The Spartans were the Nazis of Ancient Greece. Sure they were good at fighting but only because most of their population was cruelly enslaved. The Athenians once said the only way to beat the Spartan was to release their slaves. Of course, the Spartans knew this and pressured neighboring city-states to pass laws defending their brand of slavery.
@Scottidott this video is not about national defense, its about media construction, which in turn can be used to justify an act of national defense, but should not be mistaken for the same thing.
@Scottidott yes, he has a problem with nations defending themselves. You hit the nail on the head. He either wants 1. the Umma to steam roll over Europe and the US or 2. recreate Pol Pot's great idea.
Too often people just handwave social issues, abstaining from actual discussion in favor of avoiding conflict. What these people forget is that none of these issues can be solved without discussion and that by selectively choosing what you want to see, you blind yourself to the hurts and pains of those around you. Not only that, but you help perpetuate this social agony until it spills over into violence.
I think you may be giving Zac Snyder too much credit in the ideas department here. But also I would say this: The movie is essentially revealed to be narrated by a Spartan survivor who is told to tell the 300's story so as to rally the Greeks. Hence the bias against the persians.
300 is blatantly anti-shaving the main hero has a beard for the entire movie, oh wait he starts the movie as a kid, well its definitely anti- t-shirts - do any of the characters wear t-shirts - WELL DO THEY???!!!! or trainers NONE OF THEM WEAR TRAINERS - THEY'RE SAYING ALL T-SHIRT AND TRAINER WEARING PEOPLE ARE EVIL!!! THEY'RE TRYING TO BRAINWASH YOU INTO WEARING SANDALS AND TOGAS!!!!!!!
@DancesintheDark your comment is kind of funny but it doesn't refute the video's critique. even the director of 300 openly said he made Xerxes look flamingly queer because it was the scariest type of villain he could imagine for the target audience - 16 year old straight boys. the use of stereotypes in popular cinema is not coincidental. most media literate people can easily identify the patterns in this film.
I would conceed that of the critques presented the only one makes any real sense is the question of homophobia but in reality there is only one line in the film which is potentially offensive which is when Leonidas quips "Submission? Well that's a bit of a problem. See, rumor has it the Athenians have already turned you down, and if those philosophers and, uh, boy-lovers have found that kind of nerve, then..."
" - here Leonidas is describing an allie not an enemy so its not a grave insult but an implication of weakness, he uses philosophers in the same context and the term boy-lovers equally implies youth as opposed to say men-lovers which might refer more specifically to gay men.
There's nothing in the film that directly suggests Xerxes is homosexual and whilst yes he does have a stylistically homosexual appearance the same could also be said of the oiled ab sporting Spartans themselves, its not Top Gun but its not that far off.
My main objection to the type of critique posted here though is that it is badly misdirected - criticizing 300 for being an overly macho, war-mongering, politically one dimensional movie is like criticizing gay porn for promoting promiscuity. There are many far more serious forms of rascism, homophobia or discrimination in the world that do need addressing and to treat this as relating to these belittles these important issues.
@lewistonvideomaker That's exactly how Xerxes looks in the comic book that this is based off of. Snyder added alot of stuff to the story, but overall, if you want to blame anyone for this, it's author Frank Miller. He's responsible for alot in the film: Xerxes being a drag queen, Leonidas calling the Athenians "boy-lovers," although Miller said that he just wanted to portray the Spartans as hypocrites, etc. And I don't know why he did that, but ther you go.
wait, so you believe that the movie just happened to be because there was a comic book lying around? the producer, director etc. obviously knew what kind of movie they wanted to shoot thus they decided to utilize the comic book. it's their responsibility... there are far too many idiots walking around thinking there is a genetic disposition to certain values, framing a world in their heads which is basically a dumbed down clash of civilizations thanks to such garbage...
@ufster81 No, I KNOW that the comic book came out first and that after the success of Sin City, producers started going after his works and not just 300. It's based off of a comic which I have read, so I can tell you that most of what's in 300 is really Frank Miller's responsibility and that Zack Snyder and the other schlockmeisters on the film are only guilty of echoing it. And I don't think that Frank Miller would've let them change much. Zack Snyder is a hack, Sucker Punch proves that.
i am more interested in the timing of the movie and it's reception... it certainly played on the age-old fear of the oriental, depicting this fantasy battle in which the morally and racially pure white heroes won a victory against the immoral brown people. in that sense, for paying such a tribute to frank miller's racism, the producer/director and the vast amount of people who crowded the theaters expecting just to see that are equally responsible.
@ufster81 It's a bizarre thing to try and put blame on the audience when so many Americans don't know that ancient Persia is modern day Iran, and thus would not make the connection at all. All most people knew was that 300 looked cool and that there was going to be a whole lot of gore and T&A, not any bashing of a country most of them can't find on a map. You could say that they were making the parables more subtle, but propaganda can never afford to be subtle, ever.
"who crowded the theaters ****expecting just to see that****" i.e. white people defeating hordes of brown people. i also wouldn't sell short the xenophobes and the racists, they get their "information" quite easily from websites promoted by right wing media. you should see the number of ignorant lower class conservatives who happen to think that robert spencer is an expert orientalist when they quote the little idiot on moorish spain and the ottoman empire.
@ufster81 300's intended target audience i.e. most of the people who went to see it, really were just young twentysomethings who wanted to see boobs and gore. Hollywood can't afford to make anything that's inflammatory, because in the U.S., everybody's got a special interest group, even Middle Easterners, who will throw a fit if they find something offensive. And Hollywood is in a liberal leaning part of the country, so I doubt appealing to the Glenn Becks of America is on any studio's agenda.
you're wrong... that's the same "liberal" hollywood who is responsible for the plethora of anti-muslim and anti-arab films and series some of which are shown in this video. also, middle easterner is not a valid definition of a group of people, so i seriously doubt a non-existent peoples would have a special interest group. i suggest you take a look at the book "reel bad arabs: how hollywood vilifies a people".
@ufster81 I am not wrong. Most of the movies that Reel Bad Arabs talks about were from twenty and thirty years ago, and none of them could get made today. The Delta Force, Death Before Dishonor and Iron Eagle are simplistic and only use Arabs as one-dimensional villians. Compare them to The Kingdom, Green Zone and Three Kings, which have portrayals of the Middle East that are much more serious and balanced, something that liberal Hollywood is responsible for.
300 was made in 2007, so that proves you wrong. 24 and The Siege are other examples.
if you don't like the evidence presented in that book, you should check another one by it's author, Guilty: Hollywood's Verdict on Arabs After 9/11 with more contemporary evidence for this case, disproving yours.
@ufster81 No it does not, because 300 isn't the same movie as the ones I mentioned, nor are The Kingdom, Three Kings and Green Zone. Hollywood is liberal, dude, the same Glenn Becks of the world whom you believe to be the target audience of 300 constantly accuse Hollywood of being too liberal, of advocating feminism, gay rights, anti-war and anti-militarism, etc. And once again, don't tell me to look at a book or anything else in order to make your point, make your point with your own words.
i really don't care if you have a disdain for reading for information. the information is there, presented in a form which is not limited to 500 character limits and it prevents me from sinking to your level at which one simply makes claims based on subjective opinion and tries to pass them as facts or scholarly opinion.
so you claim hollywood is liberal because a couple of movies out of 100 movies is made to be in favor of a "liberal" position that 50% supports.
@ufster81 Don't posture to me and don't make excuses for yourself! You are more than capable of giving facts conscerning your opinions regardless of the limitations, just cut to the damn point! That's all you've got to do! And no, I claim that Hollywood is liberal because of the majority of movies that Hollywood produces.
you seem to have a habit of dismissing evidence presented without providing any reason for it. that's why i suggested you read a fucking book or two. i'm not going to waste my time with someone who thinks that simply making a claim is proof of the validity of that claim.
where is your evidence for the "majority" of the movies that hollywood produces that are liberal? is it "the hulk" or "captain america" ?
@ufster81 And you have a habit of making assumptions about Hollywood and the U.S. because you believe that America is out to get you and that Hollywood is out to make you look bad when Hollywood only cares about making money, that's something that you and the Glenn Becks of the U.S. need to learn, because they think that Hollywood has declared war on America Christian traditions and family values. And how are The Hulk and Captain American not liberal? Neither seem to lean toward either way.
evidence proves that hollywood has consistently presented muslims, iranians, arabs etc. in a very unfavorable light. this is not up for any dispute, period. if this is based on economic reasons, it's because the old habits of white christian people's overwhelming tendency towards racism having created a new enemy thus making it profitable to sell.
i was making fun of you, i know hulk isn't liberal.
@ufster81 Yes, and all I'm saying is that much of that negativity has in fact been earned, exclaimation mark! This is not about racism, this is about a people doing bad things and naturally having my country's negative reaction to such reflected in pop culture. And you joking around only proves that you don't want to have a proper discussion, otherwise you wouldn't have called childishly called me an "Ameritard" you "Jurk. "
bad things huh, did you ever read the fucking history of your own country? your country was built on stolen land with the blood and sweat of slaves, you fucktard. it's very much about racism because racist people like you tend to see the world through this prism where "others" are collectively guilty and always in the wrong whereas you're always right and deserve to be judged on your own merits, because your group(race) happens to be the good one.
@ufster81 I don't know, you brush over you own country's history like it never happed, hypocrite. And you're country Empire was built on the blood, sweat and tears of the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Armenians, and the Bedouins, so don't bother with this. And don't waste your breath on the rest what you're saying here,
really, there are millions and millions of greeks, armenians, bulgarians, bedouins and countless other nations that were under the ottoman empire, alive and prosperous today. the same can't be said about the native americans which proves that there is a fundamental difference between the ottoman rule and european colonization of the americas.
@ufster81 You call Balkan children being take away from their families to become minions of the Ottoman Sultan being prosperous? What France, Spain, England and Holland did to native Americans has no bearing on us. Yes the U.S. mistreated them, too, but we weren't the ones who spread the diseases that are mainly responsible for their decimation.
what, are children being taken away from their families today?
"alive and prosperous today" learn to read dumbfuck.
so you americans weren't the direct descendents of the settlers that were of european origin, right? you never benefited from slavery and those invaded territories, right?
if you believe that, you must be really stupid and ignorant.
@ufster81 Do you!? These were not MY opinions, these were accusations that many conservatives in my country make against Hollywood and they throw these claims at Hollywood all of the time! I said this to show what some people in the U.S. think about Hollywood, that's it. And a recent TIME/CNN survey found that caucasian men are the villains of Hollywood films 71% of the time. Caucasian women, 11%. Asian men, 5%. Everyone else (including Arabs) 13%.
"something that liberal Hollywood is responsible for. "....... your opinion stated as fact.
"I claim that Hollywood is liberal because of the majority of movies that Hollywood produces." ....your admission of this claim.
so, either stick to your arguments or be called a dishonest debater.
in a country where 90% of the actors in movies are caucasian, it's hardly surprising that they also get the majority share in the villain parts. this is irrelevant to the discussion.
@ufster81 I am sticking to my point, you're confusing my words. Those claims were in response to you saying that Hollywood was not liberal, which is untrue, and I used accusations that conservatives in my country use against Hollywood in order to make my point, but they were not my opinions, you moronically assumed they were, they were claims that I've heard levelled against Hollywood, that was it!
@ufster81 But it's not what I think, it's what other say about Hollywood. I don't think Hollywood is trying to destory America's values, but I have reason to think that Hollywood has liberal leanings.
idiot, matt damon isn't representative of hollywood he is just an actor, he doesn't make the decisions on what kind of movies are made. neither damon nor jolie are studio executives or producers, they are simply working class people who make millions of dollars for the studios and are easily replaceable by the studios.
@ufster81 He IS! He's one of their best and most successful. Jolie, Damon and others are powerful people with alot of pull in Hollywood which comes with being a successful actor. They AREN'T replaceable, because money talks and the costomer is always right, a people WILL pay to see these actors no matter what, their names alone are guaranteed profit.
no he isn't... he doesn't make the calls as to what gets shot. this is obvious even to the 10 year old kids but apparently you can't grasp such a simple fact. they are replaceable, it's called auditions, dimwit.
@ufster81 No, they aren't replaceable, not when far too many people will go to a crappy film just because you're in it. When a studio has a choice between an established star whose films make millions everytime and an unknown actor, usually their gut reaction is to go for the star, it's simply matter of profit.
idiot, they are replaceable because there are other actors and actresses. damon and jolie aren't the only two people on the face of this planet who can act. as of today there are about 50+ established stars who can replace damon or jolie in any given movie, so they're replaceable.
@ufster81 No, they aren't. They're famous and successful and studios will rely on the likes on established stars to bring in a profit. Hollywood likes a sure thing and the likes of Damon and Jolie are sure things, just like sequels and remakes and adaptions.
nonsense, i don't assume such a thing. i understand perfectly well that the system works both to create or magnify tendencies as well as to profit off of them. nothing casual about that, dimwit.
@ufster81 Have you been on YouTube long, you bastard!? I've seen several videos of Imams and the like saying that the Jews are the worst creation of God, that it's wonderful to kill Jews, etc. And I NEVER said that ALL middle easterners do this.
oh dude, you've seen "several" imams... that must prove it then, right? is this just you being a natural troll or what?
just watch cbn for a day, it'll provide much more evidence for american bigotry towards muslims than the total amount of videos you can find on youtube of imams saying stupid shit.
@ufster81 I heard what they said. They were very clear about what they had to say and it was a thousand times worse than anything on CBN. Trust me, Turk, I've watche a whole lot of the 700 Club, Pat Robertson is squeaking mouse compared to these guys.
bullshit... pat robertson isn't the only thing on cbn and their apocalyptic and genocidal undertones are much more dangerous and inflammatory than any random imam on youtube. we know for a fact how many people are under their influence, unlike your random imams, you stupid asshole.
@ufster81 Get real, motherfucker! Pat Robertson is a damn fool, a you're giving far too much credit. He has NEVER called for Arabs or Muslims to be slaughtered, he never says that they're God's worst creations. He does slander Islam, but genocide!? You can't get away with doing that here!!
apparently you aren't really familiar with the evangelical movement's apocalyptic and genocidal features. they are constantly calling for the destruction of israel's enemies by the united states and base this on biblical bullshit they call prophesy.
apparently you're the one who couldn't get away with lies.
@ufster81 Apparently YOU give Robertson far too much credit. How is ambiguous adventist hype worse than slandering an entire nation and advocating them to be killed. And what does this have to do with 300 being racist.
you brought up the alleged imams calling for whatever stupid shit you claimed to have heard... yes, the evangelicals are much more dangerous because their numbers make a difference in the elections and their genocidal views on so-called israel's enemies, such as arabs and iranians are made well known by their pastors, on cbn especially.
@ufster81 No, Pat Robertson is nowhere near as dangerous as these guys. Not only are what they say far more virulent, alot of Americans condemn Robertson while many Arabs go along with alot of this anit-Semetic bile.
fuck you idiot... pat robertson has called on more than one occasion for a strike on iran, consequences of which are estimated to be at around millions of losses in the region, possibly starting a regional or global conflict. millions and millions of americans support and share these views as a documented fact, where is your evidence of these random imam's pulling their weight in islamic communities.
apparently you can't grasp basic english, stupid asshole. i've told you that it's commonly accepted in many circles that the outcome of military action will most likely result in regional catastrophe. how many people do you think it's acceptable to sacrifice at the altar of israel worship of the evangelical nutjobs you son of a bitch?
@ufster81 You say that and yet you're the one who continues to have bad grammar AND no punctuations or captalisations. Military action does not automatically lead to GENOCIDE, don't sidestep what you fucking said. And Iran and other nations have called for Israel's destruction, and I'm aware of why, so don't bother pointing it out.
cognition and punctuation aren't necessarily related, asshole.
read carefully bitch, because i won't repeat this. it's a well understood consequence that millions of people will most likely die as a result of an american aggression against iran. if you still consciously support such an action, you therefore automatically accept the possible consequences thus also support them. there is no weaseling out of this for you.
@ufster81 Don't excuse your crappy writing. And there won't be any military action against Iran, not at this point. And military action does not inherently garantee genocide. Genocide it the systematic annihilation of a specific people, which differs from the casualties of warfare itself.
pointing out your logical fallacy is not making an excuse for my writing, get that into your thick skull.
advocating for the destruction of israel's enemies is advocating for genocide because they have millions and millions of enemies in the region as a result of their aggressive behavior prior to and after their inception. so, it will require the systematic annihilation of these people, if pat robertson is to have his wish granted by psychos like you.
yes, the myth of israel's destruction could have easily been a non-issue had they not decided to impose their will on the native people of the land. in fact, i too support the dismantling of the israeli state institutions, for i see no justification for a state that is built on ethno-religious privileges. apparently americans disagree, perhaps it's because they are more inclined towards such political stances.
@ufster81 I certainly do disagree. The Jews returning to their homeland is not a privilege, it is their right. And over half of Israel's Jewish population are Mizrahi Jews, and Arab citizens of Israel are treated well. There's Arab political parties in Israel, Arab members of the Knesset, a former Israeli President was just convicted by an Arab judge.
no it's not... a right is not something that you simply agree with or that it feels good for you. the irrelevance of your comments about israel's demographics are just a smoke screen because we both know that a country whose citizenship is determined by ethnicity is a racist country. all jews have the so-called right of return to israel while this isn't true for palestinians who were displaced by israeli aggression.
@ufster81 It is their right. That land is where Jews come from. And the Palestinians can have their own state, that is if Israel would stop building new Jewish settlements in Palestinian territory.
@ufster81 Then why did the U.N. call for Israel to be created in the first place, specifically to serve as a Jewish state, and why are there over a dozen Arab nations?
the u.n. partition plan was the western nations paying back their debt to the jewish people because they were indifferent bystanders to their suffering during ww2. countries like britain and united states refused to accept jewish refugees who ended up getting butchered by the nazis.
there are no arab nations... i know of no arab state which has a law which warrants citizenship based on the individual's racial background.
@ufster81 Yes, there are Arab states. Just because they don't have strict immigration policies based on Arab ethnicity doesn't make any less Arab states. They are such because they are nation-states meant to serve as realms for members of the Arab nation, although not exclusively.
no they aren't arab states, they are states with an arab majority population which is not mandated by any law, you dimwit. israel's demographics are however mandated by law to make it a jewish ethnic state.
you can't call a state an arab state, if they have no government policy of supporting an arab ethnic majority which is why you don't see any random saudi given automatic citizenship in egypt or syria.
@ufster81 They are Arab states. They are such because they are nation-states meant to serve as realms for members of the Arab nation, and what Israel does doesn't reflect here on the Arabs and their policies.
so dimwit, replace israel with united states and enact a law which says only white people can immigrate into united states, while claiming it's not a racist country because some blacks and hispanics already have citizenship and can form parties while ensuring white domination with this supra law.
it is the same thing... the law of immigration in israel is based on ethnicity. it is to ensure that the state will always be ethnically jewish dominated. if united states applies the same rule to white people, united states will ensure white population domination as white immigrants will be used to continue numerical supremacy.
you might see no problem, because you aren't displaced from your homeland. millions of palestinians are, and it's not a matter of a palestinian state when generations of your family are buried in a village that they occupied for centuries and you're not allowed to live there anymore because it's become a jewish only settlement.
@ufster81 It is a matter of a Palestinian state when that's what the Palestinian's are fighting for. Right now, they're fighting hard for official U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state. I see no problem because I think that the Palestinians cane have what they've got and the Israelis can have what they've got.
it's a matter of the right of return of the displaced palestinians, which can be achieved with or without a palestinian state. you're confusing the issues...
@ufster81 It is, and that's what I mean, the Palestinians can have their own country, and it's all that they seem to talk about. And alot of talk has been about recognition of Palestine. And don't call me a moron.
you're obviously very ill informed on the issue... so it might appear to you that it's all they talk about but that is far from the reality. right of return is a core issue and it will remain to be one until some sort of settlement is reached on it. also, formation of a palestinian state will not make israel a non-racist state as long as they define themselves and back that up with legislation, as an ethnic state.
@ufster81 There's alot more at stake here, more claims and accusations and grievances, Israel building new Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, of Israel being an apartheid state, Palestine being an attempt by the Arabs to compromise Israel. Claims of Jews having sole claim to Jerusalem and Palestinians wanting East Jerusalem to be their state's capital. But it's all pointless, we were arguing about 300 and look where we are. We've gone way off base here. We need to stop this crap right now.
@ufster81 It is an act, because pointing out films from decades ago is not real proof of current and continued wrongdoing. And I don't see how this has to do with 300. We've really gone off base here.
fuck off, asshole... 24 is not from decades ago, neither is The Siege nor the 300. the book i recommended is from 2008 and documents post 911 portrayal of muslims in hollywood. i won't do the work for you, the evidence is there if you care to look and have any desire to learn the truth.
@ufster81 But the Delta Force sure as shit is! You assumed that I mean 24. And 300 isn't anything like 24. Now either make your own point in your own words or don't. Don't tell me to read an outside source to try and make your point.
"outside source"... is that what you call scholarly work in redneckstan? i don't give a shit about making a point to you, i'm simply stating that if you want to see the evidence, it's there in this book. apparently you're more interested in "winning" the argument, which you're failing abysmally to do so far, than learning the facts.
@ufster81 No, it's what I call a guy who has the time to argue for seven hours and yet tries to rely on saying "Look, read this." instead of trying to make a point on his own with some facts.
apparently your laziness is somehow my fault. i'm not going to reconstruct the arguments made for each and every movie, dimwit, especially since you've shown yourself to be inflexible in the face of evidence presented so far, dismissing them arbitrarily. what will change this time around if i take the time to pick up that book and name some more movies, my guess is not much so you can go fuck yourself.
@ufster81 No, YOUR laziness is your own fault. You're the one who won't just make your point on your own without telling me to read this instead of just stating some facts on you own.
i've made my point... i've given the examples of 24 and the siege off the top of my head and you dismissed them arbitrarily. what will change this time around if i were to give you 10 more examples with the fucktard attitude you displayed so far? my guess is not much because it's obvious you're more interested in verifying your own stupid beliefs rather than questioning them in face of evidence presented.
@ufster81 And you ignored the fact that I brought up films like The Kingdom, Three Kings and Green Zone. And you never elaborated on how 24 was anti-Arab.
have you even watched 24? i can accuse you just as well of not elaborating on how those movies are non-biased, since you've failed to demonstrate an iota of evidence to support that argument so far. see, two can play that game asshole.
@ufster81 Well, if you have read Reel Bad Arabs then I figured that you were at least familiar with Three Kings. Dr. Jack Shaheen, the guy who wrote that book, brought up Three Kings in which he commends for portraying a balanced view of the Gulf War showing decent Iraqis fighting the tyranny of Saddam Hussein and Iraqis loyal to Saddam, or Syriana which has an Arab prince who wants to bring democracy to his country, only to be killed for it.
if you go back and re-read my comment, i wrote "i can accuse you just as well of not elaborating on how those movies are non-biased" which is absolutely accurate because you hadn't elaborated on it at that point, but simply presented them as is, which i didn't raise any objections to.
now, shaheen, the same guy you're referencing above wrote another book in which he documented post 9/11 vilification of muslims and arabs, to which you hypocritically oppose.
anyway, i've spent more than enough time for an apologist for advocates of genocide and destruction... respond only if you have anything remotely intelligent to say to save both of us unnecessary loss of time.
@ufster81 We've certainly have spent alot of time talking about anything but 300 being racist, seven hours at this point, mostly on . And I don't recall defending Pat Robertson about anything at all, I don't like the man, I think he's insipid scum who is filling American's head with lies and half-truths.
you might just as well look at the "planet of the arabs" video that this video was posted as a reply to. the evidence is overwhelmingly against your argument.
@ufster81 So now Hollywood is not liberal because it used to rip on a certain group that many Americans understandibly hated twenty to thirty years ago? And for your information I sued the term Middle-Easterners because I know for a fact that contrary to popular believe, not all Middle Easterners are Arab, particularly Persians. And prove your own point instead of telling me to look at another video (especially one that I've already seen several times).
understandably? i think we're getting to the root causes of your behavior in this comments section. i see that it's impossible for you to see blatant hollywood racism as it persists today when your own bigotry has made you internalize similar opinions.
you were wrong to use the term middle-easterner because you claimed that these "people" had special interest groups, which is a lie. there is no special interest group lobbying for "middle-easterners".
@ufster81 Yes, understandibly, I'm just explaining how many Americans feel! That is simply a matter of fact, because the truth is that you can't pull crap like the OPEC oil embargo, the Iranian hostage crisis, the taking of TWA 847, and 9/11 and not have Americans hate you. This happens in real life, and you think that Americans hate the middle east because of Hollywood?! And I just gave you the names of TWO of these special interest groups, do you have any clue of how things work in the U.S.?
so these lovely american assholes weren't aware of the downing of the iranian passenger plane by the american navy and the magnitude of crap their own government pulled in the middle east for the past half century? nothing is understandable about the ignorance of racist people, period.
none of the two interest groups you gave have anything to do with "middle easterners" as a peoples, because there is no such classification contrary to your claims.
@ufster81 Nor is there anything to understand about a bunch of glorious Middle Eastern bastards knowngly putting into power tyrants and terrorist organisations, sometimes in response to American, taking people hostage, strapping bombs to teenagers, putting AK-47's in the hands of children and spewing Anti-Semetic bile on their nations' TV programs openly. And CAIR was started by Omar Awad, Nihad Awad and Rafeeq Jaber, clearly form the middle east.
you ameritards are the ones to talk with millions and millions of deaths chalked up to your credit all over the world from south america to far east. whatever you accuse other people of doing, ironically, it's just a miniscule projection of your nation's morals and actions. funny that you have the nerve to lecture anybody, you racist fucktard.
@ufster81 Oh so what America does trumps Darfur, Burma, the Holocaust, the Cultural Revolution and Mao Zedong's agricultural reforms which only condemned millions of Chinese to death. Don't make accusations about my country conscerning such when 1. You bring up no instances or proper casualty numbers and 2. You ignore your country's own atrocities like the Armenian Genocide (which claimed 600,000 to 1,500,000) and Assyrian (which claimed 250,000 to 750,000). And "Ameritard?" Grow up.
vietnam, nagasaki and hiroshima, contras and countless other direct and indirect cause of mass murders all around the world.
yes, your country's atrocities trump mao's because your country used agent orange with purpose to starve the population, mao's agricultural reforms weren't done with the desired outcome to starve people. your country's support for the genocide in east timor was much worse.
get a fucking education, armenian genocide was under the ottoman empire.
@ufster81 Regardless of Mao's intentions, his actions still hurt alot of people and you can't deny that. And don't you dare try to sidestep the Armenian Genocide, your country did that, Ottomans or not, your country's atrocities outstrip mine by leaps and bounds, get that education yourself. You don't see me here denying Vietnam, now do you? And what about China's support of Darfur, or the Nanking Massacre, or the Soviet mass rape of German women, do they just go right over your head?
intent is primary... leaps and bounds? my country didn't exterminate the native americans to the brink of extinction. my country didn't ship millions and millions of slaves in horrible conditions and treated them as property. my country didn't spend the last century fighting countless wars against people whom never attacked it. my country didn't overthrow democratically elected governments all over the world.
@ufster81 And by the way, Middle-Easterners do have special interest groups here: Like CAIR - The Council on American-Islamic Relations, and the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Back when Disney brought out Aladdin in 1992 the beginning song had a lyric describing the middle-east as a place "where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face." It was the ADC who got Disney to change the lyric.
@ufster81 Regardless, these organisations were started by middle easterners and constanly aid middle easterners in the U.S. You're making assumptions about what I said. And don't tell me to get a life, you don't know me, or my country that well, for that matter.
bullshit... calling cair "middle easterner" is the equivalent of calling the vatican "western european" and claiming that it works to advocate "western european" interests.
@ufster81 What would you have me do, use the term Arab in relation to a movie accused of demonizing IRANIANS?! I'll keep using the term middle easterner because I consider it appropriate as it's not just Arabs who hate us. And don't put words in my mouth, as of this point I haven't accused the middle east of any ajendas of any kind.
you're quite the idiot aren't you? you claimed that "middle easterners" had special interest groups than you gave two examples which are not related to iranians or any other peoples that live in the region. remember it was your stupid argument that "middle easterners" as a whole have sway over hollywood because of cair or some other random special interest group, resulting in hollywood not being able to demonize "middle easterners".
@ufster81 YOU'RE the idiot. I meant Middle Easterners HERE in the United States, you moron! And you're blowing what I said out of proportion. I just meant that Hollywood will satisfy whom it has to in order to make a profit, even Arabs and Muslims, because when any group raises a fuss, I know that Hollywood tends to listen if profit is at stake.
i understood you the first time and your argument is still an idiotic, irrational and unsubstantiated claim. arabs and muslims aren't responsible for much profit in hollywood, your claim is absurd that this would somehow make a difference enough to prevent hollywood from practicing vilification of these peoples.
@ufster81 No it is not, and because you thought that those claimes that I made about conservatives were my own opinions, it's your arguement that's idiotic, irrational and unsubstantiated. That's to be expected, you are the one who thinks of Hollywood as a faceless boogeyman out to get you.
unlike you i can document my claims... and you should be honest enough to take responsibility for your own claims, even though they are idiotic, irrational and unsubstantiated.
I think the morally dubious nature of this movie was done on purpose, and fits the Herodotus account pretty well: it WAS a propaganda piece for the greeks, and the transposition to a typically US discourse imo translates very well how it would have been read back then.
It would have been much more informative to scrutinize that angle (the fact that The Other is nothing new) rather than taking everything literally, which kinda sounds dumb.
@Nilla6 I agree that would be an interesting angle. It doesn't delve into the details of Greek propaganda because either way, the movie is what it is. What's practically important is what messages 300 (and other media like it) has for impressionable audiences today. I was essentially editing the video for someone like myself at age 16 - a young oblivious straight white boy who loved action movies but would be open to critiquing them if someone helped me do it.
@lewistonvideomaker The way I see this movie is: "see the propaganda that society has been feeding itself throughout the ages? We're gonna crank that up to 11 so you can see how silly it is."
Cause frankly, Herodotus was being a bit silly himself when he re-wrote history in that Homerian-epic-wannabe style of his (equivalent of a Bay movie back then?).
So in a way, you're being kinda redundant and impressionable yourself by missing that 2nd layer of criticism.
@lewistonvideomaker So what I was getting at, before I got interrupted by myself, is that this video would make more sense, and completely reach that goal of trying to make people more aware of the underbelly of what they're being told if it had a "part 2", explaining how those stereotypes are used to give a powerful message in a cultural, political and historical sense.
I will add that - while this stuff may be obvious to a person like yourself - there are many people (even adults) who have a hard time recognizing these issues in popular media.
I think this is stupid. You are just looking for something to bitch about so you can feel all special and righteous - its a movie! certain people have to be demonised, it is based on an original story, it an action film - there are many explanations as to why it is the way it is. Dont interpret it as something its not. I could make one of your videos for any movie I watch i swear
@littlepro22 My motivation for making the video was to enlighten someone who would have been just like me at age 16 - totally into a film like 300 and oblivious to the stereotypes it perpetuates. "Its a movie!" Yes, it is a movie. Movies are powerful things, not only for their impact, but also in terms of how they come to exist in the first place. Deconstructing them is a valuable part of media consumption. Please explain why certain people need to be "demonished" (new term).
@littlepro22 If you can make a similar video for any movie you watch then I encourage you to do so and share it with me so we can discuss it. That's what communication and media production is all about.
@lewistonvideomaker yea sorry man i was a bit of a dick with that comment. But I still reckon that you're possibly reading too deep into it. I guess you are right to some extent
Very good video about the history of stereotyping used to control the Western popular perceptions of "the Other". And while I agree with your overall message, I don't agree that this is necessarily exclusively right-wing revisionism. I think Orientalism, stereotyping and the like, cross the political spectrum. Each side does it for their own means and it's ALL just fiction.
I'm not a big movie buff but has ANY movie ever been produced in Western cinema where the roles are reversed: The "Other" (anything other than white race) being the dominant main characters portrayed as heroes with which we sympathize while the whites are our enemy to be crushed? And if such an epic movie WERE to be made I wonder how badly it would be bashed and possibly banned by those in power-those who create the trickle-down effect? Divisions renewed? Possibly but I dare to see it happen
300 wide chested white man, as usual defending the freedom by crushing the forces of evil and evil is of course anything not white...and they are defending the freedom of Libya now just like Iraq, and they are there for freedom not natural resources, because they really give a shit about Arab's freedom
The Spartans were the Nazis of Ancient Greece. Sure they were good at fighting but only because most of their population was cruelly enslaved. The Athenians once said the only way to beat the Spartan was to release their slaves. Of course, the Spartans knew this and pressured neighboring city-states to pass laws defending their brand of slavery.
LordMunchkin 1 month ago
Pssst..It's just a movie. Now get over yourself and go back to watching Brokeback Mountain and How She Move.
kkamagwi 1 month ago
@kkamagwi Just a movie... meaning?
lewistonvideomaker 1 month ago
@kkamagwi hey asshole... now we all know what an idiot you are... aint got nuthin sensible to say ? just shut up !
DrumGold 1 month ago
Do you have a problem with a nation defending itself from outside forces?
Scottidott 2 months ago
@Scottidott this video is not about national defense, its about media construction, which in turn can be used to justify an act of national defense, but should not be mistaken for the same thing.
lewistonvideomaker 2 months ago
@Scottidott eh dime ? you missed the point as well... as I said don't share your ignorance, just shut it !
DrumGold 1 month ago
@Scottidott yes, he has a problem with nations defending themselves. You hit the nail on the head. He either wants 1. the Umma to steam roll over Europe and the US or 2. recreate Pol Pot's great idea.
1czechit1 1 month ago
Too often people just handwave social issues, abstaining from actual discussion in favor of avoiding conflict. What these people forget is that none of these issues can be solved without discussion and that by selectively choosing what you want to see, you blind yourself to the hurts and pains of those around you. Not only that, but you help perpetuate this social agony until it spills over into violence.
This video was a step in the right direction.
LordMunchkin 4 months ago 2
I think you may be giving Zac Snyder too much credit in the ideas department here. But also I would say this: The movie is essentially revealed to be narrated by a Spartan survivor who is told to tell the 300's story so as to rally the Greeks. Hence the bias against the persians.
PompamooseMagique 4 months ago
This is so great! Thank you so much for making this! Because it is entirely, incredibly, painfully true on all demonizing counts.
deviija 5 months ago
300 is blatantly anti-shaving the main hero has a beard for the entire movie, oh wait he starts the movie as a kid, well its definitely anti- t-shirts - do any of the characters wear t-shirts - WELL DO THEY???!!!! or trainers NONE OF THEM WEAR TRAINERS - THEY'RE SAYING ALL T-SHIRT AND TRAINER WEARING PEOPLE ARE EVIL!!! THEY'RE TRYING TO BRAINWASH YOU INTO WEARING SANDALS AND TOGAS!!!!!!!
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
@DancesintheDark your comment is kind of funny but it doesn't refute the video's critique. even the director of 300 openly said he made Xerxes look flamingly queer because it was the scariest type of villain he could imagine for the target audience - 16 year old straight boys. the use of stereotypes in popular cinema is not coincidental. most media literate people can easily identify the patterns in this film.
lewistonvideomaker 6 months ago 16
Comment removed
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
Comment removed
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
@lewistonvideomaker
@lewistonvideomaker
I would conceed that of the critques presented the only one makes any real sense is the question of homophobia but in reality there is only one line in the film which is potentially offensive which is when Leonidas quips "Submission? Well that's a bit of a problem. See, rumor has it the Athenians have already turned you down, and if those philosophers and, uh, boy-lovers have found that kind of nerve, then..."
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
" - here Leonidas is describing an allie not an enemy so its not a grave insult but an implication of weakness, he uses philosophers in the same context and the term boy-lovers equally implies youth as opposed to say men-lovers which might refer more specifically to gay men.
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
There's nothing in the film that directly suggests Xerxes is homosexual and whilst yes he does have a stylistically homosexual appearance the same could also be said of the oiled ab sporting Spartans themselves, its not Top Gun but its not that far off.
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
Comment removed
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
@DancesintheDark
My main objection to the type of critique posted here though is that it is badly misdirected - criticizing 300 for being an overly macho, war-mongering, politically one dimensional movie is like criticizing gay porn for promoting promiscuity. There are many far more serious forms of rascism, homophobia or discrimination in the world that do need addressing and to treat this as relating to these belittles these important issues.
DancesintheDark 6 months ago
@lewistonvideomaker That's exactly how Xerxes looks in the comic book that this is based off of. Snyder added alot of stuff to the story, but overall, if you want to blame anyone for this, it's author Frank Miller. He's responsible for alot in the film: Xerxes being a drag queen, Leonidas calling the Athenians "boy-lovers," although Miller said that he just wanted to portray the Spartans as hypocrites, etc. And I don't know why he did that, but ther you go.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
wait, so you believe that the movie just happened to be because there was a comic book lying around? the producer, director etc. obviously knew what kind of movie they wanted to shoot thus they decided to utilize the comic book. it's their responsibility... there are far too many idiots walking around thinking there is a genetic disposition to certain values, framing a world in their heads which is basically a dumbed down clash of civilizations thanks to such garbage...
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, I KNOW that the comic book came out first and that after the success of Sin City, producers started going after his works and not just 300. It's based off of a comic which I have read, so I can tell you that most of what's in 300 is really Frank Miller's responsibility and that Zack Snyder and the other schlockmeisters on the film are only guilty of echoing it. And I don't think that Frank Miller would've let them change much. Zack Snyder is a hack, Sucker Punch proves that.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
i am more interested in the timing of the movie and it's reception... it certainly played on the age-old fear of the oriental, depicting this fantasy battle in which the morally and racially pure white heroes won a victory against the immoral brown people. in that sense, for paying such a tribute to frank miller's racism, the producer/director and the vast amount of people who crowded the theaters expecting just to see that are equally responsible.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 It's a bizarre thing to try and put blame on the audience when so many Americans don't know that ancient Persia is modern day Iran, and thus would not make the connection at all. All most people knew was that 300 looked cool and that there was going to be a whole lot of gore and T&A, not any bashing of a country most of them can't find on a map. You could say that they were making the parables more subtle, but propaganda can never afford to be subtle, ever.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
"who crowded the theaters ****expecting just to see that****" i.e. white people defeating hordes of brown people. i also wouldn't sell short the xenophobes and the racists, they get their "information" quite easily from websites promoted by right wing media. you should see the number of ignorant lower class conservatives who happen to think that robert spencer is an expert orientalist when they quote the little idiot on moorish spain and the ottoman empire.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 300's intended target audience i.e. most of the people who went to see it, really were just young twentysomethings who wanted to see boobs and gore. Hollywood can't afford to make anything that's inflammatory, because in the U.S., everybody's got a special interest group, even Middle Easterners, who will throw a fit if they find something offensive. And Hollywood is in a liberal leaning part of the country, so I doubt appealing to the Glenn Becks of America is on any studio's agenda.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you're wrong... that's the same "liberal" hollywood who is responsible for the plethora of anti-muslim and anti-arab films and series some of which are shown in this video. also, middle easterner is not a valid definition of a group of people, so i seriously doubt a non-existent peoples would have a special interest group. i suggest you take a look at the book "reel bad arabs: how hollywood vilifies a people".
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 I am not wrong. Most of the movies that Reel Bad Arabs talks about were from twenty and thirty years ago, and none of them could get made today. The Delta Force, Death Before Dishonor and Iron Eagle are simplistic and only use Arabs as one-dimensional villians. Compare them to The Kingdom, Green Zone and Three Kings, which have portrayals of the Middle East that are much more serious and balanced, something that liberal Hollywood is responsible for.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
300 was made in 2007, so that proves you wrong. 24 and The Siege are other examples.
if you don't like the evidence presented in that book, you should check another one by it's author, Guilty: Hollywood's Verdict on Arabs After 9/11 with more contemporary evidence for this case, disproving yours.
hollywood isn't liberal, that's just nonsense.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No it does not, because 300 isn't the same movie as the ones I mentioned, nor are The Kingdom, Three Kings and Green Zone. Hollywood is liberal, dude, the same Glenn Becks of the world whom you believe to be the target audience of 300 constantly accuse Hollywood of being too liberal, of advocating feminism, gay rights, anti-war and anti-militarism, etc. And once again, don't tell me to look at a book or anything else in order to make your point, make your point with your own words.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
i really don't care if you have a disdain for reading for information. the information is there, presented in a form which is not limited to 500 character limits and it prevents me from sinking to your level at which one simply makes claims based on subjective opinion and tries to pass them as facts or scholarly opinion.
so you claim hollywood is liberal because a couple of movies out of 100 movies is made to be in favor of a "liberal" position that 50% supports.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Don't posture to me and don't make excuses for yourself! You are more than capable of giving facts conscerning your opinions regardless of the limitations, just cut to the damn point! That's all you've got to do! And no, I claim that Hollywood is liberal because of the majority of movies that Hollywood produces.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you seem to have a habit of dismissing evidence presented without providing any reason for it. that's why i suggested you read a fucking book or two. i'm not going to waste my time with someone who thinks that simply making a claim is proof of the validity of that claim.
where is your evidence for the "majority" of the movies that hollywood produces that are liberal? is it "the hulk" or "captain america" ?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 And you have a habit of making assumptions about Hollywood and the U.S. because you believe that America is out to get you and that Hollywood is out to make you look bad when Hollywood only cares about making money, that's something that you and the Glenn Becks of the U.S. need to learn, because they think that Hollywood has declared war on America Christian traditions and family values. And how are The Hulk and Captain American not liberal? Neither seem to lean toward either way.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
evidence proves that hollywood has consistently presented muslims, iranians, arabs etc. in a very unfavorable light. this is not up for any dispute, period. if this is based on economic reasons, it's because the old habits of white christian people's overwhelming tendency towards racism having created a new enemy thus making it profitable to sell.
i was making fun of you, i know hulk isn't liberal.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Yes, and all I'm saying is that much of that negativity has in fact been earned, exclaimation mark! This is not about racism, this is about a people doing bad things and naturally having my country's negative reaction to such reflected in pop culture. And you joking around only proves that you don't want to have a proper discussion, otherwise you wouldn't have called childishly called me an "Ameritard" you "Jurk. "
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
bad things huh, did you ever read the fucking history of your own country? your country was built on stolen land with the blood and sweat of slaves, you fucktard. it's very much about racism because racist people like you tend to see the world through this prism where "others" are collectively guilty and always in the wrong whereas you're always right and deserve to be judged on your own merits, because your group(race) happens to be the good one.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 I don't know, you brush over you own country's history like it never happed, hypocrite. And you're country Empire was built on the blood, sweat and tears of the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Armenians, and the Bedouins, so don't bother with this. And don't waste your breath on the rest what you're saying here,
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
really, there are millions and millions of greeks, armenians, bulgarians, bedouins and countless other nations that were under the ottoman empire, alive and prosperous today. the same can't be said about the native americans which proves that there is a fundamental difference between the ottoman rule and european colonization of the americas.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 You call Balkan children being take away from their families to become minions of the Ottoman Sultan being prosperous? What France, Spain, England and Holland did to native Americans has no bearing on us. Yes the U.S. mistreated them, too, but we weren't the ones who spread the diseases that are mainly responsible for their decimation.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TakumProti
what, are children being taken away from their families today?
"alive and prosperous today" learn to read dumbfuck.
so you americans weren't the direct descendents of the settlers that were of european origin, right? you never benefited from slavery and those invaded territories, right?
if you believe that, you must be really stupid and ignorant.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
i believe you earned that... thoroughly by acting like a complete retard. i was only saving on space.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 There's no excuse for childish name-calling.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
who said it needs an excuse?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
do you even read what you type...
in your opinion hollywood is anti-militarist but they make tens of war movies every year which are supported logistically by the u.s. military.
in your opinion hollywood advocates feminism, but 90% of the movies have male leads rescuing damsels in distress.
in your opinion hollywood is anti-war but they constantly make movies glorifying american war efforts. you even have 10 rosy vietnam movies for 1 fmj.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Do you!? These were not MY opinions, these were accusations that many conservatives in my country make against Hollywood and they throw these claims at Hollywood all of the time! I said this to show what some people in the U.S. think about Hollywood, that's it. And a recent TIME/CNN survey found that caucasian men are the villains of Hollywood films 71% of the time. Caucasian women, 11%. Asian men, 5%. Everyone else (including Arabs) 13%.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
"something that liberal Hollywood is responsible for. "....... your opinion stated as fact.
"I claim that Hollywood is liberal because of the majority of movies that Hollywood produces." ....your admission of this claim.
so, either stick to your arguments or be called a dishonest debater.
in a country where 90% of the actors in movies are caucasian, it's hardly surprising that they also get the majority share in the villain parts. this is irrelevant to the discussion.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 I am sticking to my point, you're confusing my words. Those claims were in response to you saying that Hollywood was not liberal, which is untrue, and I used accusations that conservatives in my country use against Hollywood in order to make my point, but they were not my opinions, you moronically assumed they were, they were claims that I've heard levelled against Hollywood, that was it!
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
when you used them to prove your point, they became your opinions you idiot. why else would you use them to support your argument?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 That's flawed logic, my point was that "THIS IS WHAT OTHERS SAY" that is it!
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
your point was made to support your claim. the only thing that is flawed is your brain.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 But it's not what I think, it's what other say about Hollywood. I don't think Hollywood is trying to destory America's values, but I have reason to think that Hollywood has liberal leanings.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you don't have any valid reasons to think as such. you've presented no evidence to prove as such... that's the gist of it.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 I DO, I've heard what Matt Damon said about Sarah Palin, I heard what Angelina Jolie said about Thanksgiving.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
idiot, matt damon isn't representative of hollywood he is just an actor, he doesn't make the decisions on what kind of movies are made. neither damon nor jolie are studio executives or producers, they are simply working class people who make millions of dollars for the studios and are easily replaceable by the studios.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 He IS! He's one of their best and most successful. Jolie, Damon and others are powerful people with alot of pull in Hollywood which comes with being a successful actor. They AREN'T replaceable, because money talks and the costomer is always right, a people WILL pay to see these actors no matter what, their names alone are guaranteed profit.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
no he isn't... he doesn't make the calls as to what gets shot. this is obvious even to the 10 year old kids but apparently you can't grasp such a simple fact. they are replaceable, it's called auditions, dimwit.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, they aren't replaceable, not when far too many people will go to a crappy film just because you're in it. When a studio has a choice between an established star whose films make millions everytime and an unknown actor, usually their gut reaction is to go for the star, it's simply matter of profit.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
idiot, they are replaceable because there are other actors and actresses. damon and jolie aren't the only two people on the face of this planet who can act. as of today there are about 50+ established stars who can replace damon or jolie in any given movie, so they're replaceable.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, they aren't. They're famous and successful and studios will rely on the likes on established stars to bring in a profit. Hollywood likes a sure thing and the likes of Damon and Jolie are sure things, just like sequels and remakes and adaptions.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
there are many other famous and successful stars who are sure things, thus these two are replaceable, period.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, they are not, because there is only one Angelina Jolie and Matt Damon, exclaimation mark!
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 And no, it is not irrelevent, it proves that Hollywood isn't trashing you as casually as you like to assume.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
nonsense, i don't assume such a thing. i understand perfectly well that the system works both to create or magnify tendencies as well as to profit off of them. nothing casual about that, dimwit.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Then why are you acting like Hollywood is out to get you?
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
i'm simply pointing out the facts. this is not an act, dimwit.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 It is an act, it's a sad and arrogant act by a no-nothing foreigner who thinks that he gets America by way of truncated half-facts.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
says the asshole who claims that all "middle easterners" give their kids ak-47s and broadcast anti-semitic shows. go fuck yourself, hypocrite.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Have you been on YouTube long, you bastard!? I've seen several videos of Imams and the like saying that the Jews are the worst creation of God, that it's wonderful to kill Jews, etc. And I NEVER said that ALL middle easterners do this.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
oh dude, you've seen "several" imams... that must prove it then, right? is this just you being a natural troll or what?
just watch cbn for a day, it'll provide much more evidence for american bigotry towards muslims than the total amount of videos you can find on youtube of imams saying stupid shit.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 I heard what they said. They were very clear about what they had to say and it was a thousand times worse than anything on CBN. Trust me, Turk, I've watche a whole lot of the 700 Club, Pat Robertson is squeaking mouse compared to these guys.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
bullshit... pat robertson isn't the only thing on cbn and their apocalyptic and genocidal undertones are much more dangerous and inflammatory than any random imam on youtube. we know for a fact how many people are under their influence, unlike your random imams, you stupid asshole.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Get real, motherfucker! Pat Robertson is a damn fool, a you're giving far too much credit. He has NEVER called for Arabs or Muslims to be slaughtered, he never says that they're God's worst creations. He does slander Islam, but genocide!? You can't get away with doing that here!!
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
apparently you aren't really familiar with the evangelical movement's apocalyptic and genocidal features. they are constantly calling for the destruction of israel's enemies by the united states and base this on biblical bullshit they call prophesy.
apparently you're the one who couldn't get away with lies.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Apparently YOU give Robertson far too much credit. How is ambiguous adventist hype worse than slandering an entire nation and advocating them to be killed. And what does this have to do with 300 being racist.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you brought up the alleged imams calling for whatever stupid shit you claimed to have heard... yes, the evangelicals are much more dangerous because their numbers make a difference in the elections and their genocidal views on so-called israel's enemies, such as arabs and iranians are made well known by their pastors, on cbn especially.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, Pat Robertson is nowhere near as dangerous as these guys. Not only are what they say far more virulent, alot of Americans condemn Robertson while many Arabs go along with alot of this anit-Semetic bile.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
fuck you idiot... pat robertson has called on more than one occasion for a strike on iran, consequences of which are estimated to be at around millions of losses in the region, possibly starting a regional or global conflict. millions and millions of americans support and share these views as a documented fact, where is your evidence of these random imam's pulling their weight in islamic communities.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 So do alot of people. And how does military action against a country that has threatened to destory one of our allies count as genocide.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
it's calling for the destruction of another nation, which is advocacy for genocidal mass murder. can you grasp this simple fact, asshole?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Military action is not automatically genocide, douchebag. Can YOU grasp that?
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
apparently you can't grasp basic english, stupid asshole. i've told you that it's commonly accepted in many circles that the outcome of military action will most likely result in regional catastrophe. how many people do you think it's acceptable to sacrifice at the altar of israel worship of the evangelical nutjobs you son of a bitch?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 You say that and yet you're the one who continues to have bad grammar AND no punctuations or captalisations. Military action does not automatically lead to GENOCIDE, don't sidestep what you fucking said. And Iran and other nations have called for Israel's destruction, and I'm aware of why, so don't bother pointing it out.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
cognition and punctuation aren't necessarily related, asshole.
read carefully bitch, because i won't repeat this. it's a well understood consequence that millions of people will most likely die as a result of an american aggression against iran. if you still consciously support such an action, you therefore automatically accept the possible consequences thus also support them. there is no weaseling out of this for you.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Don't excuse your crappy writing. And there won't be any military action against Iran, not at this point. And military action does not inherently garantee genocide. Genocide it the systematic annihilation of a specific people, which differs from the casualties of warfare itself.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
pointing out your logical fallacy is not making an excuse for my writing, get that into your thick skull.
advocating for the destruction of israel's enemies is advocating for genocide because they have millions and millions of enemies in the region as a result of their aggressive behavior prior to and after their inception. so, it will require the systematic annihilation of these people, if pat robertson is to have his wish granted by psychos like you.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Dude, please, I'm trying to write proper response to one of your previous posts. Give me a minute.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
yes, the myth of israel's destruction could have easily been a non-issue had they not decided to impose their will on the native people of the land. in fact, i too support the dismantling of the israeli state institutions, for i see no justification for a state that is built on ethno-religious privileges. apparently americans disagree, perhaps it's because they are more inclined towards such political stances.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 I certainly do disagree. The Jews returning to their homeland is not a privilege, it is their right. And over half of Israel's Jewish population are Mizrahi Jews, and Arab citizens of Israel are treated well. There's Arab political parties in Israel, Arab members of the Knesset, a former Israeli President was just convicted by an Arab judge.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
no it's not... a right is not something that you simply agree with or that it feels good for you. the irrelevance of your comments about israel's demographics are just a smoke screen because we both know that a country whose citizenship is determined by ethnicity is a racist country. all jews have the so-called right of return to israel while this isn't true for palestinians who were displaced by israeli aggression.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 It is their right. That land is where Jews come from. And the Palestinians can have their own state, that is if Israel would stop building new Jewish settlements in Palestinian territory.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
no it's not... there is no right under international law to an ethnic or religious state, simple as that.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Then why did the U.N. call for Israel to be created in the first place, specifically to serve as a Jewish state, and why are there over a dozen Arab nations?
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
the u.n. partition plan was the western nations paying back their debt to the jewish people because they were indifferent bystanders to their suffering during ww2. countries like britain and united states refused to accept jewish refugees who ended up getting butchered by the nazis.
there are no arab nations... i know of no arab state which has a law which warrants citizenship based on the individual's racial background.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Yes, there are Arab states. Just because they don't have strict immigration policies based on Arab ethnicity doesn't make any less Arab states. They are such because they are nation-states meant to serve as realms for members of the Arab nation, although not exclusively.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
no they aren't arab states, they are states with an arab majority population which is not mandated by any law, you dimwit. israel's demographics are however mandated by law to make it a jewish ethnic state.
you can't call a state an arab state, if they have no government policy of supporting an arab ethnic majority which is why you don't see any random saudi given automatic citizenship in egypt or syria.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ufster81 They are Arab states. They are such because they are nation-states meant to serve as realms for members of the Arab nation, and what Israel does doesn't reflect here on the Arabs and their policies.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
so dimwit, replace israel with united states and enact a law which says only white people can immigrate into united states, while claiming it's not a racist country because some blacks and hispanics already have citizenship and can form parties while ensuring white domination with this supra law.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Not the same thing. And white domination would hardly exist in a society where a black or a latino can stand as a judge over a white.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
it is the same thing... the law of immigration in israel is based on ethnicity. it is to ensure that the state will always be ethnically jewish dominated. if united states applies the same rule to white people, united states will ensure white population domination as white immigrants will be used to continue numerical supremacy.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81But the situation greatly differs. And besides, as long as the Palestinians have their own state, I don't see the problem.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you might see no problem, because you aren't displaced from your homeland. millions of palestinians are, and it's not a matter of a palestinian state when generations of your family are buried in a village that they occupied for centuries and you're not allowed to live there anymore because it's become a jewish only settlement.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 It is a matter of a Palestinian state when that's what the Palestinian's are fighting for. Right now, they're fighting hard for official U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state. I see no problem because I think that the Palestinians cane have what they've got and the Israelis can have what they've got.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
it's a matter of the right of return of the displaced palestinians, which can be achieved with or without a palestinian state. you're confusing the issues...
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, I'm not. The Palestinians want their own state.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
yes you are... palestinians also want the right of return to be recognized by israel.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, I'm not, and you just dismissed the idea of a Palestinian state.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
no i didn't you moron, i said this particular issue is not dependent on the issue of a palestinian state and can be handled separately.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 It is, and that's what I mean, the Palestinians can have their own country, and it's all that they seem to talk about. And alot of talk has been about recognition of Palestine. And don't call me a moron.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you're obviously very ill informed on the issue... so it might appear to you that it's all they talk about but that is far from the reality. right of return is a core issue and it will remain to be one until some sort of settlement is reached on it. also, formation of a palestinian state will not make israel a non-racist state as long as they define themselves and back that up with legislation, as an ethnic state.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 There's alot more at stake here, more claims and accusations and grievances, Israel building new Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, of Israel being an apartheid state, Palestine being an attempt by the Arabs to compromise Israel. Claims of Jews having sole claim to Jerusalem and Palestinians wanting East Jerusalem to be their state's capital. But it's all pointless, we were arguing about 300 and look where we are. We've gone way off base here. We need to stop this crap right now.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
and how's it an act, you stupid fuck, to simply point out the overwhelmingly documented evidence?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 It is an act, because pointing out films from decades ago is not real proof of current and continued wrongdoing. And I don't see how this has to do with 300. We've really gone off base here.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
fuck off, asshole... 24 is not from decades ago, neither is The Siege nor the 300. the book i recommended is from 2008 and documents post 911 portrayal of muslims in hollywood. i won't do the work for you, the evidence is there if you care to look and have any desire to learn the truth.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 But the Delta Force sure as shit is! You assumed that I mean 24. And 300 isn't anything like 24. Now either make your own point in your own words or don't. Don't tell me to read an outside source to try and make your point.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
"outside source"... is that what you call scholarly work in redneckstan? i don't give a shit about making a point to you, i'm simply stating that if you want to see the evidence, it's there in this book. apparently you're more interested in "winning" the argument, which you're failing abysmally to do so far, than learning the facts.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, it's what I call a guy who has the time to argue for seven hours and yet tries to rely on saying "Look, read this." instead of trying to make a point on his own with some facts.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
apparently your laziness is somehow my fault. i'm not going to reconstruct the arguments made for each and every movie, dimwit, especially since you've shown yourself to be inflexible in the face of evidence presented so far, dismissing them arbitrarily. what will change this time around if i take the time to pick up that book and name some more movies, my guess is not much so you can go fuck yourself.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No, YOUR laziness is your own fault. You're the one who won't just make your point on your own without telling me to read this instead of just stating some facts on you own.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
i've made my point... i've given the examples of 24 and the siege off the top of my head and you dismissed them arbitrarily. what will change this time around if i were to give you 10 more examples with the fucktard attitude you displayed so far? my guess is not much because it's obvious you're more interested in verifying your own stupid beliefs rather than questioning them in face of evidence presented.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 And you ignored the fact that I brought up films like The Kingdom, Three Kings and Green Zone. And you never elaborated on how 24 was anti-Arab.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
have you even watched 24? i can accuse you just as well of not elaborating on how those movies are non-biased, since you've failed to demonstrate an iota of evidence to support that argument so far. see, two can play that game asshole.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Well, if you have read Reel Bad Arabs then I figured that you were at least familiar with Three Kings. Dr. Jack Shaheen, the guy who wrote that book, brought up Three Kings in which he commends for portraying a balanced view of the Gulf War showing decent Iraqis fighting the tyranny of Saddam Hussein and Iraqis loyal to Saddam, or Syriana which has an Arab prince who wants to bring democracy to his country, only to be killed for it.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TakumProti
if you go back and re-read my comment, i wrote "i can accuse you just as well of not elaborating on how those movies are non-biased" which is absolutely accurate because you hadn't elaborated on it at that point, but simply presented them as is, which i didn't raise any objections to.
now, shaheen, the same guy you're referencing above wrote another book in which he documented post 9/11 vilification of muslims and arabs, to which you hypocritically oppose.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
anyway, i've spent more than enough time for an apologist for advocates of genocide and destruction... respond only if you have anything remotely intelligent to say to save both of us unnecessary loss of time.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 We've certainly have spent alot of time talking about anything but 300 being racist, seven hours at this point, mostly on . And I don't recall defending Pat Robertson about anything at all, I don't like the man, I think he's insipid scum who is filling American's head with lies and half-truths.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you might just as well look at the "planet of the arabs" video that this video was posted as a reply to. the evidence is overwhelmingly against your argument.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 So now Hollywood is not liberal because it used to rip on a certain group that many Americans understandibly hated twenty to thirty years ago? And for your information I sued the term Middle-Easterners because I know for a fact that contrary to popular believe, not all Middle Easterners are Arab, particularly Persians. And prove your own point instead of telling me to look at another video (especially one that I've already seen several times).
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
understandably? i think we're getting to the root causes of your behavior in this comments section. i see that it's impossible for you to see blatant hollywood racism as it persists today when your own bigotry has made you internalize similar opinions.
you were wrong to use the term middle-easterner because you claimed that these "people" had special interest groups, which is a lie. there is no special interest group lobbying for "middle-easterners".
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Yes, understandibly, I'm just explaining how many Americans feel! That is simply a matter of fact, because the truth is that you can't pull crap like the OPEC oil embargo, the Iranian hostage crisis, the taking of TWA 847, and 9/11 and not have Americans hate you. This happens in real life, and you think that Americans hate the middle east because of Hollywood?! And I just gave you the names of TWO of these special interest groups, do you have any clue of how things work in the U.S.?
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
so these lovely american assholes weren't aware of the downing of the iranian passenger plane by the american navy and the magnitude of crap their own government pulled in the middle east for the past half century? nothing is understandable about the ignorance of racist people, period.
none of the two interest groups you gave have anything to do with "middle easterners" as a peoples, because there is no such classification contrary to your claims.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Nor is there anything to understand about a bunch of glorious Middle Eastern bastards knowngly putting into power tyrants and terrorist organisations, sometimes in response to American, taking people hostage, strapping bombs to teenagers, putting AK-47's in the hands of children and spewing Anti-Semetic bile on their nations' TV programs openly. And CAIR was started by Omar Awad, Nihad Awad and Rafeeq Jaber, clearly form the middle east.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you ameritards are the ones to talk with millions and millions of deaths chalked up to your credit all over the world from south america to far east. whatever you accuse other people of doing, ironically, it's just a miniscule projection of your nation's morals and actions. funny that you have the nerve to lecture anybody, you racist fucktard.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Oh so what America does trumps Darfur, Burma, the Holocaust, the Cultural Revolution and Mao Zedong's agricultural reforms which only condemned millions of Chinese to death. Don't make accusations about my country conscerning such when 1. You bring up no instances or proper casualty numbers and 2. You ignore your country's own atrocities like the Armenian Genocide (which claimed 600,000 to 1,500,000) and Assyrian (which claimed 250,000 to 750,000). And "Ameritard?" Grow up.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
vietnam, nagasaki and hiroshima, contras and countless other direct and indirect cause of mass murders all around the world.
yes, your country's atrocities trump mao's because your country used agent orange with purpose to starve the population, mao's agricultural reforms weren't done with the desired outcome to starve people. your country's support for the genocide in east timor was much worse.
get a fucking education, armenian genocide was under the ottoman empire.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Regardless of Mao's intentions, his actions still hurt alot of people and you can't deny that. And don't you dare try to sidestep the Armenian Genocide, your country did that, Ottomans or not, your country's atrocities outstrip mine by leaps and bounds, get that education yourself. You don't see me here denying Vietnam, now do you? And what about China's support of Darfur, or the Nanking Massacre, or the Soviet mass rape of German women, do they just go right over your head?
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
intent is primary... leaps and bounds? my country didn't exterminate the native americans to the brink of extinction. my country didn't ship millions and millions of slaves in horrible conditions and treated them as property. my country didn't spend the last century fighting countless wars against people whom never attacked it. my country didn't overthrow democratically elected governments all over the world.
what about america's silence on darfur, dimwit?
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 And by the way, Middle-Easterners do have special interest groups here: Like CAIR - The Council on American-Islamic Relations, and the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Back when Disney brought out Aladdin in 1992 the beginning song had a lyric describing the middle-east as a place "where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face." It was the ADC who got Disney to change the lyric.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
cair is an advocacy group that acts on behalf of muslims. muslim =! middle easterner. boy, you're quite the ignorant trailer trash aren't you?
arab =! middle easterner, funny enough you were the one arguing this on your previous reply but you seem to have changed your opinion for this reply.
oh wow, what powerful people they must be if they got disney to change a lyric which is inappropriate for a child's movie in the first place.
get a fucking life...
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 Regardless, these organisations were started by middle easterners and constanly aid middle easterners in the U.S. You're making assumptions about what I said. And don't tell me to get a life, you don't know me, or my country that well, for that matter.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
bullshit... calling cair "middle easterner" is the equivalent of calling the vatican "western european" and claiming that it works to advocate "western european" interests.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 What would you have me do, use the term Arab in relation to a movie accused of demonizing IRANIANS?! I'll keep using the term middle easterner because I consider it appropriate as it's not just Arabs who hate us. And don't put words in my mouth, as of this point I haven't accused the middle east of any ajendas of any kind.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
you're quite the idiot aren't you? you claimed that "middle easterners" had special interest groups than you gave two examples which are not related to iranians or any other peoples that live in the region. remember it was your stupid argument that "middle easterners" as a whole have sway over hollywood because of cair or some other random special interest group, resulting in hollywood not being able to demonize "middle easterners".
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 YOU'RE the idiot. I meant Middle Easterners HERE in the United States, you moron! And you're blowing what I said out of proportion. I just meant that Hollywood will satisfy whom it has to in order to make a profit, even Arabs and Muslims, because when any group raises a fuss, I know that Hollywood tends to listen if profit is at stake.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
i understood you the first time and your argument is still an idiotic, irrational and unsubstantiated claim. arabs and muslims aren't responsible for much profit in hollywood, your claim is absurd that this would somehow make a difference enough to prevent hollywood from practicing vilification of these peoples.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@ufster81 No it is not, and because you thought that those claimes that I made about conservatives were my own opinions, it's your arguement that's idiotic, irrational and unsubstantiated. That's to be expected, you are the one who thinks of Hollywood as a faceless boogeyman out to get you.
TakumProti 3 weeks ago
@TakumProti
unlike you i can document my claims... and you should be honest enough to take responsibility for your own claims, even though they are idiotic, irrational and unsubstantiated.
ufster81 3 weeks ago
@DancesintheDark not another muppet.... try and put your brain in gear before you talk rubbish and shame yourself...
DrumGold 1 month ago
@DrumGold shouldn't you be under a bridge
DancesintheDark 1 month ago
@DancesintheDark Only if your mums there... although she'll be out of her mind on crack and pcp...
DrumGold 1 month ago
I feel this video both gets and misses the point.
I think the morally dubious nature of this movie was done on purpose, and fits the Herodotus account pretty well: it WAS a propaganda piece for the greeks, and the transposition to a typically US discourse imo translates very well how it would have been read back then.
It would have been much more informative to scrutinize that angle (the fact that The Other is nothing new) rather than taking everything literally, which kinda sounds dumb.
Nilla6 6 months ago
@Nilla6 I agree that would be an interesting angle. It doesn't delve into the details of Greek propaganda because either way, the movie is what it is. What's practically important is what messages 300 (and other media like it) has for impressionable audiences today. I was essentially editing the video for someone like myself at age 16 - a young oblivious straight white boy who loved action movies but would be open to critiquing them if someone helped me do it.
lewistonvideomaker 6 months ago 8
@lewistonvideomaker The way I see this movie is: "see the propaganda that society has been feeding itself throughout the ages? We're gonna crank that up to 11 so you can see how silly it is."
Cause frankly, Herodotus was being a bit silly himself when he re-wrote history in that Homerian-epic-wannabe style of his (equivalent of a Bay movie back then?).
So in a way, you're being kinda redundant and impressionable yourself by missing that 2nd layer of criticism.
Nilla6 6 months ago
@lewistonvideomaker So what I was getting at, before I got interrupted by myself, is that this video would make more sense, and completely reach that goal of trying to make people more aware of the underbelly of what they're being told if it had a "part 2", explaining how those stereotypes are used to give a powerful message in a cultural, political and historical sense.
Then it would be just perfect.
Nilla6 6 months ago
I will add that - while this stuff may be obvious to a person like yourself - there are many people (even adults) who have a hard time recognizing these issues in popular media.
lewistonvideomaker 6 months ago 6
I think this is stupid. You are just looking for something to bitch about so you can feel all special and righteous - its a movie! certain people have to be demonised, it is based on an original story, it an action film - there are many explanations as to why it is the way it is. Dont interpret it as something its not. I could make one of your videos for any movie I watch i swear
littlepro22 6 months ago
@littlepro22 My motivation for making the video was to enlighten someone who would have been just like me at age 16 - totally into a film like 300 and oblivious to the stereotypes it perpetuates. "Its a movie!" Yes, it is a movie. Movies are powerful things, not only for their impact, but also in terms of how they come to exist in the first place. Deconstructing them is a valuable part of media consumption. Please explain why certain people need to be "demonished" (new term).
lewistonvideomaker 6 months ago 2
@littlepro22 If you can make a similar video for any movie you watch then I encourage you to do so and share it with me so we can discuss it. That's what communication and media production is all about.
lewistonvideomaker 6 months ago 5
@lewistonvideomaker yea sorry man i was a bit of a dick with that comment. But I still reckon that you're possibly reading too deep into it. I guess you are right to some extent
littlepro22 6 months ago
Very good video about the history of stereotyping used to control the Western popular perceptions of "the Other". And while I agree with your overall message, I don't agree that this is necessarily exclusively right-wing revisionism. I think Orientalism, stereotyping and the like, cross the political spectrum. Each side does it for their own means and it's ALL just fiction.
lizzybeans11 7 months ago 4
well done bro.
BattleCamLad 7 months ago
Politics be damned. My objection to 300 was that it was a crappy movie. There is a good movie to be made with this story, but that wasn't it.
Frank Miller hasn't done anything of any worth in over a decade. 300 was the indication of that decline.
archer1949 8 months ago
I'm not a big movie buff but has ANY movie ever been produced in Western cinema where the roles are reversed: The "Other" (anything other than white race) being the dominant main characters portrayed as heroes with which we sympathize while the whites are our enemy to be crushed? And if such an epic movie WERE to be made I wonder how badly it would be bashed and possibly banned by those in power-those who create the trickle-down effect? Divisions renewed? Possibly but I dare to see it happen
Casicko 9 months ago
300 wide chested white man, as usual defending the freedom by crushing the forces of evil and evil is of course anything not white...and they are defending the freedom of Libya now just like Iraq, and they are there for freedom not natural resources, because they really give a shit about Arab's freedom
kuriyamatidusflossy 10 months ago
Wow, I never thought about any of this. Thanks a lot, this video was really eye opening.
LiliFromHali 11 months ago
Very nice video!
IranHistory 11 months ago