Skip to main content

Spartans never retreat! Spartans never surrender!


300
(2006)

I’ll readily admit to being surprised by the success of 300, but I guess Warner Bros were too; they expected takings more on a par with Sin City. What they got was a bit of a monster, with a total gross approaching half a billion dollars. The common link between the two is Frank Miller, a comic book writer of inclement disposition and extreme right wing leanings; maybe a bit like John Milius without the sense of humour. Or directorial ability (see The Spirit for evidence). I didn’t care much for Sin City, but it was a comic book aficiando’s wet dream. Understandably, as it adopted the visual stylings of the medium that inspired it. Zach Snyder’s film does the same thing, just with added speed-ramping.


Snyder’s an interesting director, not so much in terms of evidencing a powerful intellect but because his films are visually so compelling. He’s like a dimmer version of the Wachowski siblings in that regard (although, arguably, there’s a thin line between intellectual and pretentious, and they teeter on the brink between the two). His Dawn of the Dead remake was a pleasant surprise, particularly during the first act where the sense of danger was ferociously palpable. And I liked Watchmen for the most part, even if it displayed a penchant for gore that distracted from the thematic content (this is why I suggest that he’s hardly cerebral in his instincts). Left to his own devices he “auteured” into existence the wet dream silliness of Sucker Punch. But, quite possibly (likely even, given the trailers), the combination of his distinctive style (much more suited to the comic book medium than his producer) and Christopher Nolan’s resolute braininess will make Man of Steel satisfying nourishment on all levels. We’ll see.


With 300, Snyder weakly argues that he is having his cake. And then attempts to eat it too. Against criticisms of the film’s thrall to the fascistic designs of its heroes, he responds that it is a tale told by an unreliable narrator (David Wenham’s Dillios). It’s an excuse for everything from the fantasy elements, to the vilification of the horrid Persians, to the disgust for anything that does not celebrate the sculpted body-beautiful. Arguing that it is “just a fantasy” about a bunch of guys kicking the shit out of each other doesn’t really let him off the hook for Miller’s overt identification with the city-state and its harsh standards. Nor it does explain some of the inconsistencies (Gerard Butler’s Leonidas isn’t just a cold-blooded killer; rather than disdain Ephialtes the hunchback he treats him respectfully – hardly the sort of image Dillios would be presenting of the King to the troops back home). The subtext is; these are a tough, callous people (except when it comes to showing a hero’s love for a wife or a son, of course) but that’s what you need to be a hero. And you should be in awe of them.


But, at the same time, Snyder has a point. This is a resolutely empty-headed film. Snyder really does stuff because it’s cool, and tries to justify it later (if he’s challenged); it’s why Watchmen (which, as I say, I like) is all about emulating the look of the comic (except where Snyder’s got something “cooler” in mind) but rarely engages fully with its ideas. Here, the characters don’t even qualify as two-dimensional (this might be why Butler is so effective). And the plot amounts to; Leonidas takes 300 of his men off to face King Xerxes because he can’t declare war. They fight. Then fight some more. Then, well, we know what happened to the 300 but I won’t spoil it. There are some lame attempts to create political intrigue at home, which involve Dominic West being an absolute stinker and Lena Headey taking her top off, but these amount to little more than casting about for breathing space between dust-ups. 


While the visual palate Snyder adopts is striking, I have to admit I found it only intermittently engaging. It encourages immersion in a hyperreal fantasy landscape that is as shallow and insubstantial as all the other elements. Where Snyder succeeds is in making it seamless; he has built a self-contained world here, like it or not.


Which makes you wonder why the actors spent so long down the gym (it appears they actually did reconfigure themselves with those bodacious bods, although there’s little doubt that they were shined-up in post); all the better to sell their homoerotic camaraderie? I did wonder if Xerxes was presented as slightly effeminate in order to state to those doubting that, yes, these Spartans are all man.


The treatment of Ephialtes (Andrew Tiernan) struck me as the most objectionable of the film’s many less-than-salubrious statements. As mentioned, Leonidas shows great empathy with him when he volunteers to fight. Such are his deformities that he would be useless in battle, the King tells him. Ephialtes’ response is to show that weakness of body is a reflection of weakness of moral fibre; off he goes to betray the Spartans. Clearly, then, the Spartans eugenics programme was a laudable one, and Ephialtes’ parents were wrong to save him.


We see similar aberrations on the Persian side (giants with crab arms, slavering giant gimps) and in the oracles Leonidas must defer to at the outset (the Ephors, who are shown to be ethically corrupt and said to be the inbred; it is unclear how the latter is supposed to be the case, as the Spartans provide them with a steady flow of young maidens). Then there is the dismissal of Athenians as “boy-lovers”, which would like to preclude any Spartan inclinations in that direction. Snyder will no doubt claim this is all a consequence of Dillios’ narrative adornments, but this is a filmmaker whose presiding motivation is how air-punching he can make a sequence. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck…


There’s no doubt that Butler gives it his all in the lead role. It’s kept him in starring parts since, but since their quality has been resoundingly dubious (a supporting turn in Coriolanus aside) one wonders whether this was such a blessing. Revisiting the movie, the presence of Michael Fassbender (in his first big screen part) as Stelios is the most significant surprise. He’s okay, but one-note shouting isn’t really using him to the best of his abilities. He also resembles Christopher Lambert in Greystoke; it’s the flowing locks, I think.


The dialogue is a progressively more inane string of clichés that are punchy yet resoundingly hollow (“Give them nothing. But take from them everything!”, “Today, no Spartan dies!” – wait, I thought you all wanted to die, “Tonight, we dine in hell!”). It’s tiresomely bombastic stuff.


The staging is impressive but, like the dialogue, becomes repetitive and wearying; Leonidas’ fight with a giant gimp man is probably the highlight, as it actually produces tension. Most of the mayhem is well-choreographed but uninvolving.


You come away from the film knowing bollocks-all about Sparta, aside from the a pre-amble about how the children are brought up as soldiers; more resonant are their rallying grunts, making them sound like a team of American footballers. The shame of it is, Michael Mann was planning a film about this subject for years (Gates of Fire) that undoubtedly would have had engaged with the subject with it’s own unique style and actually shown some insights into the Spartan people and the Battle of Thermopylae. There’s no hope for it now, alas, Meanwhile, an optimistic Warner Bros has opted for that least auspicious of follow-ups; a prequel.

**1/2

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

You're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice.

Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
I’ve seen comments suggesting that John Sturges’ thriller hasn’t aged well, which I find rather mystifying. Sure, some of the characterisations border on the cardboard, but the director imbues the story with a taut, economical backbone. 

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

So long, sky trash!

Star Wars The Saga Ranked
This is an update of my 2018 ranking, with the addition of highly-acclaimed The Rise of Skywalker along with revisits to the two preceding parts of the trilogy. If you want to be generous and call it that, since the term it makes it sound a whole lot more coherent than it plays.

To defeat the darkness out there, you must defeat the darkness inside yourself.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)
Easily the best of the Narnia films, which is maybe damning it with faint praise. 

Michael Apted does a competent job directing (certainly compared to his Bond film - maybe he talked to his second unit this time), Dante Spinotti's cinematography is stunning and the CGI mostly well-integrated with the action. 

Performance-wise, Will Poulter is a stand-out as a tremendously obnoxious little toff, so charismatic you're almost rooting for him. Simon Pegg replaces Eddie Izzard as the voice of Reepicheep and delivers a touching performance.
***

When I barked, I was enormous.

Dean Spanley (2008)
(SPOILERS) There is such a profusion of average, respectable – but immaculately made – British period drama held up for instant adulation, it’s hardly surprising that, when something truly worthy of acclaim comes along, it should be singularly ignored. To be fair, Dean Spanleywas well liked by critics upon its release, but its subsequent impact has proved disappointingly slight. Based on Lord Dunsany’s 1939 novella, My Talks with Dean Spanley, our narrator relates how the titular Dean’s imbibification of a moderate quantity of Imperial Tokay (“too syrupy”, is the conclusion reached by both members of the Fisk family regarding this Hungarian wine) precludes his recollection of a past life as a dog. 

Inevitably, reviews pounced on the chance to reference Dean Spanley as a literal shaggy dog story, so I shall get that out of the way now. While the phrase is more than fitting, it serves to underrepresent how affecting the picture is when it has cause to be, as does any re…

It looks like we’ve got another schizoid embolism!

Total Recall (1990)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven offered his post-mortem on the failures of the remakes of Total Recall (2012) and Robocop (2013) when he suggested “They take these absurd stories and make them too serious”. There may be something in this, but I suspect the kernel of their issues is simply filmmakers without either the smarts or vision, or both, to make something distinctive from the material. No one would have suggested the problem with David Cronenberg’s prospective Total Recall was over-seriousness, yet his version would have been far from a quip-heavy Raiders of the Lost Ark Go to Mars (as he attributes screenwriter Ron Shusset’s take on the material). Indeed, I’d go as far as saying not only the star, but also the director of Total Recall (1990) were miscast, making it something of a miracle it works to the extent it does.

Play to them, then! Fickle, brainless idiots.

Waltzes from Vienna  aka Strauss’ Great Waltz (1934)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock was dismissive of this adaptation of the stage musical of the same name, ironically minus the musical element. Waltzes from Vienna is a rather low-watt picture, with a rote romance/jealousy plotline running through it (Johann Strauss is offering his services to Countess Helga, much to the dismay of intended Resi). The film comes alive only intermittently with bits of comedy, Strauss’ rivalry with dad, and the central composition.