I saw 300 last weekend, curious to know how a story of a handful of loin-clothed Spartans battling a great hoard of Persian invaders had set off a minor pop culture kerfuffle. In three weeks the comic book-inspired story of the ancient battle of Thermopylae had rung up over $165 million nationally and over $244 million when international ticket sales are included. Already profitable, the film, shot mostly on a soundstage using blue and green screen to create the ancient world and gallons of digital blood cost just $65 million and confirmed that digital technology is now essential for enabling the creation of any sort of environment alien to the modern moviegoer.
But what brought people to this unlikely epic after the more poorly fared Troy and Alexander? 300 had early positive buzz after early trailers and clips made it to the internet–the film’s striking more painterly than photorealistic production design was the first thing you noticed about it; it didn’t remind you of anything you’d ever seen before. Was it the novelty factor?
The actors trained for months in a never-ending variation of muscle building and toning programs so that their bodies would take on the low-body fat, high-definition sculpting that would clearly indicate these men were the greatest warriors in history. The film’s action sequences are like R-rated versions of battles from The Lord of the Rings film trilogy. Did the audience show up for blood and sweaty abs and pecs?
Was it a desire to see ancient history acted out in wide-screen spectacular? Troy and Alexander‘s poor performances would seem to negate that as an appeal, but 300 has an undeniable attraction of being what one skeptical historian calls the foundation myth of Western Civilization–that 300 Greek warriors representing freedom and reason stood against a vastly greater force representing mysticism and tyranny. That the Persians’eventual repelling by Greek forces forever guided the West’s history makes the Spartan’s defiance a highly symbolic moment depending on what you believe about East and West. The two sides of the argument are represented by skeptical historian Jona Lendering, on one hand, who considers the Spartan king a bad strategist for going to war with so few men to fight forces that weren’t nearly as horrible as the film depicts them, or other the other hand, Victor Davis Hanson, a classical historian who upholds the pro-Greek interpretation of the battle. But will audiences really care about historical precision? Is that why we make movies hits?
Are any of the reasons plausible explanations? Is there a better one? Let me know what you think in our comments section.
Haven’t seen it, but pure speculation: I think the (at least speaking of word of mouth, not knowing the dollar numbers it pulled in) following of ‘Sin City’and creator Frank Miller may have spilled over to Miller’s ’300′. They are truly like no other movies we’ve seen. So there’s a bit of the novelty factor, possibly. I mean, visually, the art of ‘Sin City’was creative, well done — though incredibly graphic and prurient. But it seemed those who liked it, absolutely loved it, and they were looking for more in ’300.’
Then not being a historian, and only just reviewing my daughter’s Greek history overview chapter, I wonder, why all the love/admiration for the Spartans? I mean, compared to the Persians, sure. But compared to Athenians, Spartans are unlearned barbarians. They trained to be soldiers, nothing more, while Athenians built culture.
Comment by Catherina — April 2, 2007 @ 12:51 pm |
Thanks for the input. For a generation that only knows of Spartans as the name of a football team, any history that is so purely distilled into a fundamental conflict might be appealing. I couldn’t help but think, during a scene where the Spartans, in their phalanx formation, push into their first attackers with a wall of shields and spears. The shocked Persians go backward and the Spartans move like a Superbowl team’s offensive line and in a moment, the hapless invaders are falling over a cliff into the sea. I think sports-crazy Americans will resonate with the pure physicality of the battles.
Comment by Alex — April 2, 2007 @ 6:02 pm |