I may be of the female gender but I enjoy more than my share of action flicks. Most of the time, I just check my brain and semblance of feminism at the door. I mean, who doesn't enjoy a brainless movie about stuff blowing up; needless, exaggerated fights/deaths; and/or a hero who saves the day against impossible, mounting odds or honorably dies trying? I sure do.
Before the movie Sin City came out, I had never heard of it nor the comic book. All I knew after watching the trailers was that I HAD to watch this movie because a) it looked kick-ass and b) Clive Owen was in it. The same pretty much applies to 300. Epic fight scenes? Check. Good-looking guy(s) that most guys want to emulate and girls can squeal over? Check. (Gerard Butler)
And of course, there are always the critics of these action movies. Some said Sin City was too gory. Noted. But as they say, if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen! If you can't handle the gore/violence, don't watch it. Plain and simple. I personally hate scary movies so I will never be caught dead watching one. Ever again, that is. I've learned my lesson. (Though I am not afraid of the so-called scary slasher movies which are not scary at all. I'm just scared of the weird, mess-with-your-head shit like IT and pretty much every Japanese horror movie, especially those with scary-looking little kids that make me never want to have kids of my own.) Critics of 300 have used excuses like the violence factor, the innane plot (hello, it's an action movie!), and the recently expoused excuse: it will provoke anger toward a certain peoples. I read an article saying that Iranians were in an uproar over the movie, which portrays Persians as "decadent, sexually flamboyant, and evil in contrast to the noble Greeks." Some even go so far as to say the movie is Hollywood's declaration of war against Iranians because it is insulting and promotes hatred towards Persians. First of all, I'm sure more than half the Americans who will actually go to watch 300 do not have the slightest inkling that Iran is in any way related to Persia. I bet many think it's a separate country and some may not have even heard of Persia. It's sad but probably true. Second of all, since when does an action movie, based on a comic no less, wholly and acurately represent a peoples? This whole thing is reminiscent of how Kazakhs were mad about the Borat movie. Movies are movies. They're one or a few people's take on something and is, oftentimes, a skewed version of reality or a total deviation from it. But above all, movies are for entertainment. People just need to get the sticks out of their asses.
End note: Anyone actually watch 300? I've heard it's been topping the box office and both good and bad reactions. Well, I'll be seeing it soon enough.
Before the movie Sin City came out, I had never heard of it nor the comic book. All I knew after watching the trailers was that I HAD to watch this movie because a) it looked kick-ass and b) Clive Owen was in it. The same pretty much applies to 300. Epic fight scenes? Check. Good-looking guy(s) that most guys want to emulate and girls can squeal over? Check. (Gerard Butler)
And of course, there are always the critics of these action movies. Some said Sin City was too gory. Noted. But as they say, if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen! If you can't handle the gore/violence, don't watch it. Plain and simple. I personally hate scary movies so I will never be caught dead watching one. Ever again, that is. I've learned my lesson. (Though I am not afraid of the so-called scary slasher movies which are not scary at all. I'm just scared of the weird, mess-with-your-head shit like IT and pretty much every Japanese horror movie, especially those with scary-looking little kids that make me never want to have kids of my own.) Critics of 300 have used excuses like the violence factor, the innane plot (hello, it's an action movie!), and the recently expoused excuse: it will provoke anger toward a certain peoples. I read an article saying that Iranians were in an uproar over the movie, which portrays Persians as "decadent, sexually flamboyant, and evil in contrast to the noble Greeks." Some even go so far as to say the movie is Hollywood's declaration of war against Iranians because it is insulting and promotes hatred towards Persians. First of all, I'm sure more than half the Americans who will actually go to watch 300 do not have the slightest inkling that Iran is in any way related to Persia. I bet many think it's a separate country and some may not have even heard of Persia. It's sad but probably true. Second of all, since when does an action movie, based on a comic no less, wholly and acurately represent a peoples? This whole thing is reminiscent of how Kazakhs were mad about the Borat movie. Movies are movies. They're one or a few people's take on something and is, oftentimes, a skewed version of reality or a total deviation from it. But above all, movies are for entertainment. People just need to get the sticks out of their asses.
End note: Anyone actually watch 300? I've heard it's been topping the box office and both good and bad reactions. Well, I'll be seeing it soon enough.
Saw the trailer, I'd go to see it if I weren't so sure that two hours of fighting is more than my eyes can take. I get bored with long fight scenes, The Two Towers one actually put me to sleep.
ReplyDeleteNisha, come on, we sat through "Kill Bill" and loved it everytime. That was pretty much two hours of cool violence.
ReplyDeleteI've read "Gates of Fire", I studied the Spartans in Professor Broedel's class and I've seen the old battle of Thermopylae movies, so I should complain about "300" like I did with "Troy" right? But I won't. Like "Sin City", "300" is based off Frank Miller's work, and if they didn't stay true to Mr. Miller's work, other people would be pissed off. The fantastic elements of "300" are right off Frank Miller's graphic novel. It's got nothing to do with Hollywood hating Iranian, the comic industry maybe...
However, more than "300", I was hoping George Clooney would make "Gates of Fire" since he bought the rights and all.
Another thing, historically true movies need not be good either. Classic example: "Alexander". Historically accurate and terrible.
"Troy", however, has no excuse. It's like you said, a typical action movie... it fits your criterion better than any other movie I know. Yet I complain that the movie destroyed the essence of the "Illiad". People now believe that Paris escaped with Brisies etc. It's like taking a good original plot and managing to make it suck, like "The Departed".
I'm still going to watch "300".
Ooh...I heard Alexander was terrible. I also figured as much after noticing Colin Farrell's horrible blonde dye-job. =P
ReplyDeleteAs for Troy, you're right. That movie was pretty crappy. I think the critera I mentioned must be in balance for an action movie to be good. Case in point: Troy. That movie had too many heroes (main characters, really), good-looking "heroes" at that. I wonder if my Latin teacher from hs ever saw Troy. I bet she would've been pissed.
Latin teacher, why? I thought she would love to see a Greek epic being massacred on-screen...
ReplyDeleteOoh, ooh, I went to watch Patrick Stewart in "The Tempest"... what a brilliant production. Although the best play I've seen in London still remains "A Woman in Black". Later we went to watch "Monty Python's Spamalot" which was highly entertaining, but still Amit fell asleep. And he claims he's a Python fan.
ReplyDeleteWell my Latin teacher probably would have had a fit over Troy because it "...destroyed the essence of the Illiad." =P
ReplyDeleteI want to watch Spamalot...shame on Amit.