater scene, dude jumping in the air all the stuff you see in the trailer) Great, but when the movie was over I felt bad for liking it.
First you have to understand how Hollywood works with the whole "based on a true story". That's such a legal way of seeing things it's embarrassing. Based on a true story means you can make a movie1% accurate to 100% accurate calling it "based on a true story."
The best example of this is the movie Dangerous Minds. Where they pretty much used the names or name of Michelle Pheifer's character (which technically makes it based on a true story) and made an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT MOVIE. If you read the actual book, it's basically a teacher's perspective at a poor school. Hollywood put gang violence and all this stuff in the movie to make it interesting. So that movie only used a small small 1% of the story (using probably just the names) and did what they want with it!
So the problem with saying "based on a true story" is that you don't know HOW MUCH TRUTH in the story is used. That's one MAJJJOOORRRR problem.
2.) Point 2
I'm curious to see what was sexist in the movie. It could be argued that the two main women that were shown other than being "atmosphere" aka extras were not put in the best of light. The Oracle got licked on and showed her chest. (though i thought the scene was beautifully shown as far as her looking underwater and stuff). The queen or Leonidas's wife (sorry forgot the name) could have been represented as a ***** like the guy she revenges on said she was. That scene could have been better. instead of saying "Traitor" they should have said "He's a traitor" b/c that's left up to grabs if they're referring to her for killing a "man" (she's inferior and that's how women are shown in the movie, yes she has a mouth on her as in the beginning, but she still does what her man asks so not really 100% equal) or him for having persian gold in his robes (i'm assuming that's what that was right? that he sold out and so did the wise ones at the top of the mountain.) (If you believe the movie sexist please let us know how else. these are the only points i could find on sexism, but I'm a guy so, i'm curious to know)
Point 3 Racism and inaccuracy
Okay I'm not Persian but I am a man of color and I did feel offended and here is why. Throughout history (which stands for "His Story") minorities period do not get portrayed in a good light. This movie IS PRIME example of that. They put every minority in HISTORY of the world on the "evil side" AND DEPICTS THEM in terrible ways mostly as inferior and unworthy. So which minorities do I mean 1. Races (persian, blacks, asian, etc) 2. Special people/handicapped people. 3. Gay people.The only minority not on the "evil" side/persian side were women and that's obvious why (if it's not obvious it's because women did not battle because they were considered inferior. Women now are pretty much considered that way b/c if they were = to men in that sense then they'd have to sign up at 18 just like men have to for war. (i forgot what it's called it's not the draft, but whatever guys have to do to register). If you look throughout history if you weren't the equivalent of a man/Spartan for this topic, then you were considered unworthy and inferior. All the people on the "evil" side were treated that way in history. Read "Birth of a Nation" and watch Disney's "Pocahantas" (for those that don't get it on an adult level, though this clearly shows the simplest way of understanding racial injustices) to see how people thought of minorities based on race. In the movie they were easily taken out/killed and some of them died just dumb. That could be argued good filmmaking b/c the Spartans are the good guys, or racist to show if you're not white then you're inferior. (How this could have been changed to show sensitivity of races is to one show more accurate dressware of the minorities (the king looked more african than persian I'm told from articles about 300 being racist), had them depicted as better opponents or rivals (For example, in the buffy the vampire series, both sides buffy and the vampires were sort of equal rivals. They both had great offensive and defensive tactics so it was pretty much a draw, THEN Buffy would obviously have to do a combo or some type of move and beat the vampire b/c she's the hero of the story). 2. Special/handicapped people. Anyone that looked different in history has been killed. Handicapped people have been stoned and treated terribly though that's not really shown in society via movies and books and stuff. In Salem trials I believe if you had a birthmark or something you could have and more than likely were killed for looking different and that's what history's terrible moments showed. Prime example(Holocost= if you weren't blonde haired and blue eyed then you were inferior) or read the Hunchback of Notre Dame or the Elephant Man. These are the closest comparision examples from the actual movie. Leonidas nor did the other dude treat that deformed guy well at ALL. Leonidas did clearly show why, which that wasn't offensive. but how he basically said you can be the "waterboy" was. How the film could have fixed the offensive treatment of the "handicapped or special" is the more P.C. term guy is put him in the back of the army line ORRRR Leonidas could have said 'I'm sorry" as his last words and a clip of the special guy could have been shown Or he could have apologized before his suicide battle at the end when the "special' guy was saying give up so that you can live another day.
One more small point of the movie. Leonidas and his peopel are supposed to be heroic and the "good guys' for this movie, and they talk of honor and all this crap. But looking at those times, was it honorful for him to kick those messengers in the pit at the beginning of the movie. NOOOO. it wasn't, that's not honorful now nor would it be useful if you didn't want to go to war! Was it honorful to build up that barricade which some people would say is "cheating". Some would argue that the equivalent to that (if they won) is the equivalent to an athlete cheating to win (taunting opponents to make them lose their focus or tripping them when the referee isn't watching or taking steroids) and that might not be honorful if you spent all of your time practicing/training/honing your skills.
Lastly why were the minorites =race grotesque looking. From a film perspective yeah greatly done. But offensive in that you didn't see Asian warriors just looking Asian or Persian or black warriors without grotesque looks to them. If they added regular fighters then it might not have come off offensive. I say that from a filmmakers perspective.
Point 4. Why people SHOULD LOOK CLOSELY AND SEE THE OFFENSE FOR WHAT IT IS: When has Hollywood shown a positive light on minorities or the other perspective or viewpoint of "His story aka history"? For the sake of this movie, when will you see an accurate event MOVIE of what really happened and how things really looked? You probably won't. Soooo since the film said "based on a true story" how many people are going to say, "well this movie wasn't real, the costumes, the looks of the warriors, etc"? Probably not many. Most people would take this as accurate b/c it's said "based on a true story" and they probably won't research the full story. How many people thought Dangerous Minds or that Freedom Writers movie is 100% accurate.
If I were the creators I'd at least put a disclaimer at the beginning of the movie saying this is a work of fiction......... Now enjoy the movie.
Sorry I forgot to mention why it's offensive to gay people. The ruler, "villian", opponent is considered feminine. We all know some would call him a "si**y" or the f- word. They still say it in sports and other realms of this society. Sorry but it's true and that is considered to be degrading to women and to gay people. Was the characters "real life" counterpart that way or did Hollywood make him effiminate to better sell the "he's going to lose" complex because he's the "s***y/ f word" and we're the equivalent of what a "man" is supposed to be?
okay in that perspective i see why women would be offended. I don't think most get that complex though b/c they don't flinch if their husband says someone's acting like a little girl/woman/ etc. That's offensive but I think a lot of women have been trained to not take offense to that.
I still haven't seen the movie and don't really plan to. Just not my type of flick.
But I have to say that expecting ANY story -- be it film or novel or play -- that takes place in ancient Sparta to reflect 21st century standards of sexual equality is just silly. Could it be possible that 300's portrayal of women is sexist because ancient Spartans were sexist -- at least by today's standards?
When I saw the movie 300 my first reaction was.... I sucked. I thought that I was a pretty bad movie, but.... There were some really well plotted out scenes in it. I really dont there was any racist remarks or actions in the movie.
300 is a great movie! People these days have a tendency to read into things a bit, and see things that aren't there. If you don't like this type of movie don't go see it. If you do, see it twice! That's all that really needs to be said about it.
The 300? ....Racist?.......C'mon !!!!! Seems like a case of analysis paralysis.
Look deeply and hard enough and you can conjure up anything. 300 is about War....War is ugly....beautiful faces and beautiful bodies of all stripes become grotesque and ugly during War......I have never seen a calm smiling face in the heat of battle... How are warriors supposed to be depicted?
Spiritwalker
Ummmm, read my posts like 4 or five up. I posted two things for all those that can't spot racism or does not know how the history of ignorance/prejudice/hatred work. You have one side visually, the winning side that shows that they are strong and in a sense "what a man should be like" =strong/white/male (which could be argued what Hitler and other evil comparisons would find acceptable).On the losing side or "evil" as it's depicted you have "what men are not" or should not be = different ethnicities (asian, black, persian, indian?)/sexual orientations perhaps (the adrogenous looking persian king)/religion/handicapped/disformed/etc. If you look throughout history it seems people that have been persecuted/killed/ treated terribly (Jews, women, handicapped (for those that aren't aware, handicapped people were being slaughtered at one point because they were considered unfit),
sexual oriented (GLT) and races (asian, black, spanish, native american, etc)
One of the problems I have with Hollywood is that it doesn't show other aspects of minorities. It always shows the stereotypes, that's the problem. So when this movie came out saying "based on a true story" you'd think it could be a little more accurate. I know my friends that are Persian were offended because it's not accurate at all. And the name of the Persian king isn't correct (there's more to the name or something) so... I don't know.
One of my friends that's black told me the equivalent to how dumb the Persians would die is like how dumb and unrealistic black people die in scary movies. (That's probably why scary Movie 1 and 2 was so successful, btw because black people don't do dumb stuff.) For instance that scene in the movie where this asian guy ran towards three spartans with spears. Who would do that? that's dumb. The fight scenes should have been more evenly matched then perhaps that aspect of minorites being inferior wouldn't have been so easily noticed.
So those people that didn't see it as offensive, can you see now how someone could see it as offensive? Second question, is obvious are the people that didn't see it as offensive white?
peace!
(Good movie, but people were offended. Gays probably shouldhave been offended even though it was marketed towards them)
So those people that didn't see it as offensive, can you see now how someone could see it as offensive? Second question, is obvious are the people that didn't see it as offensive white?
peace!
(Good movie, but people were offended. Gays probably shouldhave been offended even though it was marketed towards them)
I can see why people did find it offensive and I'm white. I saw a preview for a new action movie called The Kingdom about a terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia. It was obvious from the previews who the good guys and bad guys were supposed to be. It's obvious to me that Hollywood plays on the perceptions and mis-perceptions people have of one another. I just hope people have the common sense to distinguish fact from fiction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
300 was offensive and here is why
Sorry folks, 300 was insensitive
