+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: The Kyra Memorial Spin Room (/forum-540.html)
+---- Thread: Movie "300" offends Iranian Government (/thread-233225.html)
Movie "300" offends Iranian Government - WoodlandsOwl - 03-13-2007 08:13 AM
Iranian official lashes out at Hollywood movie "300" for insulting Persian civilization
An Iranian official on Sunday lashed out at the Hollywood movie "300" for insulting the Persian civilization, local Fars News Agency reported.
Javad Shamqadri, an art advisor to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, accused the new movie of being "part of a comprehensive U.S. psychological war aimed at Iranian culture", said the report.
Shamqadri was quoted as saying "following the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Hollywood and cultural authorities in the U.S. initiated studies to figure out how to attack Iranian culture," adding "certainly, the recent movie is a product of such studies."
The movie's effort wound be fruitless, because "values in Iranian culture and the Islamic Revolution are too strongly seated to be damaged by such plans", said the Iranin official.
Shamqadri, who is also a filmmaker, said that production of more domestic and artistic films which portray Iranian achievements is a proper response to movies like "300".
"300," an ancient epic about the famous Battle of Thermopylae in Greek history, set a new record at the box office in North America this weekend.
The Warner Bros. adaptation of the 480 B.C. battle took an estimated 70 million U.S. dollars in its debut weekend, according to figures released on Sunday by Los Angeles-based box office track firm Media by Numbers.
The R-rated film, based on comic book writer Frank Miller's graphic novel, tells the story that an army of 300 Spartan warriors led by their king Leonidas fought to the death to delay a massive Persian army's invasion, so that the Greeks could reorganize a counterattack.
I'd like to see a film of some Iranian "achievements" but I can't think of any. Iranians are pretty good at taking over embassies, kidnapping innocent civillians, financing terrorists, and having insane leaders. But I dont think the rest of the world considers these things "achievements"
- Tulsaman - 03-13-2007 08:20 AM
i wonder why?
Answer: Cause it came from america
300 spartans pretty much handed their asses to em.
- T-Monay820 - 03-13-2007 08:54 AM
Is this the same art advisor that recommended the Holocaust editorial cartoon contest?
- GGniner - 03-13-2007 09:19 AM
the bad guys were Persian, imperalistic and wore Turbans....hmm?
the good guys were caucasian and non-compromising who went after the enemy before the enemy got to them. the persian emissary comes telling them to "submit" and insults the Kings wife and he reacts by kicking him in a bottomless hole, and nowhere in the film did you see spartans asking, "why do they hate us?"
It is a politically incorrect movie, not the least bit suprised Iran takes issue with it. Now if more movies would be like the WW2 era movies maybe we can get somewhere.
Its quite possible this was on purpose, Frank Miller was on NPR not long ago and he "gets it" and his criticisms of Bush are right on.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24146_Batman_Artist_No_Moonbat&only
- Machiavelli - 03-13-2007 10:04 AM
Saw the movie last night. I would recommend it. I don't like how they scripted the queen in the end though. Don't try to make something political out of nothing. Great story..... Great effects........ Leave it at that.
- WoodlandsOwl - 03-13-2007 10:49 AM
GGniner Wrote:the bad guys were Persian, imperalistic and wore Turbans....hmm?
the good guys were caucasian and non-compromising who went after the enemy before the enemy got to them. the persian emissary comes telling them to "submit" and insults the Kings wife and he reacts by kicking him in a bottomless hole, and nowhere in the film did you see spartans asking, "why do they hate us?"
It is a politically incorrect movie, not the least bit suprised Iran takes issue with it. Now if more movies would be like the WW2 era movies maybe we can get somewhere.
Its quite possible this was on purpose, Frank Miller was on NPR not long ago and he "gets it" and his criticisms of Bush are right on.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24146_Batman_Artist_No_Moonbat&only
From the movie I thought what pissed off the Spartans the most was the Persian suggestion that they could be "bought."
The only one "bought" was that hunchback troll that reminded me of my ex-wife.
- GGniner - 03-13-2007 11:14 AM
WMD Owl Wrote:GGniner Wrote:the bad guys were Persian, imperalistic and wore Turbans....hmm?
the good guys were caucasian and non-compromising who went after the enemy before the enemy got to them. the persian emissary comes telling them to "submit" and insults the Kings wife and he reacts by kicking him in a bottomless hole, and nowhere in the film did you see spartans asking, "why do they hate us?"
It is a politically incorrect movie, not the least bit suprised Iran takes issue with it. Now if more movies would be like the WW2 era movies maybe we can get somewhere.
Its quite possible this was on purpose, Frank Miller was on NPR not long ago and he "gets it" and his criticisms of Bush are right on.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24146_Batman_Artist_No_Moonbat&only
From the movie I thought what pissed off the Spartans the most was the Persian suggestion that they could be "bought."
The only one "bought" was that hunchback troll that reminded me of my ex-wife.
They also bought off the anti-war politician that the queen killed.
I got the sense that Sparta, under that King, was not about to bow down("Submission" as the King called it) to Xereces and the Persians and become their slaves.
- Fanatical - 03-13-2007 02:57 PM
Of course, most of the accounts of the wars between the Greeks and Persians that we have are Greek, who didn't care for the Persians at all and this reflected in their writings. Why would they be surprised a the story from the Greek perspective would be any different two and a half millenia later? I like how they were able to still mention the Islamic Revolution as the reason Hollywood portrays the Greeks never liking the Persians.
- NIU007 - 03-13-2007 03:40 PM
It's interesting that they're complaining about it and then saying it won't have any effect. Then why make a big deal out of it? Really thin skins over there.
Re: Movie "300" offends Iranian Government - OUGwave - 03-13-2007 04:29 PM
WMD Owl Wrote:I'd like to see a film of some Iranian "achievements" but I can't think of any. Iranians are pretty good at taking over embassies, kidnapping innocent civillians, financing terrorists, and having insane leaders. But I dont think the rest of the world considers these things "achievements"
You can't think of any Persian cultural acheivements? You must know **** all about world history then. Both during Zoroastrian times (the majority of their history) and the Islamic era, they have excelled in science, mathematics, literature and particularly poetry. Its a particularly rich culture, perhaps the most influential culture in Asian history. You pick a small fraction of Persian history (The Islamic Republic of Iran -- perhaps THE smallest slice of Persian history, which has lasted not yet thirty years) and ignore not only the broader sweep of Persian history, which dates back to 3000 BC, but also somehow ignore the period from 1935 onwards when they were one of the most loyal and strategically important allies the United States had.
Also, I just saw the movie last night, and though I choose to just see it as a movie -- you'd have to be nuts to say that coming out at this particular time, it doesn't look like an anti-Persian propaganda piece from their perspective. Not saying that is its intent, but look at it from their perspective. If they had released a film like that where the roles were reversed, MEMRI and right wing blogs would be immediately calling it a disgusting propaganda piece.
Now cue the accusations that I'm anti-American and pro-Ahmedinijad.
P.S. -- I really enjoyed the film. Although I did think that there was quite a bit of latent homo-erotic subtext there.
- OUGwave - 03-13-2007 04:33 PM
GGniner Wrote:the bad guys were Persian, imperalistic and wore Turbans....hmm?
the good guys were caucasian and non-compromising who went after the enemy before the enemy got to them. the persian emissary comes telling them to "submit" and insults the Kings wife and he reacts by kicking him in a bottomless hole, and nowhere in the film did you see spartans asking, "why do they hate us?"
It is a politically incorrect movie, not the least bit suprised Iran takes issue with it. Now if more movies would be like the WW2 era movies maybe we can get somewhere.
Its quite possible this was on purpose, Frank Miller was on NPR not long ago and he "gets it" and his criticisms of Bush are right on.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24146_Batman_Artist_No_Moonbat&only
Interesting. It appears that your position is that the movie is propaganda and you think thats a damn good thing and we need more of it.
Interesting.
It is rare that a free-man asks to be propagandized.
Re: Movie "300" offends Iranian Government - Fanatical - 03-13-2007 04:56 PM
OUGwave Wrote:Although I did think that there was quite a bit of latent homo-erotic subtext there.
Well, the Spartans did enjoy that sort of thing.
Re: Movie "300" offends Iranian Government - ShoreBuc - 03-13-2007 05:10 PM
OUGwave Wrote:WMD Owl Wrote:I'd like to see a film of some Iranian "achievements" but I can't think of any. Iranians are pretty good at taking over embassies, kidnapping innocent civillians, financing terrorists, and having insane leaders. But I dont think the rest of the world considers these things "achievements"
You can't think of any Persian cultural acheivements? You must know **** all about world history then. Both during Zoroastrian times (the majority of their history) and the Islamic era, they have excelled in science, mathematics, literature and particularly poetry. Its a particularly rich culture, perhaps the most influential culture in Asian history. You pick a small fraction of Persian history (The Islamic Republic of Iran -- perhaps THE smallest slice of Persian history, which has lasted not yet thirty years) and ignore not only the broader sweep of Persian history, which dates back to 3000 BC, but also somehow ignore the period from 1935 onwards when they were one of the most loyal and strategically important allies the United States had.
Also, I just saw the movie last night, and though I choose to just see it as a movie -- you'd have to be nuts to say that coming out at this particular time, it doesn't look like an anti-Persian propaganda piece from their perspective. Not saying that is its intent, but look at it from their perspective. If they had released a film like that where the roles were reversed, MEMRI and right wing blogs would be immediately calling it a disgusting propaganda piece.
Now cue the accusations that I'm anti-American and pro-Ahmedinijad.
P.S. -- I really enjoyed the film. Although I did think that there was quite a bit of latent homo-erotic subtext there.
It would be tough to even begin to discuss contributions to world civilization by the Persians. I would simply tell anybody who is not familiar with it to google persian empire and King Cyrus.
Cyrus came up with what most historians consider the first human rights declaration after conquering Babylon. Parts of Zorastrian religion also were brought back to Israel after Cyrus set free the Jews who were held captive in Babylon. The relgious philosopy of Free Will was first put forward by Zorastrians and there is also strong evidence that their notion of heaven and hell was influential in the creation of another religion known as christianity.
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/ixbin/goto?id=OBJ4931
- WoodlandsOwl - 03-13-2007 06:13 PM
Here is the quote in question:
Shamqadri, who is also a filmmaker, said that production of more domestic and artistic films which portray Iranian achievements is a proper response to movies like "300".
I am well aware of the contributions of the Persians to science, engineering, etc.
But Sharnqadri didn't say Persian achievements. He said Iranian achievements.
According to the Ayatollahs, their "history" started in 1979 when the "Islamic Republic" was founded by Khomeini. I don't see them making any movies about what happened during the period of 1935-February 1979, unless its a movie about the "Den of Spys" or how SAVAK and the CIA supposedly ran death camps..
From 1979 onwards the Iranians offer no evidence of any achievements worth making a movie about...
- GGniner - 03-13-2007 06:26 PM
OUGwave Wrote:Interesting. It appears that your position is that the movie is propaganda and you think thats a damn good thing and we need more of it.
Interesting.
It is rare that a free-man asks to be propagandized.
are you always this dumb? everything that comes out of hollywood has a message, somehow I bet you like Syriana and "an inconvient truth"
They are making the villians in upcoming blockbuster films environmental related for crying out loud. During WW2 we didn't have loons like this running that place and they produced great films that rallied the nation like Casablanca.
I'm sure you would take issue with anti-nazi films from WW2 era the same way you are with the islamo-nazi's /sarc
Paul Haagis, won 2 Oscars for Crash last year exposed a well known agenda while quoting in his speech from Marxist playwright, Bertolt Brecht:
Quote:"Art is not a mirror held up to society, it is a hammer by which to shape it."~BrechtThis echos Lenin:
Quote:"Of all the arts, for us cinema is the most important." ~Lenin
I think art should reflect everything thats really Good and True about the world, in 300 they do a decent job in showing parts of that and most importantly the need to stand up to an imperalist threat like Xeres was then, if you want to connect the dots to the modern imperalist(iran, islamofascim) then fine.
- GGniner - 03-13-2007 06:29 PM
WMD Owl Wrote:Here is the quote in question:
Shamqadri, who is also a filmmaker, said that production of more domestic and artistic films which portray Iranian achievements is a proper response to movies like "300".
I am well aware of the contributions of the Persians to science, engineering, etc.
But Sharnqadri didn't say Persian achievements. He said Iranian achievements.
According to the Ayatollahs, their "history" started in 1979 when the "Islamic Republic" was founded by Khomeini. I don't see them making any movies about what happened during the period of 1935-February 1979, unless its a movie about the "Den of Spys" or how SAVAK and the CIA supposedly ran death camps..
From 1979 onwards the Iranians offer no evidence of any achievements worth making a movie about...
Check this out, this is what the fascist state of Iran is teaching its people....this is their "contribution" about Tom and Jerry cartoon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40VFcJTIduw
its scary that lies like that, when they don't even have the facts of the companies behind the cartoon on top of the anti-semitic hate speech is what is being taught in Iranian schools.
They also tell their people that Pepsi Cola is a Jew plot and an ancronym for: Pay Each Penny Save Israel
here is a pretty good run down of Iranian propoganda in their media at the moment
http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S6&P1=2&P4=jewish&P5=1&P3=1
- GGniner - 03-13-2007 07:07 PM
WMD Owl Wrote:From 1979 onwards the Iranians offer no evidence of any achievements worth making a movie about...
I think its best to say Islam has offered nothing to the world other than death and has turned segments of it into a death cult, They did managae to declare war on the US in 1979.
the persian empire wasn't islamic,
- aTxTIGER - 03-14-2007 01:04 AM
GGniner Wrote:WMD Owl Wrote:From 1979 onwards the Iranians offer no evidence of any achievements worth making a movie about...
I think its best to say Islam has offered nothing to the world other than death and has turned segments of it into a death cult, They did managae to declare war on the US in 1979.
the persian empire wasn't islamic,
id disagree. i do like their numbers, their science, and their literature. of course those all came about 1000-1300 years ago, so i do see your point.
- Rebel - 03-14-2007 02:50 AM
aTxTIGER Wrote:id disagree. i do like their numbers, their science, and their literature. of course those all came about 1000-1300 years ago, so i do see your point.
Sorry, I don't know if you're referring to the Persians or Arabs, but if you're referring to Algebra, well, it dates back to the Babylonians.......who also weren't Islamic. Islam is only 1400 years old. Seriously, what HAVE they given society? Because I can't find anything. Even Cyrus was WAYYYYY before Islam. Let's not intertwine Islam with ancient Persia or ancient Arab culture. It's VERY new considering the issue.
- Bourgeois_Rage - 03-14-2007 07:13 AM
Islam was after 300 supposedly occurred as well.
The issue should be Persians were portrayed poorly. And even then, it's a freakin movie. One side has to be the 'good guys' and one side has to be the 'bad guys.' The average film goer would be confused if you actually tried to present a two sided story.
I'm trying to remember if the British freaked out when Jason Isaacs killed Mel Gibson's sons.