3 of 5

Write now Article Tools

This is not a simple topic to write about at any time, but with a film such as 300, which is bigoted on so many levels it becomes a little easier. Taking, first, the idea of race, I do not find the idea of the 'white' Greeks versus the 'black' Persians so very distressing. It is more of a gross simplification than genuinely offensive. I feel what is worrying, especially from a directorial point of veiw, is that the idea of conflict is reduced purely to a level of 'good guy vs. bad guy', with no attempt made to understand the true nature of conflict as one group of men versus another. To dumb down this difference to an even greater extent, it was felt necessary to portray the majority of the Persians as monstrous in aspect. By stripping them of their humanity, there is no need to examine the fact that in battle there are only men fighting men; an altogether less comforting concept which would upset the feel of pure right and wrong in the film. Other, horrendously inaccurate, aspects of the film show a similar tendancy towards gross simplification that I find unpleasant. For example, to try and add a storyline (an embarassing and withered attempt) the ephors of Sparta are portrayed as traitorous (and therefore deformed) mystics, rather than the elected city men that they truly were, who attempt to disrupt the march of the 300 because they are in the pay of the Persians. The fact that this did not happen is upsetting, but my main point is the way that, as they are 'evil', they are portrayed as deformed (abnormal, much like the traitor Ephialtes who is a horrible sight). This basic logic may make the film 'more accesible' but I feel shows a much more distressing, bigoted concept of the ideas of right and wrong.

Sex in 300 is embarassing, with excessive sex scenes of tiresome turgidity that appear essentially apropos of nothing.

However, the treatment of gender in the film strikes me as somewhat confused - with at various points Spartan women facing essentially a purely male chauvanist approach, with only the 'good guy' Leonidas acting in a reasonable way. They seem to ignore (along with many other aspects of Spartan society and culture) the fact that, as the freemen of the city state were all professional warriors, the lady of the house essentially took over what would be regarded as the 'man's perogative' whenever the husband was at war, and due to this state of affairs, as well as the idea that women could only produce strong children if she herself were strong, resulted in a society that was much more 'feminist' with women taking a much more balanced role in decision making than many others at that time, and therefore base assumptions made by the film about the treatment of women are another example of the base simplifcations and the overall 'lowest common denominator' attitude of the film makes.

Eugenics? What of it - there is a very basic account of the myth that Spartan children were left on the slopes of Taygetos to see if they were fit (instead there is some evidence that this was the place, Apothetae, where children were left to die), but beyond that I can see no reason to consider any kind of agenda insofar as eugenics is concerned. Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

Learn more about this author, Alex Powell.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Movie analysis: Race, sex and eugenics in the movie 300?
We want to hear your view. Write now!