Ive just spent some time reading reviews for the sandal movies. Quite often I hear the reviewers trying to be clever with rhetoric. Talking about depth and exploration etc. The kind of language the every day movie watcher gets lost in.
Its trying to say this.The essence is that. We get a sense of pasion etc. The undertone is this or that I think you get my drift.
I like the Advert for a type of Wood varnish that says. It does excatl;y what it says on the tin.
I refer to the overwelming support and box office smashes that so called film critics lambaste and throw to the crows. Its time movies relate to the popularity of the masses.Movies like the Queen. Broken back mountain etc. hardly any one watches these movies fair to say Broken Back mountain is already in the bargain box at Blockbuster videos.
Alexander tried to troll the exploration route and away from him as a historical figure.
I like a review for 300. It says it was plain and simple a war film that wasnt afraid to be a war film. We know war is nasty and bloody. No frills nor fluff just plain blood and guts with passion glory bravery etc. Some people say that 300 is pretty shallow but for me it was as deep as any it. had Love passion.pride treachery honour etc. At 2 hoursit was full of incident following a brief period in history so there isnt a lot of scope or variation with such a story anyway. Unless you want to se Leonidas eying up Xerxes or his troops crying.
300 is proving the critics well wrong and would wager it will be among the top earners of 2007. If anyone has the balls to redo Alexander. then the masses want to see An Achliean Alexander. With as muck balls of any Spartan as we know he did.
The guy who crushed the boys that beat the Spartans at Leuctra. Then Im sure people would flock in droves for suckh an Alexander and give him back his warrior reputation, Which is what he was after. He was basically Chasing Achiles not hephastean.
Kenny
To Create a War Film
Moderator: pothos moderators
-
jasonxx
Thanks to themovie 300. ok the slaves were emited and the monsters a bit made up. Though to me represent the menace that was Persia at that time. Thanks to the movie. The world over know about Leonidas. What he stood for what he did and what his code was. We know he did stand and sacrifice. we know they fought and died to the last man.
We know at that time the Spartans were the warrior elite. AT THAT TIME.Millions watched it and were touched and entertained.
Now the same question did Stones movie tell the world about Alexander The Great. Regretebly no.
Tyre. Thebes Gaugamela. The Gordium Knot. Etc ETc Etc fete after fete achievement after acheivement that persuaded the Romans to label him Great.
Did Stones movie show anything of this im sorry folks but the answer is undeniably no.
kenny
We know at that time the Spartans were the warrior elite. AT THAT TIME.Millions watched it and were touched and entertained.
Now the same question did Stones movie tell the world about Alexander The Great. Regretebly no.
Tyre. Thebes Gaugamela. The Gordium Knot. Etc ETc Etc fete after fete achievement after acheivement that persuaded the Romans to label him Great.
Did Stones movie show anything of this im sorry folks but the answer is undeniably no.
kenny
I will likely see this film out of, I suspect, some masochistic desire to annoy the daylights out of myself.
The "world" knows of Leonidas. The legend is well spread down the cultural synapses of the "Western tradition". What the world does not know is the real story (or as near to it as we can ascertain) of that action. The near 7,000 who held that pass untill the the final debacle. The six to nine hundred helots that will have died with their overlords. The professional Persian army that -- on a king's whim one suspects -- were destined to force the pass. The Thespians and Theban "hostages" who died along with the Spartans and their Greek slaves on the final day.
None of this will be told to the world.
The world will be told East versus West fables along the lines of twentieth century "cowboys and indians". They will be shown not just a polyglot, uncivilsed rabble depicted as the Persian army but a cavalcade of bloodshirsty freaks the likes of which never graced the most fevered nightmare. This will be accompanied by all manner of beasts of war and the sexual licentiousness of a depraved Eastern invader led by a sensual, lewd basketballer of a king.
And many will come away thinking that Iran hasn't changed all that much. Just adopted a religious overlay.
Good thing I took my children to Thermopylae and explained what transpired. As I did for Salamis and Plataea. That will count for little, I suspect, once confronted with this computer generated Hollywood historical monstrosity.
And I've yet to see more that what I've downloaded from testesterone leaking Greek websites.
Who knows? I might like it...
The "world" knows of Leonidas. The legend is well spread down the cultural synapses of the "Western tradition". What the world does not know is the real story (or as near to it as we can ascertain) of that action. The near 7,000 who held that pass untill the the final debacle. The six to nine hundred helots that will have died with their overlords. The professional Persian army that -- on a king's whim one suspects -- were destined to force the pass. The Thespians and Theban "hostages" who died along with the Spartans and their Greek slaves on the final day.
None of this will be told to the world.
The world will be told East versus West fables along the lines of twentieth century "cowboys and indians". They will be shown not just a polyglot, uncivilsed rabble depicted as the Persian army but a cavalcade of bloodshirsty freaks the likes of which never graced the most fevered nightmare. This will be accompanied by all manner of beasts of war and the sexual licentiousness of a depraved Eastern invader led by a sensual, lewd basketballer of a king.
And many will come away thinking that Iran hasn't changed all that much. Just adopted a religious overlay.
Good thing I took my children to Thermopylae and explained what transpired. As I did for Salamis and Plataea. That will count for little, I suspect, once confronted with this computer generated Hollywood historical monstrosity.
And I've yet to see more that what I've downloaded from testesterone leaking Greek websites.
Who knows? I might like it...
Last edited by Paralus on Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:17 am, edited 2 times in total.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.
Academia.edu
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.
Academia.edu
-
athenas owl
- Hetairos (companion)
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:07 am
- Location: US
Paralus, very well said. I'd also like to add that Themosticles and his navy also gave the "300" a chance to hold out so herocially. I have never understood why the Thespians are ignored, as they stayed willingly. This film has been a chance, once more to give my incurious son a little lesson on history. He was under the impressio it was just a story made up by Frank Miller. 
It looks visually stunning and I've heard it is very true to the graphic novel. I'll see it on DVD and try to take it for what it is, entertainment.
What I most want to comment on to the original post. Seems that some people equate Alexander immediately with war (and fair enough that). But wasn't he more than just a series of battles? It is the complexity and the contradictions that make him so interesting, to me anyway.
It looks visually stunning and I've heard it is very true to the graphic novel. I'll see it on DVD and try to take it for what it is, entertainment.
What I most want to comment on to the original post. Seems that some people equate Alexander immediately with war (and fair enough that). But wasn't he more than just a series of battles? It is the complexity and the contradictions that make him so interesting, to me anyway.
300? Mamma mia!
I've seen 300 and found it unbelievable. 
Unbelievable that in 2007 still someone makes a film courting a myth and ideology centred on Death; these are the Spartans whom the nazis imagined and took as their model, too beautiful to be true and lusting for self-annihilation. As for the portrait of the Persians, I would never have thought that in my whole life I would agree for a single moment, on a single question with Achmadinejiad, but this is what happened. 
A film of embarrassing ugliness; fortunately in the cinema where I saw it, people laughed healthily (God bless them) in some moments of climax.
All the best
Azara
Unbelievable that in 2007 still someone makes a film courting a myth and ideology centred on Death; these are the Spartans whom the nazis imagined and took as their model, too beautiful to be true and lusting for self-annihilation. As for the portrait of the Persians, I would never have thought that in my whole life I would agree for a single moment, on a single question with Achmadinejiad, but this is what happened. A film of embarrassing ugliness; fortunately in the cinema where I saw it, people laughed healthily (God bless them) in some moments of climax.All the best
Azara
-
athenas owl
- Hetairos (companion)
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:07 am
- Location: US
I think a great sequel to "300" could be called "The Peace of Antalcidas".
One of my favourite little bits of Alexnader's history is when he sent the 300 suits of armour to Athens with this little staement:
"Alexander son of Philip and the Hellenes, except the Spartans, set up these spoils from the barbarians dwelling in Asia"
Yes, I'm not a big fan of the Spartans.
One of my favourite little bits of Alexnader's history is when he sent the 300 suits of armour to Athens with this little staement:
"Alexander son of Philip and the Hellenes, except the Spartans, set up these spoils from the barbarians dwelling in Asia"
Yes, I'm not a big fan of the Spartans.
Hello,
I think that I missed the post where everybody was giving their opinion of the film. Anyway, here is mine.
The film is for me an extremely violent and at the same time, beautiful spectacle to behold.
Take the image of Leonidas speaking to the deformed man- I mean you could easily have turned that image into a masterpiece.
I don't know exactly how they got the film to last so long- the Persians came back wave after wave- and we see rhino's and elephants falling off the cliff into the abyss and of course the initial image of Leonidas speaking to the emissary of Xerxes and kicking him into the abyss is quite cool.
The film satisfies much as did the Roman Gladiators a need for blood and violence- I don' think personally it will win many oscars but "good" films usually don't.
Best regards,
Dean
I think that I missed the post where everybody was giving their opinion of the film. Anyway, here is mine.
The film is for me an extremely violent and at the same time, beautiful spectacle to behold.
Take the image of Leonidas speaking to the deformed man- I mean you could easily have turned that image into a masterpiece.
I don't know exactly how they got the film to last so long- the Persians came back wave after wave- and we see rhino's and elephants falling off the cliff into the abyss and of course the initial image of Leonidas speaking to the emissary of Xerxes and kicking him into the abyss is quite cool.
The film satisfies much as did the Roman Gladiators a need for blood and violence- I don' think personally it will win many oscars but "good" films usually don't.
Best regards,
Dean
carpe diem
I can't resist ...athenas owl wrote:One of my favourite little bits of Alexnader's history is when he sent the 300 suits of armour to Athens with this little staement:
"Alexander son of Philip and the Hellenes, except the Spartans, set up these spoils from the barbarians dwelling in Asia"
Yes, I'm not a big fan of the Spartans.
Best regards,Constantine Cavafis 1863-1933 (From Modern Greek Poetry – From Cavafis to Elytis, by Kimon Friar)
IN 200 B.C.
"Alexander, son of Philip, and the Greeks, except the
Lacedaemonians..."
We can imagine perfectly well
how utterly indifferent they must have been in Sparta
to this inscription. "Except the Lacedaemonians."
but of course. The Spartans were not made
to be ordered about and led by the nose
like invaluable servants. Besides,
a panhellenic expedition without
a Spartan king for leader
would not have seemed to them of much distinction.
Ah, most assuredly, "except the Lacedaemonians."
This, too, is an attitude. It's understandable.
And so, except the Lacedaemonians at the Granicus;
and afterwards at Issos; and at the final
battle where the dread army the Persians
had massed at Arbela was swept away:
which had set out for Arbela for victory, and was swept away.
And out of that remarkable panhellenic expedition.
so victorious and so illustrious,
so celebrated and so glorified
as no other before had ever been glorified,
and so incomparable, we were born:
a new world of Greeks, a great one.
We, the Alexandrians, the Antiocheans,
the Seleucians, and the innumerable
remaining Greeks of Egypt and of Syria,
and those in Persia, and in Media, and all the others.
With our far-reaching empire,
our various actions, the result of prudent adaptation,
and the Greek Common Language
which we brought far into Bactria, even to the Indians.
What's all this talk about the Lacedaemonians now!
Amyntoros
Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
-
jasonxx
Dean Hail
Your remark about Oscars and this film not getting any. I would wager the film makes more money and is enjoyed by more people than the Oscar Winners. Its the public vote and popularity what counts. As you say the movie is spectacular to say the least and does exactly what it says on the tim.
Paralus your comments about demonds monsters etc. Ok they didnt exist but the whole idea is symbolic. I doubt those under the kosh of the Germans saw them as humans but invading faceless monsters filled with terror.
Ok the Thespians and helots got missed out. but take off your analistic head ignore the inacuracies and see the movie for what it is. Boys own escapism. We all need heroes. Valour honour and this movie has a flying banner for it. Its the most dynamic entertaining film since Lord Of The Rings.
As far as the comment Alexander was not primarily a fighter. Alexander whole life and reputation is based on warfare and battles and the sooner people realise that and stop trying to disect his bleeding sex life then maybe wed have a more suitable proper movie.
Dean hail brother.
Kenny
Your remark about Oscars and this film not getting any. I would wager the film makes more money and is enjoyed by more people than the Oscar Winners. Its the public vote and popularity what counts. As you say the movie is spectacular to say the least and does exactly what it says on the tim.
Paralus your comments about demonds monsters etc. Ok they didnt exist but the whole idea is symbolic. I doubt those under the kosh of the Germans saw them as humans but invading faceless monsters filled with terror.
Ok the Thespians and helots got missed out. but take off your analistic head ignore the inacuracies and see the movie for what it is. Boys own escapism. We all need heroes. Valour honour and this movie has a flying banner for it. Its the most dynamic entertaining film since Lord Of The Rings.
As far as the comment Alexander was not primarily a fighter. Alexander whole life and reputation is based on warfare and battles and the sooner people realise that and stop trying to disect his bleeding sex life then maybe wed have a more suitable proper movie.
Dean hail brother.
Kenny
-
jasonxx
Audiences laughing.
Ive been to see the movie 8 times and i never heard anyone laughing. The feed back i got fropm viewrs and audiences. they thought it was awesome. And for anyone to bemoan the fact that such a movie is made in 2007. Is kinda living in a world of utopia.
The world today is every bit as brutal now as it were with Alexander or the Spartans. Basic human nature although rebuked is blood thirsty and violent. Slave trade is as rife in the third world. Children and wmen are bought into slavery and prostitution. Countries are plunged into war fopr the sake of a gallon of petrol.
300 is violent but at least its not pretentious. It is what it says it is, no moralisations for war in fact its ugly. But thats the reality of basic human nature. For every gentle humble person. there is a hundred robbers muggers liars paedophiles etc.
Its no good putting your head in the snow saying society is more civilised than it were then its definately not.
kenny
Ive been to see the movie 8 times and i never heard anyone laughing. The feed back i got fropm viewrs and audiences. they thought it was awesome. And for anyone to bemoan the fact that such a movie is made in 2007. Is kinda living in a world of utopia.
The world today is every bit as brutal now as it were with Alexander or the Spartans. Basic human nature although rebuked is blood thirsty and violent. Slave trade is as rife in the third world. Children and wmen are bought into slavery and prostitution. Countries are plunged into war fopr the sake of a gallon of petrol.
300 is violent but at least its not pretentious. It is what it says it is, no moralisations for war in fact its ugly. But thats the reality of basic human nature. For every gentle humble person. there is a hundred robbers muggers liars paedophiles etc.
Its no good putting your head in the snow saying society is more civilised than it were then its definately not.
kenny
-
athenas owl
- Hetairos (companion)
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:07 am
- Location: US
Not sure that this really has anything to do with anything, but rereading the posts I was struck by the different kinds of "entertainment" Greeks vs. Romans. Explicitly the gladiatorial combat versus athletic and artisitc (theatre and music, etc.) competitions even that blood-thirsty cur 
Alexander put on.
War may have been Alexander's business... but even he, who loved Euripedes (very psycholigical stuff I think) might not have enjoyed the all out war film himself. His was a violent culture, perhaps that's why they didn't need the violence as entertainment, too. Though, Rome was violent as well..so hmmm..
Amyntoros, thanks for that poem..very apt.
Alexander put on. War may have been Alexander's business... but even he, who loved Euripedes (very psycholigical stuff I think) might not have enjoyed the all out war film himself. His was a violent culture, perhaps that's why they didn't need the violence as entertainment, too. Though, Rome was violent as well..so hmmm..
Amyntoros, thanks for that poem..very apt.
Oh dear! I believe we might be long lost twins separated at birth.athenas owl wrote:I think a great sequel to "300" could be called "The Peace of Antalcidas".
The final installment will, of course, be the peace arranged by Thebes in 367. Dear me, we could then have it neatly segued into the great panhellenist expansion of the Macedonian empire eastwards....
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.
Academia.edu
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.
Academia.edu
I went to see 300 at the weekend at the London IMAX. A rather big screen there. I did enjoy the film for what it is, a bit of brainless fun, but I can't say that I have any impulse to see it again. It's a fairly simple (though undeniably beautiful) film, but I can't help but compare it to the great Zulu! which I've probably watched about 20 times. In my opinion there is much more depth in the latter as opposed to the former.
On the subject of Alexander's film - perhaps if someone made a film specifically about the week around Gaugamela then you could justifiably compare it to 300. Such a film has not been made, though I hope someday it will. You can't compare the latest Alexander film (which is a life story, not just about a single battle) to 300 without entirely missing the point.
As my friend used to say - 300 is a good film if you leave your brain at the door.
BTW Amyntoros - Nice poem.
I did enjoy the film for what it is, a bit of brainless fun, but I can't say that I have any impulse to see it again. It's a fairly simple (though undeniably beautiful) film, but I can't help but compare it to the great Zulu! which I've probably watched about 20 times. In my opinion there is much more depth in the latter as opposed to the former.On the subject of Alexander's film - perhaps if someone made a film specifically about the week around Gaugamela then you could justifiably compare it to 300. Such a film has not been made, though I hope someday it will. You can't compare the latest Alexander film (which is a life story, not just about a single battle) to 300 without entirely missing the point.
As my friend used to say - 300 is a good film if you leave your brain at the door.
BTW Amyntoros - Nice poem.
Best wishes,
Keroro
Keroro
-
jasonxx
Kerero
The no brainer thing that keeps getting mentioned. Basically how intricate can you get and complicated with a story that basically lasted a couple of weeks at the most. Were not talking saga or intricate threads. Als we did get below the surface. We saw the deciept the corruptness. The movie said what it was meant to be without losing itself in Cryptic Analasism.
Ok im singular here and accept and know the inacuracies. But for me the soul was real. Ok maybe the Sparatns didnt fight alone. Maybe the Persians were not monsters.etc etc.
But it represented far more of whats missing an society. and just maybe people youth etc need a little reminder abvout values. Loving and defending your Wife and family even if you have to die. Honour and respect between the people and commanders.
In the real world Leonidas is very rare. But its not such a bad thing tohope for noble people. As Diogenes most famously qouted. He was looking for an honest man.
I feel the quote about leaving your brian behind basically refers to the academics and historical men. But for me the movie had more soul than any Ive seen for a long time.
But ultimately its all about prefernce and personal taste. To say the movie is bad and be critical is to basically ignore the vast majority of people who watched this movie and voted with bums on seats. Braveheart Was even more fabricated but it still didnt stop it been a fantastic movie. With all the Characteristics of 300. Loyalty bravery honour love etc.
I predict 300 will not go into the bargain bucket and will ultimately be classed as a cult. I do believe it will start a lot of silly copies.
And to recur with the idea its atrocious to make such a movie in 2007. Lets look at the PC computer games nearly all are based on warfare.
kenny
The no brainer thing that keeps getting mentioned. Basically how intricate can you get and complicated with a story that basically lasted a couple of weeks at the most. Were not talking saga or intricate threads. Als we did get below the surface. We saw the deciept the corruptness. The movie said what it was meant to be without losing itself in Cryptic Analasism.
Ok im singular here and accept and know the inacuracies. But for me the soul was real. Ok maybe the Sparatns didnt fight alone. Maybe the Persians were not monsters.etc etc.
But it represented far more of whats missing an society. and just maybe people youth etc need a little reminder abvout values. Loving and defending your Wife and family even if you have to die. Honour and respect between the people and commanders.
In the real world Leonidas is very rare. But its not such a bad thing tohope for noble people. As Diogenes most famously qouted. He was looking for an honest man.
I feel the quote about leaving your brian behind basically refers to the academics and historical men. But for me the movie had more soul than any Ive seen for a long time.
But ultimately its all about prefernce and personal taste. To say the movie is bad and be critical is to basically ignore the vast majority of people who watched this movie and voted with bums on seats. Braveheart Was even more fabricated but it still didnt stop it been a fantastic movie. With all the Characteristics of 300. Loyalty bravery honour love etc.
I predict 300 will not go into the bargain bucket and will ultimately be classed as a cult. I do believe it will start a lot of silly copies.
And to recur with the idea its atrocious to make such a movie in 2007. Lets look at the PC computer games nearly all are based on warfare.
kenny
Alexander wasn't just a warrior
Kenny, if the only thing worth exploring about Alexander is his reputation/success as a warrior, then Pothos would long ago have ceased to exist; there wouldn't be any other discussion forums, news groups, etc.; and there wouldn't be 30-40 new books and articles a year being published about him. There was a whole load more to Alexander than fighting and battles, as the plethora and variety of threads on this forum alone demonstrates.jasonxx wrote:As far as the comment Alexander was not primarily a fighter. Alexander whole life and reputation is based on warfare and battles and the sooner people realise that and stop trying to disect his bleeding sex life then maybe wed have a more suitable proper movie.
I might be wrong, but to me this indicates that your objection to Stone's film was nothing to do with whether he cried, or had a boyfriend, or anything like that; but, instead, that all you want to see is battle scenes, and are not interested in exploring any other facet of Alexander's history or character. If that is the case, there's nothing wrong with that; but some of the rest of us are interested in other aspects of Alexander's life (as Oliver Stone clearly is, too) and I think you ought to accept that.
ATB