300 (The Second Part ?)

[Rasputin]

THE PERSIAN EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

'A Thousand Nations of the Persian Empire Descend Upon You ! Our Arrows Will Blot out the Sun' - Persian King Xerxes' Emissary



'Then we will fight in the shade.' -Stelios the Spartan Warrior



The timing for the latest Warner Bros Epic battle movie 300 is clearly unfortunate but maybe not so. Based on Veteran comic book artist Frank Miller’s gory depiction of the ancient Battle of Thermopylae in 480 B.C, that is said to have opposed 300 Spartans to the massive Persian Army of King Xerxes the Great, it is an action packed, sexually provocative and bloody spectacle that clearly deserves its R-Rated label. In a particularly tense climate of international politics where threats of an imminent US or Israeli attack on Iran ( once known as Persia ) is on everyone’s mind it would be easy to see in this movie as many bellicose metaphors as there are sand pebbles in the entire desert landscapes of the Middle East. Before succumbing to what is our national sport that is seeing conspiracy theories of monstrous proportions in any non Iranian/Persian depiction of our land and history, let us take a closer look at what would be considered, by any one with a minimum of film knowledge, as merely a B-Rated Film albeit directed with a visually stunning approach.



Zack Snyder’s 300 was initially a project that was in the Vaults of Warner Bros since the late 1990’s. It was to be a remake of a low budget Hollywood classic Sword and Sandals film entitled the 300 Spartans ( which I had already reviewed for the Iranian.com in 2002 under the title Battle for the West ) directed by Rudolph Maté and starring Richard Egan and David Farrar in the title roles of Spartan King Leonidas and Persian King Xerxes. The remake was initially to be directed by Michael Mann ( Heat, Miami Vice, Last of the Mohicans) and produced by George Clooney with Bruce Willis in the title role of Leonidas and rumors that Spanish machismo Antonio Banderas would portray the Persian King of Kings. The script was to be based on the Best Selling novel by Stephen Pressfield entitled Gates of Fire. However due to the fact that Mann went on to direct Ali a Bio Epic on Box Legend Cassius Clay aka Muhammad Ali starring Will Smith who hoped for an Oscar nomination in the title role, the Sword and Sandals project was abandoned. In early 2000 newcomer independent Horror movie filmmaker Zack Snyder ( Dawn of the Dead) suggested the adaptation of another version of this epic story based on Frank Miller’s dark and graphically stylized depiction of the ultimate Spartan sacrifice. The 1962 version has been a cult film for all aficionados of a film genre that went extinct after the mid 60’s due to the increasing appeal of the public for realism on film as well as a more contemporary related stories which the TV as a medium would also encourage and take credit for. James Bond Stunts with a quick hygienic and stylish kill were to replace the massive realistic battle scenes opposing foes in shining armour while Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry and Charles Bronson’s Death Wish films were to illustrate an unorthodox conception of Law and Order where the major characters were to render personal justice in the name of self defense often with a simplistic far-right conservative conception of how society should be dealing with its so-called scums and outcasts. This realistic and graphic approach to violence that were to rank such films as Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather sequels, or his equally violent Apocalypse Now as award winning masterpieces at such well known film festivals as Cannes or the Oscars were nevertheless far more violent with morally more ambiguous messages than most Sword and Sandals Technicolor films of the previous era or even that of the most recent Epic film: Ridley Scott’s excellent Gladiator that launched the film genre to critical acclaim and Box Office success.



Interestingly the rising stars of these “modern films” like Marlon Brando, Al Pacino or the highly acclaimed and in my humble opinion overestimated Robert De Niro whose role in Martin Scorcese’s Taxi Driver was to inspire John Hinckley Jr. to commit his failed assassination attempt on Former US President Ronald Reagan. Strangely I have come across several Iranian actors or directors in the Diaspora including some of the most popular and talented in the Diaspora who clearly hail such performances certainly for the good reasons but also most certainly because of the physical identification that Al Pacino’s Scarface or De Niro’s Don Corleone could have with lets say someone like the great Behrouz Vossoughi or the younger and no less talented Houshang Touzie. There may also be another explanation to this identification in that the inner violence that appears on screen through their performances is also something their generation to some degree could identified with.



There is nothing moral about violence on film but it is undeniably photogenic and exciting to the viewer. Directors know that and so do the actors. Was it not the great Hollywood Star and Mr. Tough Guy ***k Douglas ( Spartacus, The Vikings) also greatly admired by Iranian New Wave director Mohsen Makhmalbaf ( I am Referring to a scene in his movie Nun va Goldoon ) who said:



'Virtue is not photogenic. What is it to be a nice guy? To be nothing, that's what. A big fat zero with a smile for everybody.'



Or



'I've made a career of playing sons of bitches.' ?



To claim the contrary would be as hypocritical as to imagine Western films without Cowboys & Indians and equally Sword & Sandals without Persians fighting Greeks or Romans not crucifying Christians or not feeding them to the lions in the Arena …

Why should acknowledging this fact be interpreted as a justification of violence or of a denial of the negative consequences that violent depictions can have on young and unstable adult viewers ? Should we see an obscure ideological message ( if there is one) or an indulgence of real life sadism in what is meant to be a tribute to a film genre ? Should that mean that we have to adopt a partisan attitude towards a film we have not even seen ? Any alerted viewer or critic can see the movie’s subtle qualities in pushing the boundaries of the Epic genre through the use of CGI effects like shooting the movie nearly entirely on blue screen with little if no real Sets. Should Motion Pictures for that matter be accountable for the unpredictable reaction of viewers ? In that case NO ONE would make movies nor go to see films.



Personally there are two major questions that intrigue me and which I think are at the core of the debate on a “would be outrage” of the Persian Community (spearheaded so vehemently by our fellow compatriot and Satirist Siamak Baniameri and by the following petition). I do not have the answers to them but I would like to submit it to the reader’s sagacity:



What is more shocking:



To be depicted as villains in a film that is supposed to be anything but a history lesson about an event that took place 25 centuries ago?

[Rasputin]

To be associated to an entity that exists no more that is the Persian Empire itself ever since its removal by a widely popular Islamic Revolution that put an end for ever to what its supporters considered as an evil and corrupt institution?



What the controversy about this film reveals as in the case of Oliver Stone’s movie Alexander is that the Persian Empire, with or without its King or legitimate heir, still exists in the minds of all Iranians and probably transcends even political convictions. It probably has more to do with our own Ego (justified or not) or is it a Freudian sense of self preservation and of our role as a nation in the History of Mankind?

Do we as viewers adopt a partisan attitude towards a film we have not even seen?



As an Iranian/Persian I would say YES be it by the inevitable patriotic upheaval such a movie will generate in us as descendants of a proud and civilized people who would prefer to be seen for some of the values that define us in the positive light and which are totally ignored in this movie such as for Cyrus’ Declaration of Human Rights or the great architectural and scientific accomplishments that virtually civilized the ancient world. If criticism of such a commercial film can indeed generate a debate on our role in the history of mankind and that it can give us the opportunity to educate fellow Americans then why not?



As a Movie Buff I would certainly say NO because there is nothing particularly mature in the political statement made in Zack Snyder’s movie no more than in most of fellow talented feature writer Siamak Baniameri’s The Iranican Dream. It is meant to be a Pop Corn Entertainment to an American audience who at best (and sadly enough unless proven otherwise ) hardly even knows if Persia even exists or existed nor can they distinguish between Iran and Iraq.



Again from a purely non partisan point of view I would even come to think that the Persians are even quite COOL looking. The Merchandizing of immortal masks or Persian and Greek figurines are no more shocking or despicable than George Lucas’ Star Wars figurines and toys some of which have become collector items today. The movie is visually far more brilliant and attractive than Frank Miller’s original comic book that is overall anything but beautiful. The movie’s SFX and sound effects and a music score that uses the vocals of Iranian Singer Azam Ali enhance the original comic book storyboard to more dynamic effect. Another Iranian Stuntman Darren Shahlavi also took part in the action scenes.



In short if you are looking for entertainment and unrealistic 2nd or 3rd degree violence, there is nothing to be afraid of but if you hope to find in this movie historical truth albeit the fact that we won the battle and the Spartans lost ( But allowed Greece to win the Greco-Persian War), then you are going for a sheer disappointment.



Were we to show the World a different face then we should try to make our film version of the same battle. I very much doubt that we would deliver a more objective and propaganda devoid version. An interesting example is that of the Turkish War movie Valley of the Wolves shot with an international cast including Hollywood Stars Billy Zane (Titanic) and Garey Busy (Shut Up and Shoot) as the movie’s villains. The film was a huge success in Turkey and Germany, shot with the same production value as a Hollywood Block Buster and received outrageous critics in the Western Press for describing the Americans soldiers in Iraq as sadistic and blood thirsty ( as if that was a stretch of an imagination ? ) and for its anti-Semitic tones which was the reason the film did not get a Visa for a wider Theatrical release in France, Britain and the US.



Sword and Sandal movies never claimed to be masterpieces or monuments of Art no more than Western Spaghettis so why treat them for what they are not?



Zack Snyder’s 300 as much as Ridley Scott’s Gladiator are first and foremost entertainments that tease the little kid in us: Go and be a Man my Son!



In a recent press conference given after the movie’s Premiere in Hollywood some journalists questioned its director on the movie’s metaphors. Some saw in Xerxes and his Empire an analogy with George Bush and the American invasion of Iraq. Others claimed on the contrary that Bush was actually Leonidas who fights to the near end to defend the democratic values of the West. As interesting and predictable a comparison as they may seem, non of these arguments truly convince me that this movie even has a message other than go and buy a ticket and have some fun. The movie can very well be exploited as a propaganda tool by both the White House and why not Iran’s President Ahmaninejad in trying to rally the most reluctant citizens in seeing subliminal metaphors in a Box Office success. If so it would mean that their own political agendas are so weak and fragile that they need to have recourse to motion pictures to self promote themselves or their ideologies.



If you wish to do yourself and your community a favor then start by supporting your actors, directors and artists who throughout our own history have so often been either instrumentalized by political power, censored when questioning authority or simply disregarded by their fellow compatriots as being of no importance or even useful to society.







Maybe a good start would be to support filmmaker Cyrus KAR and his bio Epic documentary In Search of Cyrus the Great or the equally interesting film project Xerxes by writer Ren A Hakim both of which offer an alternative and positive outlook on the founding fathers of our ancient and noble Land …



VIVE LE CINEMA!

[Rasputin]

با آغاز اكران «300» كه تلاش جديد ضد ايراني هاليوود به حمايت دولت آمريكا است، رسانه*هاي جهان و مخاطبان سينما واكنش*هاي متفاوتي به اين فيلم نشان داده*اند، اما كارگردان اين فيلم ادعاهاي ديگري دارد.

پس از آنكه برخي رسانه*هاي جهان اعلام كردند كه فيلم «300» با حمايت مالي و به درخواست دولت آمريكا ساخته شده است، "زاك اسنيدر"، كارگردان اين فيلم ضدايراني مدعي شد كه اين تصوري اشتباه است.

وي روز گذشته در مصاحبه با روزنامه "بوستون گلوب" گفت: «برخي باور دارند كه من از سوي دولت آمريكا پول دريافت كرده*ام تا اين فيلم تبليغي را بسازم؛ اما اين*گونه نيست.»

وي افزود: «حتي يكي از من پرسيد آيا سياست شما همان سياست "فرانك ميلر" است كه داستان فيلم را بر اساس كتاب او ساختيد؟ بايد بگويم زمانيكه من كتاب ميلر را به فيلم تبديل مي*كنم، نگاه او، همان نگاه من است و نمي*توانم ديد او را اصلاح كنم.»

اسنيدر تلويحا اذعان كرد كه فيلم "300" را مي*توان با حمله* آمريكا به عراق مقايسه كرد؛ چنانكه در بخشي از فيلم مي*توان سياست*هاي دولت* آمريكا بعد از 11 سپتامبر را به وضوح مشاهده كرد.

وي با اشاره به اينكه برخي سعي دارند تا شباهت*هايي را ميان موضوع فيلم و برخي وقايع سياسي روز برقرار كنند گفت: «ممكن است برداشت*هاي متفاوتي از اين فيلم شود اما من هيچ اظهارنظر سياسي در اين*باره نخواهم كرد. وقتي نقد فيلم افراد را مي*خوانم، كاملا به نگاه سياسي آنها پي مي*برم.»

در همين حال، منتقدان فيلم رسانه*هاي بزرگ جهان نيز "300" را مورد انتقاد قرار داده و از پوچي و بي*محتوايي آن سخن گفته*اند. روزنامه "آتلانتا ژورنال" اين فيلم را آكنده از گزافه*گويي*هاي دانست.

روزنامه "بوستون گلوب" اين فيلم را كسالت*آور همراه با صحنه*هاي ساختگي و بي*روح توصيف كرد.

روزنامه "U.S.A
تودي" نيز در تمسخر محصول جديد دولت آمريكا نوشت: «هيجان اين فيلم فقط كمي بيشتر از يك بازي ويديويي است.»

روزنامه نيويورك*تايمز نيز در نقد اين فيلم آورده است: «جديت ساختگي و تصنعي اين فيلم، آن را خسته كننده*تر از سرگرمي*ها كرده است.»

شبكه خبري CNN
نيز با اشاره به صحنه*هاي جنگي فيلم، آن را غيرقابل قبول دانست.

[Rasputin]

I saw 300 Saturday night at Universal Studios and it rocked! As a film (and I speak as a former film student) it was exactly what it should be; visually pleasing, well acted, and persuasive (if visceral and somewhat homo-erotic) story telling. As a history lesson (And I speak as an Iranian) it was inaccurate from our perspective; Xerxes was not back, French or Gay (to my knowledge). But this just serves to point up Ms. Ghassemian's argument in "Fiction doesn't deserve a petition". It's highly stylized fiction based on a comic book!

BUT the trouble is that Hollywood's timely green-lighting and release of this movie is based on what they always base their decisions on (and I Speak as a former Paramount employee) it's based on social alleogry which guarantees box office dollars. A social allegory is a story line that echoes the current mood in the country, and when well-planned these films are always big hits. I'll spare you a lesson in cinematic history but if you recall "Not Without My Daughter" was also released right around the hostage crisis. And it did some damage to our image and it stung.

So there is some reason for righteous indignation! We should band together and do something. But sign a petition? I'll sign it as a sign of solidarity, but heck, that's just an exercise in futility. It's a story from the Greek perspective and they have a right to tell their story however they want. That's the 1st amendment. What we need to do is band together in a less impotent and whiny way. We need to tell our own story, though our eyes.

I mentioned this to a friend the other day and he laughed accusing me of being naive; his argument was that we don't have that kind of clout. And he may be right. Because in my experience every time some Iranian breaks some barrier to dominant ideology, all we do is knock them down. I've heard Iranians say Christiane Amanpour is too "Ommol", I've heard people ridicule Anousheh Ansari for spending silly money on a fancy "roller coaster ride in space". When a group of cool Iranians made a comic book, bringing our Ferdowsi's Rostam into the consciousness of American kids as a cool super hero they were even recognized at the Library of Congress, but most of what I hear from Iranians is that they did Rostam's hair and eyes all wrong!

Wake up call to all Iranians: If you don't rise and stand on your well-healed Iranian toes and band together a little more pro-actively to support one another in their valiant efforts to rescue our own culture and image then what right do we have to get mad when others don't respect it? IF every Iranian who will sign this petition, had donated $20 to Cyrus Kar's movie about Cyrus the Great SpentaProductions.com the darn thing would have been made by now, and we'd have a heck of an easier time convincing the rank and file that yes, there are two sides to every story.

But we have to agree on that story among our selves first. Are we proud of each other or not? Are we prepared to band together like the 300 did? Or not? Are we going to support each and every effort each one of us makes at great expense to ourselves to improve our lot? Or not? Because if not, even I will be tempted to root for the 300 that did.

[Rasputin]

saw Zack Snyder’s 300 at a sleepy suburban movie theatre near Chicago. The lady behind me was telling her husband that she did not expect to like the movie because “it sounds too violent!” Those who came for that exact reason got their fill of digital gore. There were other dark premonitions. Hours before the movie I opened a forwarded Internet petition singed by some 10,000 bewildered Iranians who were shocked that their Persian identity could be just as savagely demonized as their “Muslim” heritage.

I didn’t sign. It is after all, a comic book movie made by a director whose last masterpiece was a remake of the “Dawn of the Dead.” Protests should be preserved for threatening preemptive invasions not fantasy flicks – even when they bang on the drums of jingoism. To my mind, Snyder’s 300 drinks deeply at the cauldron of rage that is still boiling over in the United States six years after that bloody Tuesday. Two invasions, a trillion dollars in smoke and three thousand dead Americans have not sated the Achellian anger in a remote part of the American psyche. The movie 300 unleashes that abiding desire to curse, brag and rave at “endless Asian hordes.” Bring’em on you barbarian slaves, you, you..., black, gay, effeminate, depraved cowards. Your friends are hunchbacks, deformed giants, midgets, magicians, eunuchs, perverts, lesbians and executioners. To hell with you all and your “mysticism and tyranny!”

Nobody expects historical accuracy from a Hollywood movie based on a graphic novel. But using domestic racial and sexual stereotypes to demonize the enemy is breaking new ground. In the movie 300 Persian “immortal” knights are snarling beasts beneath their sinister masks and their king is a pierced and bejeweled androgynous savage. But, more significantly, Snyder’s Persians – I am not talking about the disposable extras covered up to their eyes in male burqas – are predominantly black and by implication of mannerism and affect, homosexual. Allowing the widest berth for the genre and medium one still marvels at Snyder’s audacity in demonizing the “Asiatic hordes” while morphing the Spartan warrior into the typical white American survivalist. Snyder’s Spartans are white guys fighting a sea of racially inferior blacks, yellows and browns. They are staunchly heterosexual and weary of their elected elders (ephors) who are seen as sacrilegious lepers, traitors and scheming politicians.

The real Spartans were the opposite of these: fond of their “ephebes,” superstitiously religious and obedient to the authority of their tortuous political system. While jealous of their autonomy, the Spartans never cared one whit about Greece. They had turned themselves into a savage garrison state, not to defend freedom of Greeks but to take away that of their fellow Greek (Messenian) neighbors. Far from the idyllic portrayal of the movie, the rite of passage for an adult Spartan “equal” was not to confront a lone wolf but to skewer an unsuspecting Messenian helot. That is why the Spartans invented the boot camp. And, that is how they invented state terrorism. It is true that the Spartans valiantly fought one Persian king at Thermopylae. But they were not averse to taking the gold of his successor a few decades later to bring low another group of their fellow Greeks (this time, Athenians) at the conclusion of the Peloponnesian Wars.

But the most significant difference between the real Greeks and their avatars in Snyder’s 300 is that the real Greeks were not racists. The word “barbarian” had cultural (not racial) connotations. The philosopher and soldier of fortune Xenophon admired the Persian king Cyrus and wrote a book on the superiority of the Persian to Greek education. Herodotus the main chronicler of the dual Persian expeditions under both Darius (492 B.C.) and Xerxes (480 B.C.) never attempted to dehumanize – let alone, demonize – them. His account of Xerxes’ invasion reads like a Greek tragedy where Gods tempt a tragic hero into a self destructive course.

It is instructive to compare this movie’s Orientalist vision of a savage Persian king to Herodotus description: “Among all this multitude of men there was not one who, for beauty and stature, deserved more than Xerxes himself to wield so vast a power.” Only a decade after the events portrayed in this movie the preeminent Greek playwright Aeschylus dedicated a tragedy to the Persians. The play was not a triumphalist ode to heroes of Marathon, Salamis, Thermopylae or Platea. Staged at the Persian court in Susa, it was about Persian grief. The play’s protagonists were Xerxes, the queen mother Atosa and the ghost of her husband, the first invader of Greece, Darius. It described the Greeks and Persians as: “sisters of one race... flawless in beauty and grace.” And the Greeks openly wept in their amphitheaters, not for their own but for their enemy’s tragic end. A century and a half later when Alexander of Macedon invaded Iran and burned Persepolis, the Iranians would return the favor. They preferred to eulogize their invader and remember him not as a vandal but as a prophet in search of eternal life and wisdom.

Turning its back to Hollywood, our world can learn an important lesson from the cataclysmic war between the Persian empire and the Greek confederates: it is possible to gallantly fight a pitched battle against the fiercest of enemies without conceiving of them as hordes of degenerate subhumans.

[Rasputin]

Hollywood released the long expected movie called 300 a few days ago in the US. It is a semi-fictional movie based on Frank Miller's graphic novel 300. It tells the story of the Battle of Thermopylae, where the King of Sparta led his army against the advancing Persians, 480 B.C. The author of the book used historical facts and existing names as a basis for his fictional plot and character's which leads to the "Persians" being portrayed as something like Lord of the Rings- like characters called Orks and malformed Negro beings. With all respect for the author's rich phantasm, I think this is where Hollywood crosses the line of political correctness.

As much as fiction tells us that the story is made up, it gives us a certain feeling. Conspiracy theories already swirl through the net about the positioning and timing of this movie. Could it be that this movie has some kind of political intention? Some even believe that this sense of revolt that is shown throughout the movie against the "evil Persians" is a prelude to what the US intends to do with Iran within a short period of time. To have the support of the dumb and easily- influenced people who see this movie and have no notion of historical facts what so ever, this movie would be the perfect mood maker to destroy whatever is Persian- resulting in a military attack on Iran.

The sole fact of giving existing historical facts and personages a fictional twist is unethical from my perspective. It would be the same to make a movie about Hitler's life, portraying him as Jesus or something. Wouldn't that be sick as well? Of all the stories that could be filmed, Hollywood had to use the Persian defeat by the Spartans. As much as the good and important influence that big Hollywood movies could have on people and politics (An Inconvenient Truth, Blood Diamond or Bamako), its influence could also be devastating.

Thousands of Iranians already have signed a petition asking for a boycott of the movie. That goes too far for my taste. Giving it that much weight and attention, we are making its influence even greater than it already is. My choice would be to ignore the whole thing altogether. Don't go to see it at the movies, and don't pay too much attention to it. And if there really are going to be that much people who are going to be influenced by it, alas. Why would we want to waste our energy on people who wouldn't be able to see the difference between reality and Orks in the first place?

[Rasputin]

Iranian-born singer Azam Ali is quickly becoming a fixture in Hollywood.

She's lent her voice to a variety of soundtracks -- from TV shows like Alias and Prison Break, to movies like Matrix Revolutions and Dawn of the Dead.

It seems that when directors want a sort of futuristic sound that somehow sounds ancient -- they pick up the phone and call Azam Ali.

Her latest big-screen effort is for the film "300" -- which opens tomorrow in US theaters.

It's about the ancient battle between the warriors of Sparta in Greece and an invading Persian army.

[Rasputin]

من از سازندگان فیلم ۳۰۰ سپاسگزارم. نه برای آنکه سعی کردند بسیار عریان و آشکار به ایران توهین کنند و یا سعی در فروخفتن حقارت شکست از ایران در قرن ها پیش را داشتند، بلکه به این دلیل که زمینه ای برای هویدا شدن شکوه و جلال ایران و تمدن ایرانی در دوران هخامنشی را فراهم کردند. اگر سازندگان این فیلم می دانستند که نتیجه آن اعاده حیثیت سلسله پادشاهی هخامنشی است شاید هرگز این کار را نمی کردند. واقعیت آن است که هر کدام از ایرانیان که چند برگی از کتاب تاریخ میهن خود را خوانده همواره نسبت به دوران هخامنشی احساس نوستالژیک دارد. تاریخ هر رشته ای را که در ایران جستجو می کنی منشا آن به دوران هخامنشی می رسد. آغاز سرشماری جمعیت، احترام به حقوق بشر و آزادی عقاید، استراتژی های نظامی، امور مالیه و جمع آوری مالیات از مردم و ... همگی در دوران هخامنشی با وجود ابتدایی ترین وسایل به بهترین نحو اجرا می شد. اما از ۲۷ سال پیش تفکری خاص در ایران سعی داشت تاریخ را قلب کند. اکنون فیلم ۳۰۰ موجب شده که همان متحجران نیز از دوران هخامنشی به نیکی یاد کنند و اذعان کنند که هرچه تاکنون تبلیغ می شده صحیح نبوده است.پس آقای میلر! هنرمندان هالیوود! ممنون!

[Rasputin]

از قرار اخبار، یکی از قمپانی های معظم سینماتوگراف سازی که در ینگه دنیا واقع است یک فیلمی ساخته مسمی به سیصد و در آن لشکریان ایرانی را که تحت امر خشایارشا به یونان حمله کرده بودند را یک عده های وحشی و بی سرو پا و دیو هیبت و بلکه ناقص العقل تصویر و یونانی ها را یک جماعت خیلی متمدن و خوش بر ورو و مظلوم و در عین حال به کمال دلیریت نشان داده که علی رغم عده قلیل به ایرانی ها غالب می شوند؛ عن قریب است که سیصد مذکور به مدد موسیقی های جالب و تصاویر دیجیتعالی دلفریب به اکثر سینماهای ممالک عالم راه پیدا کند، مدعیات صانعین آن به خلق الله قالب شود.

بجهت این، عده ای از بلاگران ذوی الاحترام معترض که از اولین ایشان، نیماخان اکبرپور بود که ماجرا را شرح، بواسطه آنکه شاغل به ژورنالیستی هم هست آن را به جراید کشاند. میرزا خداداد خان رضاخانی هم در وبلاگ خود به نام " ارزیابی شتابزده" یک نطق غرایی در این باب کرد که از قرار آن، به اعتقاد وی ماجرا بی ارتباطات با وضعیت پلوتیکی فعلی مملکت ما نیست و ای بسا که غربیون و بالخصوص ایالات متحده از این جهت که خود را همیشه میراث دار یونانی ها و رومی ها می دانند خواسته باشند که به این وسیله انتقام گرفته و تحقیر ما را کنند و از آن بدتر، به زبان بازبانی به خلق عالم پیغام برسانند که این ایرانی های حاضر از تخم و ترکه همان لشکر خشایار بوده، باید به هر تقدیر آنها را مضمحل و منکسر ساخت.

صاحب وبلاگ لِگو ماهی هم که از جمله بلاگرین خیلی هنرور و خوش ذوق بوده و هر از گاهی ابداعات خوبی از خود بروز می دهد، پیشنهاد به ساختن یک بمب گوگلی، از همه اهل وبلاگستان خواست که مثل قضیه خلیج عربی مدد رسانند. علی هذا فعلا که خیلی بوی باروت و مواد منفجره در وبلاگستان به مشام می رسد که البته دقیق معلوم نیست بواسطه مقدمات این بمب است یا نزدیکی به چهارشنبه سوری که یک مدتی باب شده قبل و حین آن اطفال و بلکه والدین و حتی پیران سالخورده یک بمب هایی در شوارع منفجر کنند که صور اسرافیل در مقابلشان سرفه پشه محسوب می شود.

[lolita37]

you can sign a complaint petition here...i got this from someone else who sent it to me so...

http://www.petitiononline.com/wpci96c/petition.html

[Nutcase]

Iran outraged by Hollywood war epic

TEHRAN (AFP) - War epic "300", a smash hit in the United States for its gory portrayal of the Greco-Persian wars, has drawn the wrath of Iranians for showing their ancestors as bloodthirsty "savages".

The press, officials and bloggers have united in denouncing the film as another example of "psychological warfare" against Tehran by its American arch enemy at a time of mounting tension over its nuclear programme.

"Hollywood declares war on Iranians," said the headline in the reformist daily Ayandeh-No of the film which tells the story of the 300 Spartan soldiers fighting off ancient Persians in the Battle of Thermopylae.


"It seeks to tell people that Iran, which is in the Axis of Evil now, has for long been the source of evil and modern Iranians' ancestors are the ugly murderous dumb savages you see in '300'," fumed the paper on its front page.


A cultural advisor to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad described the film as "American psychological warfare against Iran."


"American cultural officials thought they could get mental satisfaction by plundering Iran's historic past and insulting this civilization," Javad Shamaghdari told semi-official Fars news agency.


Three MPs in the Iranian parliament have also written to the foreign ministry to protest to the production and screening of this "anti-Iranian Hollywood film".


The film has already proved a major box office hit in the United States and, unsurprisingly, Greece.


It is highly improbable the film would ever be screened in the Islamic republic but contraband DVDs of the latest American movies are often available on the streets no sooner that they are internationally released.


Cyber savvy Iranians have already started online petitions and set off "Google bombs" against "300".


The furore over "300" is by no means the first time Iran has been left fuming over Western portrayals of its ancient history.


Iranians were also enraged by the 2004 epic 'Alexander' about the conquest of the Persian Empire and a notorious 2005 British newspaper review of an exhibition of antiquities which branded ancient Persia the "Evil Empire".

[abadani69]

نمايش عمومي فيلم 300 جنجال تازه اي را دامن زد، سبب راه اندازي يک نهضت اينترنتي براي "بمباران گوگلي" سازندگان اين فيلم شد و حتي گروه بندي نظامي ـ امنيتي کيهان تهران را هم ناگهان به ياد ايران انداخت.

هفته گذشته با پخش آنونس فيلم 300 زمزمه هايي- بيشتر از سوي ايرانيان خارج از کشور- به گوش رسيد که بار ديگر سينماي هاليوود دست به تحريف تاريخ ايران زده و چهره خشني از ايراني ها ترسيم کرده است. اين زمزمه ها با آغاز نمايش فيلم از روز جمعه شدت گرفت و علاقمندان به حل مسائل حقيقي در دنياي مجازي با راه انداختن يک نهضت اينترنتي تصميم به بمباران گوگلي سازندگان اين فيلم گرفتند و در کنار آن طوماري نيز براي امضا روي وب گذاشته شد.عکس العملي طبيعي که هر ايراني علاقمند به ايران، از خود نشان مي دهد.

اما بخش جالب ماجرا، عکس العمل روزنامه کيهان بود که خود بزرگترين ارگان "ضد فرهنگ ايراني" است. اين نشريه که اين روزها مي کوشد هر چيز را به پرونده هسته اي ربط بدهد، نوشت: "اين روزها فيلم ضد ايراني «300» به كارگرداني يك فيلم ساز هاليوودي (زاك سنايدر) در آمريكا و برخي كشورهاي ديگر به اكران در آمده است. ماجرا به عهد قديم و جنگ هاي ايران و يونان برمي گردد. در قالب اين فيلم، 300 يوناني در كنار لئونيداس پادشاه اسپارت در برابر سپاه 120 هزار نفري خشايارشاه كه همگي خشن و نادان و ناتوان تصوير شده اند، مقاومت مي كنند و طرف يوناني (سمبل دموكراسي در برابر وحشي گري) به پيروزي مي رسد."

کيهان حسب معمول خود ساخته شدن اين فيلم را توطئه اي دانست که "پنتاگون فرهنگي صهيونيسم و سرمايه داري جهاني" تدارک ديده است تا باعث تضعيف روحيه ايرانيان در جنگ کنوني با آمريکا شوند.

کارشناسان و منتقدان فيلم اما از زواياي ديگري به اين فيلم توجه کردند. آرينا امير سليماني نگاه کوتاهي به تاريخ انداخت: "همين قصه فيلم 300 نزديک به چهل و پنج سال قبل توسط رودلف ماته آن هم به شکلي واقع گرايانه تر به فيلم برگردانده شد و در ايران نيز به نمايش در آمد و تنها بصورت يک فيلم ديده شد. بعد از پيروزي انقلاب اسلامي در ايران بود که سياست تحريک آميز صدور انقلاب و افراشتن پرچم اسلام در سراسر جهان، ساختن اين قبيل فيلم ها را بعنوان تقابل در دستور کار قرار داد. بدون دخترم هرگز [بر اساس داستاني واقعي] معروفترين فيلمي است که در چهارچوب جديدساخته شد و به نمايش در آمد، و البته کمتر ايراني بود که به دليل تصوير ابلهانه اي که اين فيلم از ايراني ها به نمايش مي گذاشت، به خشم نيامده باشد."

آرينا امير سليماني مي افزايد: "از آن ببعد دهها فيلم سينمائي و مستند ساخته شده که «بدون دخترم هرگز» پيش آنها تبليغ براي ايران به حساب مي آيد و فهرست زير مشهورترين آنها را در بر مي گيرد: Nuclear Terrorists.Blind Horizons يا Inside Iran, The Most Dangerous Nation - Nuclear Jihad: Can Terrorists Get The Bomb? - Journey to The End of The World:IRAN. اين فيلم هاو سريال ها که ريشه توليد آنها را بايد در سياست هاي ماجراجويانه طالبان ساکن درايران ديد از کانال هاي معروفي چون History، BBC، National Geographic وDiscovery هم به نمايش درآمده اند که مخاطبان آنها نخبگان و تصميم سازان جوامعي هستند که رئيس شوراي نگهبان ما آنها را گاو خطاب مي کند".

ژاله صفا، منتقد ديگر فيلم از زاويه متفاوتي به نمايش فيلم 300 مي نگرد: "ظاهرا اين امواج سياسي هستند که گاه به سينما هم مي رسند و از يک فيلم تصويري خاص ارائه مي دهند. اگر توهين به ايراني موضوع بحث است که در همين يکي دو سال اخير با فيلم هايي مانند سيريانا اين کار را به شکلي عريان تر و کاراتر انجام دادند، ولي اکثريت تماشاگران نوار ويديويي همين فيلم را ده بار عقب و جلو کردند تا دو کلمه فارسي شکرين را که از ميان لب هاي جورج کلوني خارج مي شود، بشنوند. اما هيچ کس در باره اين فيلم که با انفجاري در تهران آغاز مي شود و ايران را در مرکز تروريسم جهاني مي گذارد، حرفي نزد."

رضا بهاري کارشناس سينما مي گويد: "اين پنتاگون فرهنگي و صهيونيستي که به نظر مي رسد ترمي کاربردي در بخش فرهنگي زندان قزلحصاراست نه دردنياي واقعيت دست به کارهائي در دفاع از جمهوري اسلامي هم زده است.سه چهار سال قبل بود که جورج کلوني و رفقاي دزدش در سه پادشاه[يک قصه تخيلي] عراقي هاي مبارز را از چنگال سربازان صدام نجات داده و تحويل مرزبانان ايراني دادند. يا فيلم هاي مستندي با لحن مثبت درباره تاريخ و فرهنگ ايران باستان ساختند. نمونه اش: Engineering an Empire: Persians.علاوه بر اين بايدپرسيد: در همين فيلم هاي آمريکايي، پليس خشن و فاسد، قاچاق چي بي رحم، قاضي خطاکار و حتي اين اواخر رئيس جمهورهاي قدرت طلب و فاسد تا بن استخوان[ مثلا سريال 24] هم هستند. اينها از خارج آمريکا يا کرات ديگر مي آيند؟"

مهرداد شيباني، تحليل گر سياسي هم از نگاه سياست به اين فيلم مي پردازد: "چرا ما فراموش مي کنيم که فرانک ميلر يک نويسنده داستان هاي گرافيکي است و هيچ کس از او توقع وفاداري به تاريخ را ندارد؟ داستان 300 نوشته ميلر همان قدر به واقعيت هاي تاريخي وفادار است که زباله هايي مانند Ghost Rider و ديگر قصه هاي مصور مارول! فراموش نکنيم اين فيلم ها که هيچ ايراني با آنها موافق نيست بازتاب تصويري است که دولتمردان جمهوري اسلامي موجب آن شده اند. درد اينجا است که اين جنجال بر سر يک فيلم تخيلي و تجاري است که مشتي نوجوان پاپ کورن خور آمريکايي که عاجز از يافتن محل ايران روي نقشه جغرافيا هستند، آن را ديده و ساعتي بعد فراموش مي کنند. ولي همين نوجوان ها، زماني که والدين شان اخبار روزانه را دنبال مي کند، از سر اجبار بارها و بارها نام رئيس جمهوري اسلامي را مي شنوند که از چنگ و نابودي اسراييل مي گويد و در عالم واقعيت در نزد خود از ايران و ايراني تصويري هولناک ترسيم مي کنند. اين جوان در آينده نزديک نياز به هيچ محرکي ندارد تا در ارتش آمريکا ثبت نام کند و براي تحميل دموکراسي به خاورميانه و شايد ايران برود. اگر قرار است براي ترسيم تصويري واقعي و انساني تلاش کنيم، بياييد آن را فارغ از شيفتگي و نفرت و در دنياي واقعيت بسازيم. به يقين زماني که در اين کار موفق شويم، تلقي همه فيلمسازان غربي از هويت و منش ايراني دچار تغييرات بنيادين خواهد شد."

[abadani69]

نيويورک - عنوان فيلم، برگرفته از سيصد سرباز اسپارتي است که 480 سال پيش از ميلاد مسيح در ترموپولي با يک ميليون سرباز خشايار شاه جنگيدند و با اينکه جانشان را از دست دادند، موفق شدند ايراني ها را متوقف کنند تا زمان کافي براي ايجاد استحکامات براي دفاع از اين شهر يونان باستان فراهم شود. ز. ک. اشنايدر، کارگردان فيلم، با استفاده از رمان فرانک ميلر و لين والري، نبرد خونين بين سيصد قهرمان به فرماندهي لئونيداس و يک ميليون "بربر" آسيايي را به تصوير کشيده که قصد داشتند "مردان آزاده" اسپارتي را تحت فرمان "ظالم ايراني" در آورند، که مردم را به کام مرگ مي فرستاد و آنها را اسير مي کرد و دست به کشتار مي زد!

و اين تضاد فاحش، دستمايه اعتراض رئيس جمهور ايران شده است که با اتکا به جواد شمقدري، مشاور هنري اش، اين فيلم را "توهين به ايران" قلمداد کرده است. شمقدري که خودش هم کارگردان است، مي گويد: "در اين فيلم ايراني ها را ملتي خونريز، بي تمدن و وحشي نشان داده اند که با يوناني هاي شجاع و احترام بر انگيز، مي جنگند". تلويزيون دولتي ايران، برنامه اي را به نقد شمقدري از فيلم اختصاص داد که بر اساس آن فيلم توليد شده توسط برادران وارنر چيزي جز محصول اقدام مقامات آمريکايي نيست که بعد ار انقلاب اسلامي در ايران، دائما ميل شان را به از بين بردن هويت ايراني نشان داده اند.

شليک اتهامات ايران به سوي هاليوود در مورد فيلم "اسکندر" هم اتفاق افتاد که اليور استون در اين فيلم روايتگر زندگي اسکندر مقدوني بود. مشاور احمدي نژاد افزود: "آنها قصد دارند تا از وقايع تاريخي که 2500 سال پيش اتفاق افتاده است، استفاده کنند تا به منافع نامشروع خود دست پيدا کنند". بدين ترتيب غرور ملي ايراني ها و با تصور کردن اينکه فيلم "سيصد" يک توطئه شوم براي دامن زدن به جنگ بين تمدن هاست، رئيس جمهور ايران در پي بازيافتن محبوبيت از دست رفته اش است که اين امر با آنچه منتقدان آمريکايي، آن را نقطه ضعف واقعي فيلم مي دانند، منافات دارد: آنها معتقدند که فيلم سيصد "کريه" است.

منتقد سينمايي نيويورک تايمز مي نويسد: "سيصد فيلمي است که به اندازه آپوکاليپتوي مل گيبسون خشن است اما دوبرابر آن فيلم، احمقانه است. در صحنه هايي که از خونريزي و حملات احمقانه خبري نيست، فقط برآمدگي سينه اسپارتي ها و تن آويز هاي ايرانيان به نمايش گذاشته مي شود." واشنگتن پست که بيشتر از بقيه فيلم را به صلابه کشيده است، مي گويد: "فيلم سيصد، فيلمي است ساخته شده براي افرادي که بهره هوشي پاييني دارند و حتي توضيح داده نمي شود که فداکاري براي نجات ترموپولي چه اهميتي دارد و هيچ سخني درباره اينکه بعد از آن يوناني ها از ايراني ها شکست سنگيني خوردند، گفته نمي شود". با وجود اعتراض احمدي نژاد و نقد هاي منفي که از فيلم شده است، فيلم در مقام سوم ليست پرفروش ها قرار دارد. تماشاگران، زماني که يک سرباز اسپارتي، در مقابل سرباز غول پيکر ايراني مي ايستد و چشمانش را با نيزه از کاسه بيرون مي آورد، کف مي زنند و فرياد شادي مي کشند و همچنين وقتي شوراي اسپارت بعد از بحث و مشاجره، از کمک به سردار قهرمان، لئونيداس، سرباز مي زند، آه حسرت مي کشند و اين صحنه ها يادآور وضعيت فعلي کنگره آمريکا در مورد جنگ در عراق است.

[Rasputin]

I can’t help but be amazed at the amount of energy and dedicated emotion our fellow countrymen, almost all men, are showing a movie these days. Everywhere I go on the internet there is an article, a dialogue, or a sign of major attention to the movie, 300. At first glance, I say well-done Gentlemen! I appreciate the passion both for and against the issue. Thank you for speaking up, letting us know your opinion in a democratic way.

While obviously the release of this movie and the topic it portrays is a very important event in some people’s minds, it is, unfortunately, not the most atrocious thing happening to Iranians, Persians, their image, and their history these days.

With much less fanfare, no red carpet, no million dollar advertisement budget, and no big business backing, 50 women went to a peaceful assembly to protest that which is plaguing all true Iranians (formerly Persians), limiting and destroying their hopes for the future, and reducing them to half-humans. Much like the movie, they were attacked by stick-wielding morons, beaten up, and 33 of them were imprisoned. There was just a minor difference -- these were not computer generated graphics, they were real people, women of our country, mothers, wives, daughters, and sisters, unprotected and alone, yet brave and defiant.

If only half of the emotion our fellow countrymen are displaying for a movie were to be displayed for Iranian women, their plight, their cause, and their movement, I should think we would be a lot farther along in opening and conducting dialogues which would end the inequalities forced on our nation. Building a stronger nation will be the true offensive on those who try to portray our nation as half-humans, ghouls, and monsters.

To these bright young minds, these enthusiastic and energetic men, I say that when half of a nation is mistreated, ridiculed, bereft of basic human rights, discriminated against, insulted, threatened, and made to shrink in spirit, the other half will also suffer, it will also be degraded, it will also be ridiculed, it will also shrink in humanity and spirit. A degraded mother cannot raise a proud son. A mistreated sister cannot support and help uphold the dreams of a brother. A broken daughter cannot make her father a happy parent. A maltreated wife cannot be half of a successful marriage to a man.

While it may seem that some Iranian men are taking full advantage of rights given to them by current Iranian laws at the expense of Iranian women, it is my belief that in accepting those rights, they lose so much of the joy of humanity, turning into gluttons and little dictators themselves.

I would like to see some passion from Iranian men about that. I would like to think that for the younger Iranian males, many of whom at some point have witnessed and read about the mistreatment of Iranian women on social, legal, and marital issues, there is a cause about which to feel passionate and fired up. I would like to know that our men understand the immensity and peril of the issue at hand, that they are genuinely outraged when in bright daylight, our women are beaten up and prosecuted, the 2 most steadfast of whom continue to stay in solitary confinement, defending the rights of this nation. As we speak, a little of what is showered on a Hollywood movie, would carry our fearless women forward tremendously, I assure you.

A little attention won’t hurt you Gentlemen, but it will go a long way to show the other half of our nation, at least 35,000,000 people, that you are alive, feeling, thinking, and acting on real issues of urgent importance to Iran

[Rasputin]

As an archaeologist and as the author of one of the petitions against the movie 300, I would like to shed some light on some of the aspects of the movie 300. At the time of this publication the petition that started on March 4th, 2007 has exceeded 38,000 signatures.

Briefly, the movie portrays the famous battle of Thermopylae between the Persians and the Greeks that occurred in 480 B.C. During that battle, the Persian Imperial army had to cross a narrow gorge in order to reach the Greek mainland. The gorge was held by almost 300 Spartans backed by 4000-7000 Greek soldiers, and they managed to hold Persian army for few days.

Although there have been claims that the Persian soldiers numbered more than1 million, in actuality the correct number would have been somewhere around 200,000 since at that time, it would have been logistically impossible to mobilize 1 million army.

The movie demonstrates both Persians and Spartans on the eve of the battle. Interestingly enough, the way the film depicts the Spartans is more or less historically accurate, especially when it comes to their clothing, attitude, and internal historical political issues. However, when it comes to the Persian side, the film portrays an army of beasts, monsters and demons whose leader is a naked gender-confused King wearing a ridiculous number of piercing and chains!

There have been numerous claims pointing out that this movie is in a science fiction genre; therefore, these petitions are too passionate and needlessly serious. Science fiction by definition means “a genre (of literature, film, etc.) in which the setting differs from our own world (e.g. by the invention of new technology, through contact with aliens, by having a different history, etc.)”(Prucher, 2006).

According to this definition one might ask, how can we call the movie a fiction while it shows the actual events, places, and characters with their real names? And why is this so-called fiction only applied to demonize the Persian side? Everybody agrees that the battle of Thermopylae did happen, Leonidas was the name of the Spartan king, and Xerxes was indeed the Persian king. In the movie Persians were called by their actual names, and the only fictional part is to show the Persians as monstrous savages!

For these reasons, I am hesitant to call the movie 300, just a fictional movie. Insulting Persians by twisting the historical facts is as unjust as making a movie about Dr. Martin Luther King, picturing him as something different and calling it just “science fiction!”

Calling Persians barbarians and slave drivers is another unethical aspect of the movie 300. It is a proven scholarly fact that the Persian Empire in 480 B.C was the most magnificent and civilized empire. Persia was established by the Cyrus the Great, the author of the first human rights declaration. By pursuing a policy of generosity instead of repression, and by favoring local religions, the Persian Empire was able to inspire its newly conquered subjects to become enthusiastic supporters.

Frankly, it is fair to say that given the historical evidence, Persians were among the few nations who did not have slaves especially when it came to building their magnificent palaces. Clay tablets discovered by University of Chicago scholars in 1947 demonstrate that these royal palaces were built by workers who compensated based on their skills. This was in contrast to Egyptian and Roman architecture built on the backs of thousands of slaves.

While I’m certainly not a conspiracy theorist, I must say that Warner Brothers could not have found a worse time in history to release movie like 300. Given the conflict going on between Iran and some western countries, this could be translated as more support for inaccurate generalizations about Iran, and anything but a message of love between the West and Iran.