300

[featherynscale]

kittenpants, orcjohn, triadruid and I managed to see 300 last night. For the entire length of the movie, three of us sat there like Beavis and Butthead; "This is the coolest thing I have ever seen. huh-huh, huh-huh". Apparently, the thing was too comic-bookish for triadruid's tastes, and he was disappointed. The rest of us reveled in that.

Beautiful art direction, brilliant action sequences, explosions (the Persians had some black-powder bombs, which I'm not sure are correct to the period, but so what?), nice looking men, an excessively hot queen, revenge, glorious doomed gestures, and a rhinoceros. What's better than that? (Well, it would have been better if the captain's son and the blond Spartan he kept bantering with had actually had sex, instead of merely flirting, but that's apparently too much to ask for.)

The Persians were, on the whole, ridiculous. When I eventually grasped that the story was being told afterwards by a soldier to the council, it made a little more sense. I mean, that's what you'd say, right? "There were six million of them! They were monstrous and deformed, and came riding strange beasts. Giants walked among them. Xerxes himself must have been 12 feet tall, and advanced upon us on a golden throne borne by thirty thousand slaves..." All it lacked was the requisite introduction: "No shit, there I was...."

The big question in everyone's mind after the film (other than "Why is it okay to show that much blood and gore and corpses and naked women and transsexual amputees and all that, and you still get an R rating, but if you show a penis, it's NC-17?" and "Why did the Spartans call the Athenians boy-lovers?" and "Why no soldier-on-soldier sex, dammit?") was this:
At that tech level, how do you get a rhinoceros on a boat, *keep* the rhinoceros on the boat, and keep the boat seaworthy, i.e. with no holes in it from rampaging rhinoceros? Discuss.

Comments

Re: the perpetual question

[rio-luna.livejournal.com]

first of all, i nevber said men, or individual man. my comments addressed a media iteration of issues of power, exposure and visual pleasaure without referring to men as individuals as silly, fragile ego'd or petty.

if anything I called attention to the metaphoric distance between stereotypical displays of 'masculine power' with the very real humanity of men as inidviduals, not as symbols of oppression.

no need to be nasty or insulting, dude--i didn't say anything to YOU, did I? check yourself and back the FUCK up.

Re: the perpetual question

[kellan-m-solan.livejournal.com]

In that case, you display an acute lack of awareness about what you are saying. I have re-read your post very carefully, as I do not wish to be inequitable. But presumably these 'media iterations' were not, in fact evolved by women. Certainly not women as educated on the matter as yourself. And so, yes you did very much say 'men.'

Also, barring the knife, we are not so easily separated from our penises and, physiologically speaking the penis cannot have a 'need.' Indeed it is not equipped to make demands at all lacking as it does any nerve bundles even remotely capable of such a feat. So when you speak of "the Phallus's perpetual demand for either obeisance or placation." You speak of a man's need, or men's need as you see fit.

Lastly, if I was insulting, it was to the ideas you so flippantly espoused in an otherwise light hearted thread, and not to you personally. It might also be worth pointing out that I am not the one cursing...

Re: the perpetual question

[featherynscale.livejournal.com]

I humbly beg of you two: switch to decaf. This thread is not that serious. In fact, it's only not the dumbest thread I have ever started because after I started this one today, I started another one where I asked people to compare Steven Colbert to a rhinoceros. Consider that, if you would.

Re: the perpetual question

[kellan-m-solan.livejournal.com]

laughs* you're journal, you're rules. Feel free to delete as necessary.

I'm afraid I'm the kind of person who will bite at flame bait, though I do try by vaguely upscale about it. This is, in fact a discussion I try to have when it comes up. I'm always mystified by the fact that these days a woman can say whatever she wants to disparage men and everyone just smiles or applauds the insight. On the other hand, even if I wanted to make such blanket comments about women (which I very much do not) I certainly could not do so without triggering a storm of controversies, not to mention destroying any future of mine in politics }-).

If we actually want better gender relations let us shoot for fairness and not a changing of the guard. Unless of course you lass's actually want to punish us for a few thousand years to get even. In that case, I guess I'll have to choose sides!

Also: if Colbert were a skinny-geeky rhinoceros, would he really be that different from now? I know I'd watch more.

Re: the perpetual question

[featherynscale.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure, based on previous interactions with rio_luna, that her initial comment was fairly tongue-in-cheek. My request for an answer to the "Why no dick in film" question certainly was, and I was pretty sure that she was giving me a satirical answer.

As a rule, I don't care to hear/read/be around for any generalized disparagement of any gender. I don't even like to listen to people talk about what 'men are like' or 'women are like' even in positive terms. It doesn't seem terribly constructive or useful from any angle, nor is any of it likely be accurate to any given individual. In fact, I am told that I am too hardass on people about it, and that I should, in fact, calm the hell down. I'm still deciding whether or not I should comply with the request.

So, as distasteful as it is to see people get worked up about things that don't seem to warrant the outpouring of doom, it is doubly distasteful to me to see it happen about whether or not men are more evil than women or vice versa. I reject the very ground of the argument. (I also don't usually count myself as a lass, or as having any particular investment in establishing matriarchy, but that's another whole set of issues.)

Also, you are correct. The difference between Colbert and a rhino is perhaps not as wide as I had originally thought. It begs more consideration.

Re: the perpetual question

[kellan-m-solan.livejournal.com]

I will try to refrain from calling you 'lass' in that case. But you have to remember that a large portion of my memories of you involve your being dressed as a pirate, or dressing me as a pirate, and also a liberal amount of drink...

and possibly you calling me lass... }-)

Re: the perpetual question

[featherynscale.livejournal.com]

Also, I'm not deleting it, I'm just asking you to not continue it unless you are both having fun at it. It reads to me like you're not.

Re: the perpetual question

[kellan-m-solan.livejournal.com]

I'm always having fun. It is safe to assume, that if I'm engaged enough by something to be participating in it I'm enjoying it. This is especially true of discussion/debate/argument of any kind. Since there is always a chance I might learn something. Which is very exciting. And also, the tiny outside possibility that I might facilitate someone else's learning (I don't count on that one though).

I am very much the sort of person who walks away from things he doesn't like. At worst, I might walk back-wards to keep from turning my back... but still very much away. You should know this about me by now }-)

P.S. I would vote for non-compliance with that particular request. It seems like a right healthy view you have going.