'300' shouldn't be taken too seriously. After all it's simply a blockbuster, thus pure entertainment.
But it's a good blockbuster, a different one.
But it's a good blockbuster, a different one.
The visuals and camera work are completely stunning: the contrast used, the appealing and vivid colours, the skies and landscapes, the slow motion battle sequences, the over-the-top costumes and props... 300 is a feast for the eyes. Total eye candy (not mentioning the buffed, almost naked greek hunks).
And there's the controversy/discussion on whether the film is homophobic or not.
I found this review on the homoeroticism of '300', specifically on the relationship Stelios/Astinos.
It's amazing what people find when they are looking really hard for something ;)
"It started with Stelios saying something like,“You fought well. For a woman!” to which Astinos gave a naughty smile. And then there was a remark at some point about one of them admiring thespians to which the comeback was,“Jealousy does not become you.” And then at a different scene they were fighting back to back and Stelios said,”You need me to watch your back,” to which Astinos answered,”We don’t have time for that right now.”
Yes, I saw the movie twice and really think it was pretty explicit in the words that they were lovers, even who was dominant and who submissive. But I also think it’s too bad that the studio honchos or the writers or Frank Miller or whoever did not have enough guts to make Stelios the one most shaken by Astinos’ death instead of his father. Just like when they made Patroclus Achilles' cousin in Troy."
Now, he might actually have a point. The dialogue between those two was dubious, but does it really matter whether they were gay, lovers, or just commrades in arms!?
Another, yet different, review:
"I personally don't care one way or another about this movies politics, I found it to be an entertaining flick, nothing more or less. Yet I see a lot of misunderstanding about why some people claim this movie is homophobic. So I figure I would do my best to explain the reasoning behind it.
Those that argue that this movie is homophobic see nothing in the portrayal of the greeks as homophobic. On the contrary, the Greeks are presented as the ultimate masculine ideal, strong, manly men willing to fight and kill above all else. And then we have Xerxes. Wearing his golden codpiece, carried on a giant gay pride float by dozens of oiled slaves, gently stroking Leonidus, trying to seduce him to
the dark side. And the ever hetero spartans brutily massacre the effeminate persians.
The people that argue that 300 is a homophobic film sees it as a portrayal of the straight spartans destroying the queer persians, and see them portrayed as righteous for doing so, protecting their precious way of life against the decadence of the invaders.
Read into it what you will, I believe it to be a valid interpretation."
I love when a movie causes this much fuss!!
And there's the controversy/discussion on whether the film is homophobic or not.
I found this review on the homoeroticism of '300', specifically on the relationship Stelios/Astinos.
It's amazing what people find when they are looking really hard for something ;)
"It started with Stelios saying something like,“You fought well. For a woman!” to which Astinos gave a naughty smile. And then there was a remark at some point about one of them admiring thespians to which the comeback was,“Jealousy does not become you.” And then at a different scene they were fighting back to back and Stelios said,”You need me to watch your back,” to which Astinos answered,”We don’t have time for that right now.”
Yes, I saw the movie twice and really think it was pretty explicit in the words that they were lovers, even who was dominant and who submissive. But I also think it’s too bad that the studio honchos or the writers or Frank Miller or whoever did not have enough guts to make Stelios the one most shaken by Astinos’ death instead of his father. Just like when they made Patroclus Achilles' cousin in Troy."
Now, he might actually have a point. The dialogue between those two was dubious, but does it really matter whether they were gay, lovers, or just commrades in arms!?
Another, yet different, review:
"I personally don't care one way or another about this movies politics, I found it to be an entertaining flick, nothing more or less. Yet I see a lot of misunderstanding about why some people claim this movie is homophobic. So I figure I would do my best to explain the reasoning behind it.
Those that argue that this movie is homophobic see nothing in the portrayal of the greeks as homophobic. On the contrary, the Greeks are presented as the ultimate masculine ideal, strong, manly men willing to fight and kill above all else. And then we have Xerxes. Wearing his golden codpiece, carried on a giant gay pride float by dozens of oiled slaves, gently stroking Leonidus, trying to seduce him to
the dark side. And the ever hetero spartans brutily massacre the effeminate persians.
The people that argue that 300 is a homophobic film sees it as a portrayal of the straight spartans destroying the queer persians, and see them portrayed as righteous for doing so, protecting their precious way of life against the decadence of the invaders.
Read into it what you will, I believe it to be a valid interpretation."
I love when a movie causes this much fuss!!
After the great remake of Dawn of the Dead, Zach Snyder didn't disappoint on making another visual masterpiece. And just for that alone, the movie is awesome!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment