Iranians pissed over "300" movie

Perhaps they are too easily offended ?

 

It was called Hollywood and the Pentagon.

Link:

http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/site/tv_guide/full_details/World_history/programme_2082.php?state=video

I believe it was only shown on the UK History Channel.

Hollywood and the Pentagon: A Dangerous Liaison: (VIDEO)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8125002310328201175&q=Pentagon%2C+Hollywood&hl=en

 

It is not a big secret films have 'hidden messages' - but in the context of metaphors and to reflect the perspective of the directors view of the world [at the time]. Think more French art house - rather than CIA/Pentagon backed brainwashing propoganda.

I agree with what you say here [above] - it just seemed like you were saying something else in your earlier post. That i do not agree with.

These are just films - ofcourse they distort time and reality. Ofcourse events happen more quickly and are more hyper-real or hyper-unreal.
That is called 'keeping the audiences attention' . The writers may have some insight into the machinations of life - but so do we all. It depends on how well a storyteller we are or the makers of the films are. PR would make a wonderful film maker . Me on the other hand - would not. He is articulate and has researched his 'shit' [ i mean that in the nicest possible way] very well - fair play to him.

The films you mention have some great metaphors.
Those films were designed for the mass market. So were not fantasticaly deep and meaningful - in a more sophisticated way. They still had the restraints of maintaining a audience attention - a average popcorn chomping coke swilling film goer.

They would go in a 'art house' section of BlockBuster [if you know what i mean]. They just pandered to people who think they are above 'dude where's my car'.

These metaphors and if you wish 'hidden messages' are done well because 'Hollywood' has some terrific writers . Even though scripts come from all manner of sources.

I see wher PR is comeing from with the whole CIA/Pentagon thing. I just do not think it extends further than films based on the US military. They attempt to influence and on some level some directors pander to ''flattering the U.S. Army, winning support for its actions on the battle field, and encouraging more soldiers to sign up. In short: pure propaganda'' .

The thing is there have been dozens of films that have done the complete opposite. All from 'Hollywood' - whatever the hell that means these days.
Most deffinitly the way the military is shown has altered over time - in both direction . The way the military wishes for themselves to be depicted and how a none military influenced film wishes to depict the military.

So it is unfair to suggest 'Hollywood' is attempting to guide us one way. It just so happens 'Hollywood' is used for the vast bulk of American films. When the influences, origination, direction and metaphors are from all over the globe and from all manner of different influences. Obviously the way 'Hollywood' influences us. depends on what films we watch.

Do you mean like Fight club ?. yeah sure i can see that could be true - if the e.g i gve is what you mean.
I just think you may just have had your shower on too hot or cold with your earlier post.

I did not miss your point . I just did not answer you point very well. I hope i did a better job this time.

 

How would a Rambo film made in todays climate differ from one made in Reagans era ?. Not that we have long to find out.

 

given recent events it is no wonder iran should be concerned, invariably these films regardless of the historical facts are used to used to programme a dumbed down populace.

the facts alone say this

persia was alot bigger than the states of greece, it was in effect a marauding empire invading and oppressing smaller states. it demanded tribute and would crush all who got in its way. the greeks were smalltime invaders and oppessors. the persians made the mistake that greece would simply roll over in the same way as everyone else.

from a tactical perspective if the spartans had held the back routes behind the fortification of thermopylae then there would have been a good chance of holding back the persians at thermopylae. perhaps it was decided that greece would give the persians the impression that he greeks were persuing a land based defensive action rather than the naval action that destroyed the persian navy and thus due to the lack of sailing vessels a weakening of supply columns leading to the complete withdrawl of persian forces.

the power vacuum caused by the persians created the athenian problem of athens plundering allied states in the name of military co operation leading to the collapse of athens and the writing of "the republic" a retrospective examination of what was wrong wih athens leaders couched in other terms i suppose.

 

Just saw 300 in Imax. Thought about the validity of Iranian objections;


The movie is presented as an almost legendary fable, its charachters are both idealized and without depth or nuance. Therefore is is difficult to draw anology to our present situation form the tale.

The Persian Empire is shown as absolutey superior in every way to The Greeks
( in arms and armanents)

If one needs to draw a parallel to todays situation, Iran would bbe represented by The 300 and the US would be the overmighty Persian Empire.

 

Here is a Persian posting his perspective on the film.


http://www.slate.com/?id=3936&m=18934554

 

stranger take word to sparta, here we lie obeying her orders

 

It's kind of bizarre to see quite a few people behaving as if media (in this case, film) has no effect on the psyche of those viewing it. Especially when media is used as a POWERFUL tool by government, opposition to government, corporations, etc. on a regular basis all over the world. Commercial television woudn't even exist if this weren't so.

In terms of film, I won't speak directly about "300" because I continue not to have seen it, nor do I have a desire to. But vilification of certain groups and glorification of others is quite common in film. People have mentioned "Rambo" already - but I also think about other pro-military/government films like "Top Gun" and "XXX" (with Vin Diesel, not a porno...lol) as films that glamourize the military/CIA/secret government agencies and glorify soldiers and operatives as noble heroes. The fact that the main audience for "action" films - where violence is clearly the solution for everything - is boys aged 12-16 isn't really a coincidence. These films are not only marketed to these boys for financial gain, but also permitted because of the shaping influence they have. What kind of military would we have with a culture of boys who were taught that killing is wrong, that the road to peace is nonviolence, that we should question government, and that all humans have an equal right to life? Perhaps no military at all.

Our media desensitizes us to violence, conveys cultural lies (such as the ideas that we are a "democracy" or that there is "equality under the law" or that Indians were savages and cowboys were heroes), and provides advertisement for government opinions - few of which actually benefit the people. Media is hugely responsible for the success of the American government, and it is naive to think that the particular category of "film" would be exempt from government influence. Especially since, as one poster pointed out already, the government is willing to permit the use of its equipment for films that portray the military in a heroic light. If the government were't interested in influencing public opinion, it would certainly allow the use of equipment for ALL military-themed films, including those that are anti-military. But of course, that would be silly, wouldn't it? OF COURSE the government wants to portray the military in a positive light at all times - because to tell the TRUTH is to lessen military and government power over the psyche of citizens. And we can't have that.

And to whoever said I've been on here for ages, yep. Used to be the "protest" moderator - till I realized that protesting only gives credibility to the government. Now I just live on a commune and have babies.

 

I think it would look like a film about a shitload of Americans with all their sophisticated vehicles and planes etc shooting and killing a load of allied soldiers - cuz its a damned fact that if The U.S. army werent over there the job would have been done with a lot fewer British casualties - infact probably 75% of British casualties were murdered or wounded by yanks

 

OK, once again, it's about 300 Spartans who survive and attack of over 10,000 Persians. I'd be pissed off if a midget kicked my ass and someone made a movie about it.

 

Yes, absolutely. Not so much the producers, but the people feeding the producers suggestions. Hollywood serves a vital role in creating culture and making people think a certain way. That is a fact. It's about a lot more than just money and entertainment.

 

maybe in a couple of years time they can make some sort of hilarious movie about some soldiers in iraq now, there'll be the moving scene with one of their buddies killed by a sniper or perhaps a comedic scene where they fumble around killing women and children after they rape them of course. i'm very tired with the whole iraq thing tired to listening to people justifying it and tired of the news reporting another atrocity.iraq has become a tired old rotten fruit of a news story that not even the war supporters really want to take a real bite of it themselves.

 

That is what i thought a while ago.

 

I bet Greek people are more pissed because of stupid American tourists getting off planes and yelling "THIS ... IS... SPPPPAAAAARRRRTAAAAAA!!!!"

 

hahahahaha

 

i visited sparta. exactly as plutarch (i think don't quote me on that) said sparta would look to the people of the future. no great buildings but was the super power of the region. the greeks of the area use the historical sites as places to dump their rubbish and rotten fruit. when they're not toturing their animals that is. a bleak but totally true assessment. the greeks of greece are not the ancient greeks they are whats left after 2000 years of collapse and invasion. greece never really itself after the peloponessian war. greece was ended by the hubris of athens and of people like pericles who took athens to war in some fruitless excercise. after robbing the people of the greek islands he built monuments to himself and destroyed a civillisation for his vanity.

 

the spartans were a bunch of psychopaths.
they left their children to die on a hillside if they weren't born perfectly healthy.
they raped their children.
they were known and feared as warriors because they had no conscious, and could kill without mercy.
most of them were gay (not that there's anything wrong with that).

they were also the name of my highschool football team.

 

the spartans were a bunch of psychopaths.

>> the spartans were a society that institutionalised homosexuality after they had their way with the young boys they brutalised them

>>they left their children to die on a hillside if they weren't born perfectly healthy.
they raped their children.

the spartans would actually do much worse than leave them on the hill, they would would take them up high in the mountains and swing them off a precipice

>>they were known and feared as warriors because they had no conscious, and could kill without mercy.

well i'm not so sure they had rules of engagement, people who retreated / ran away were not chased.

>>most of them were gay (not that there's anything wrong with that).

as i said before

>>they were also the name of my highschool football team.