300

Much has been said, discussed and written on this film and having seen the film about an hour ago, I have to share my thoughts on this. Internet message boards have been the spot for heated battle between people claiming why this is the greatest or worst film ever. Before I go into a rant or praise about the abovementioned film, there are a few things I need to clarify on this subject. There has been near endless debate as to how this movie should be seen - as a historical film which has taken huge liberties, as a faithful graphic novel adaptation or just as a summer pop corn flick. Whichever of the three you chose from the above, it doesn't change a few facts. The film is a live action adaptation of the graphic novel by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley which itself was inspired from the famed battle of Thermopylae.

What made the graphic novel interesting, at least for me, was the undeniably cool artwork. The writing by Miller was okay, but then again, I dont expect anything earth shattering from his work. He always had a flair for violent subject matters and one dimensional characters, and this was perfect for him to flex his muscles. That being said, this has to be his best work that I have read, in the sense that the subject fit his over the top dialogue and dramatics well. The movie is fairly faithful to its source material that is the graphic novel. The visuals look as if they have been lifted straight out of the pages of the novel, all thanks to immense advancements in the blue screen technology. In order to flesh the film out more, they have added a parallel story of Queen Gorgo. The other liberties that has been taken has been on the visual level, like adding preposterous characters like the goat man in the persian harem, Xerxes' executioner, Rhinos, incendiary bombs etc. So , does it work visually? As a pop corn ride, yes it does. But again, it gets real boring real fast. Proof again, that no amount of innovation or eye candy or big budget can save you from audience's noticing the flaws. Just ask Uwe Boll. He knows that very well. The overuse of slo-mo and cutting from one angle to the other in between action becomes very irritating and I doubt will please many adults. Recommended only for extremely short attention spans.

Now for the story. It's pretty straightforward. King Leonidas takes 300 of his best warriors to fight against Xerxes' barbaric, uncultured, uncivilized & loathesome horde of millions while his queen fights at the senate to send the rest of the massive army to fight alongside him. Slow motion, posturing, homophobia, racism and more slow motion follow. Boy come to think of it this film would make a lot of old german Nazis wet their shorts with glee. I know, I know, I have read Warner Bros declaration too - this film isnt a historical retelling, it is a work of fiction. Too little too late, even if they can argue that this was an excellent way to narrate this incident, just like every finished work it cannot wash it's hands off the meaning it puts across. The fact that it is based on an actual historical incident, means that they cant deny its impact on the present day crowd. Out of 10 people who will watch this film, less than 2 probably would have cared to read up on the actual historical battle, and be content with taking the facts offered by the film. The faults lie with both the film and the graphic novel. While the Persians have been shown to be nothing short of sideshow freaks and terrible oppressors of freedom(sound familiar?) the Spartans are the embodiment of the present day 'manly' man. Curiously, Xerxes' is portrayed by a Brazilian and to be androgynous, and most of his army by black men. And the Persians had Rhinos and bombs! I was half expecting to see them launch fokker byplanes with machine guns too. I can argue at length why this is not acceptable to me, this gross rape of history for a summer action flick and 300 million profit, but the numbers decree that this film be considered a great blockbuster. But cash registers isn't the measure of a film by even the longest shot, and I am talking about those things, not doubting its commercial success. My friend argues that this is mindless action and thats all it has to offer, but I dont agree. There are many films which have been one hell of a macho adrenaline ride and sadly it didn't feel that way for me. An adrenaline ride takes over all other concerns and just lets you loosen up and enjoy the action but this pompous snoozefest didnt even have great action.

As my previous blogs have stated, I am no fan of Miller, his work tends to stay in the testosterone ride level, and frustratingly refuses to attach any depth to his characters. All great to look at, but nothing much underneath it. Dont get me wrong, I love mindless action. I own dvds of Independence Day and Godzilla for crying out loud! 300 sadly, isnt even a great action film. The action gets tedious. To be honest, Troy had better action , specially the one on one fights starring Brad Pitt and Eric Bana. Now that was action. But with this film it attaches a weird and warped sense of the world at that time to try maximize the glorification of its protagonists. When I saw Kingdom of Heaven,I had vowed to buy and watch the director's cut of that film to remind me what a historically correct(comparatively) yet solidly etched story can do. After watching 300 I feel the need even more urgently. Thanks to 300 I have been reminded just how good Kingdom of Heaven is. Thats the only positive experience I have gained out of this. If this post has sounded like long drawn rant against one film which doesnt deserve this attention then please understand, I am a filmmaker myself and everytime I go to see one, I hope for the best. And with everyone hailing 300 to be something earth shattering, it's fall from grace has been even greater. Had I known nothing about the film, I probably would have hated it less , not because it isnt deserving of it, it is, but primarily because I wouldn't have bothered to waste my time. But I have seen the effect this film has had on so many people. My acquaintances have been going on about how they 'know' the history of Thermopylae and internet boards have been going crazy decrying how Sparta was the cradle of modern democracy and Persia along with China, India and the rest of the backward world tried but failed to touch the land they so greatly craved. One internet discussion board even has someone claiming that Greeks are the oldest civilizations apparently. Zack Snyder, the director of this film is making the live action adaptation of Alan Moore's Watchmen as you read this, and it saddens my heart to imagine what he will do to that great work. My honest request , please read Watchmen before it comes out.

Before I leave, you, let me apologize for my cheapness, I feel it is my duty to counter all the bullshit flying around in the internet thanks to the 'positive effects' of this film with a few well known facts. Until next time, stay happy.
The Battle of Thermopylae was fought in 480 BC
The Battle lasted 4 days.
It wasn't fought by 300 Spartans. But as a joint attack with the Athenians. The Athenians were powerful at sea. The plan was to destroy the Persian fleets while at land, they held their ground.

The Spartans acted as leaders to another good 7000-11,000 soldiers(rough estimates). On the night of the third day, Leonidas, realizing that they had been betrayed, and there would be no escape, ordered them to leave. Roughly 2000 soldiers remained- out of them were 700 Thespians and the 300 odd Spartans. Everyone died there.
There were more Greeks allied to the Persian army than there were in the Greek army itself.
The strength of Xerxes' army is greatly disputed, Herodotus claimed it was more than 2.5 million. But modern logical estimates do not put it anywhere above 800,000.
Xerxes wasnt an adrogynous body piercings ridden giant. He was known to have a temper though. He famously whipped the sea for not obeying him.
The Persians were arguably more culturally advanced than Greece.
The oldest civilization is Mesopotamia.