Start of New Film '300' Disses Our Troops

[goresalooza]

Scottish star Gerard Butler, lead actor in the highly anticipated film opening March 9, has revealed to Esquire Magazine that U.S. troops in Iraq are not heroic. Here's the quote from the magazine, Mar/April 2007 issue:

Esquire: "In the movie, a small band of proto-democratic freedom fighters take on a Middle Eastern enemy -- did you discuss parallels with contemporary world politics?"

Gerard Butler: "300 was sold to me one way: The Spartans are the U.S. But I think if you look at it with half a brain, then you see that the situation is absolutely reversed. I've really got to be careful what I say here. [Director] Zach [Snyder] and I never tried to compare it to politics, because, to be honest, that doesn't work for me. I mean [the Iraq war] is such a *beep* It is a mess. Who are the heroes there? There are no heroes. It's all just dirty."

[Lichgod]

You said in the first post your plans to boycott the movie. Does that mean you had planned on seeing it? Or were you never going to see it and want to change others to your way of thinking?

I am wondering if you would share your left/right criteria for seeing a movie.

How many conservatives/patriots does it take to outweigh a leftie?

For example: One Code Pink actor and 100 USMC actors / directors / producers make a movie on, say, street fighting in Iraq. The movie theme supports the war effort enough that left leaning news-types call it right wing propaganda. Do you see the movie?

If everyone in this movie about a battle 2500 years ago was a conservative advocate except Persian minion number 742 who loudly declares his flaming liberal position on current events in a magazine, would you see the movie?

Personally, I would like to think one conservative was worth an army of liberals.

I am looking forward to seeing the movie for the story it presents and the manner of the presentation. Non-American lefty actor’s opinion on Iraq who appears in a movie generally supportive to conservative / freedom ideals, well his opinion is worthless.

[mewzilla]

The Spartan's blew up their own women and children in the marketplace?

Well, the Spartans did commit infanticide, IIRC. And did a lot of other unsavory and/or loony things. FWIW, I wouldn't necessarily take being called Spartan a compliment.

[roses of sharon]

For sure, I just wasn't aware that they had murdered their own women and children during their battles, and hid behind their skirts as the Islamic cults do regularly?

[PLMerite]

I just got back from seeing "300." Excellent movie. The parallels between then and now are incredible, although it might be that I was looking for them. I highly recommend this film. If the lead actor's politics upset you, just remember his politics are no more important to his job than your plumber's, and should carry no more weight.

[mewzilla]

Well, to my mind murdering babies and Helots is just as bad. In this case, I'd almost be willing to root for the Persians.

[Jane Austen]

This is the first I heard of this. My husband went to see the movie but did not like it much. Said it was more violent than "Apocalypto" (which we enjoyed) and was too fictionalized.

[carolinalivin]

I saw the movie in our town, Oceanside, CA. The theatre was packed with marines and my son, who served, was there also. They all loved it. A lot of duty, honor, bravery ect. Some good wise cracks and the Frank Miller graphics were good and interesting compared to todays usual fare.

I liked it and I think most young men will also.

BTW the Persians were the bad guys and the freemen were the good guys. What do you want?

[Uriah_lost]

Although I get your point, it must be said that they WERE the earliest form of democratic self rule and the seed of western democracy. The English have a King, does that rule them out of the "democracy club"?

[Uriah_lost]

What about the writer, Frank Miller? He's the one that's been excoriated for making a piece of "Pro Bush, Pro War propaganda". The actor gets paid anyway but Miller's future depends on the movie doing well. It really doesn't look like it needs you anyway since it's breaking all kinds of records, with my help! Don't go all knee-jerk on us.

For some others in the thread that don't seem to be particularly familiar with Greek history I recommend this quick read:

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/SPARTA.HTM

And here's an excerpt detailing their particular form of democratic-ish government.

Spartan government was an odd affair, but its overwhelming characteristic was stability . The Spartans, in fact, had the most stable government in the history of ancient Greece (some historians call this stability, "political stagnation"). At the top of government was the monarchy; the monarchy, however, was a dual monarchy. Below the monarchy was a council which was composed of the two kings plus twenty-eight nobles, all of whom were over sixty, that is, retired from the military. The council debated and set legislative and foreign policy, and was the supreme criminal court. Below the council (or above it), was an assembly of all the Spartiate males (a democracy, in other words) that selected the council and approved or vetoed council proposals. Above them all, however, was a small group of five men known as the ephorate . For all practical purposes, Spartan government was the ephorate, for these five men led the council, ran the military, ran the educational system, ran the infant selection system, and had veto power over everything coming out of the council or the assembly. They even had power to depose the king; however, they needed powerful divine proof (in the form of omens or oracles) to exercise this power. So what kind of government was Spartan government? It was a democratic timocratic monarchical oligarchy. Chew on that a few times.

[petro45acp]

"...and then there is the little bit about my tagline....."

Just saw "300" and had to grin at the use of your tagline!

Semper Fi,
Top sends