" Back when the Hong Kong action style was in vogue, the term "Pistol Opera" was used to describe the heightened sense of drama lent to the hyper-violent material. This is like a Pistol Opera without guns, or shirts (how about "Nipple Opera"?). Are the gay taunts there to make the fellas feel more comfortable about getting excited about watching physique models parade about for two hours?" - Brian Juergens

Thanks for the update Brian!

I am not surprised that this is the case after all I have read about this movie.

David Wenham, Rodrigo Santoro and Gerard Butler are some of my favourite actors...sooo..I am disappointed.

Hollywood needs to grow up or at the very least grow some balls.

The same old tired effete stereotypes year after year, movie after movie and no one thinks that it is insulting to gay people. Hell, it's even insulting to straight men to think that they can't handle some 'gay' content.

I thought the younger males in society were more open to gays anyway? Why pander to the LCD?

Nothing pisses me off more than the straight-washing of characters(historiical or otherwise.)

QTC

a rendition of spartiates as 'homophobic' (anachronistic, i know) would be historically inaccurate since their militaristic society was not only 'homosocial' but actually actively encouraging of physical/emotional bonds between its elite males. 'effeminacy' on the other hand WAS feared and derided.

yeah, they might have taken it too far. but to be fair... the athenians were "boy lovers." they practiced pederasty, where an older male warrior, accomplished in society, would "mentor" a younger boy, who was just starting to get his "down," or his first touch of facial hair. penetration was frowned upon, orla or anal, but touching, fondling, and even intercrural sex (sliding between the thighs) was accepted.

the practice was supposedly less accepted in sparta.... but none of the greeks would have approved of effeminate men.

and btw... xerxes was a bad-ass.... no way he was effeminate...

This movie seems like the epitome of old-fashioned Hollywood propaganda:

Heroic, straight, white males "saving" western civilization from a bunch of effeminate, sexually suspect, corrupt easterners.

I find it amusing that there's so much outrage at After Elton's reporting of the IW and TH stories, but this seems to have attracted little attention (despite several posts now). I would think this is more offensive than any of that.

Deacon? Cadance? Any feelings about this one?

Yes, the Athenians practiced pederasty, but so did the Spartans. In fact, as Classics buff points out, they were a militaristic society that encouraced homosocial behavior. Young men went to live with the "men" and were assigned a mentor and a part of that relationship included pederasty.

This is a great blog entry--I found it through Towleroad, and very glad I did.
Since I teach this stuff: I'm very skeptical about the Spartans being less accepting of homosexual relations than Athenians; Athenian writers sometimes criticize Spartans for institutionalizing gay sex more than they were comfortable with--and of course, for encouraging lesbianism. What makes the movie sound so offensive by your account--and so terribly sad--is that Athenians so clearly associated boy love with military and manly traditions, so this is such an awful historical misrepresentation to foist on the public--tantamount to the depiction of Africans as savages to justify their subjugation, which still works because it feeds popular prejudices.
By the way, you must be aware it's an error to claim Xerxes was not effeminate because he was a "bad-ass." Some of the most important military leaders of both Athens and Rome, men who killed people with their bare hands, tore out the tongues and chopped off their heads, were called effeminate in their time--and they may very well have been. Effeminacy was associated with excessive interest in women, not men or boys, in the ancient world, as you must know; men who were interested in boys or men tended not to overgroom themselves but men interested in women did, and were criticized for effeminacy. Thus, in different periods, Alcibiades, Alexander, and Mark Antony are all criticized for their effeminacy, and it's considered evidence of their continuing interest in women even though their relatioons with male loovers were well known.

After what happened with "Troy" and "Alexander", I guess I shouldn't be surprised that, once again, a heterosexual filmmaker's decided it's better to rewrite history than let anyone get the idea that he thinks it's okay to for one manly-man to be sexually attracted to another manly-man. No wonder Ann Coulter thinks "faggot equals sissy." She's never had to face the idea that once upon a time it was considered good for two soldiers to love each other because that made them BETTER warriors than the soldiers who were interested solely in women.

"Effeminacy was associated with excessive interest in women, not men or boys
-Teacher"

Thanks for the the mini-history lesson Teacher!

Good post - it once again reminds us that culture is subjective - but - good citizenship is universal (also subjective).

Welcome to AfterElton - one of the best blogs on the net!

xo

QTC

But I think Brian is only using effeminate in the modern sense that Hollywood is portraying it. Something tells me that 300 isn't portraying Xerxes as having excessive interest in women. As you say, they were effeminate in their time. This 300 and Hollywood's coded portrayal of gay people are in our time.

Should 300's homophobia really surprise? I mean, it's come from Warner Brothers. Warner Brothers was also associated with Troy, a movie that obliterated the male-male relationship between two of the leading male characters, turning them into cousins rather than lovers. If you see a Gree epic movie made by Warner Brothers, expect the male-male element to be censored.

John,

We'll just have to wait & see if AfterElton goes after 300 w/ the same dogged relentlessness that it has w/ IW & TH.

that last post was highly childish and indicative of a general inability to respond to differences of opinion in a healthy way.

I don't think the blame should be laid at Warner's feet,
but at Frabk Miller's.
I'm more and more pissed off by his views on gender relationships,
and I hope the article reflected that.
That guy is 50 years behind on that regard.
Great storyteller, though.

Have you listened to Frank Miller express his view on the Iraq situation? Essentially he thinks the West is on a noble mission to bring civilization to the Middle East. And he sounded like a paranoid crazy man. I used to think his work was insightful, but now not so much.

I think you should allow people to actually SEE the movie without skewing it with ANTI-HOMO propaganda. Seriously, must everything be a GAY BATTLE?

Boo Hoo. I'm gay and seriously, I grew up years ago. Much assumption going on here about what it could mean, should mean and without even having 1st person knowledge. Reviews are biased and subjective.

In a homophobic society and culture, it's not hard to find a "gay battle". Ignorance is bliss, but the world won't change for the better either. I think it's great to get a "gay" perspective about this film from someone who did see it. The review did not say to boycott the film, only highlighted its shortcomings. It is seriously immature to complain about a film review for focusing on gay issues on a gay blog.

great post, thanks for that!

I didn't expect anything from this film after the Berlinale reportings:
http://www.httwww.cinematical.com/2007/02/14/berlinale-update-300-screens-to-chorus-of-boos-in-berlin/

one note though, that last line:
"The fact that your film takes place thousands of years ago doesn't mean that your attitudes need to be stuck in the Dark Ages."
as others have pointed out already, male-male relationships have always happened throughout history, they were just more prominently documented in ancient greece. Homophobia on the other hand is a very recent phenomenon.

Uh, no, homophobia is not recent.
After all, people were killed, tortured and imprisonned for
have homo sex centuries ago.
Of course, they didn't target "gay people", since the concept didn't exist.
But the results were at least partly similar.

This will need further fleshing out by one of the history teachers above.
In ancient Sparta boys were so conditioned to be with boys that when it finally
came time to marry/procreate, the young women were dressed as boys to give the young men
a push in the right direction.
Also there were no speedos/loincloths or whatever they are wearing in the film.
The men's genitals would have been exposed.
There is also something in Herodotus or Thucydides about enemies of Sparta being
surprised to see the Spartan men going to the trouble of oiling their hair before
battle.

Perhaps Leonidas's comment about boy-loving Athenians
was meant to ridicule them for not being man-loving warriors,
as history has shown the Spartan troops to be. This was one way
the Spartans engendered close bonds among their men. I doubt if
that subtlety was at play, however, given Hollywood's
standards. I know the guts and glory and honor theme is beautiful,
but I still have no desire to see people hacking each other apart.

OMG people. I'm a homo and I loved the movie. Jesus, lighten up.

craig,

I hope you don't practice law w/ the same incoherency and immaturity as your numerous posts indicate.

Haven't seen the movie yet... but I still intend to.

When I read:

' [...] makes a crack about the Athenians being "boy-lovers" '

My immediately interpretation of the insult was:

"Those Athenians aren't tough enough to be MAN-lovers like us!
They have to settle for BOYS!"

Bill, I can assure you the "boy-lovers" insult wasn't intended the way you think.
It was in the graphic novel, verbatim, and Miller was quite clear
in his comments about that line.

I agree with CK about Frank Miller. I too had heard him speak; fascile, unfortunate and unsupportable opinions about the Iraq war and other American crusades. He just sounded dumb and thoughtless. I find the idea behind "300" compelling, but didn't expect much, especially after suffering through "Sin City".
peace.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if Frank Miller sees this movie as some parallel of the Iraq War. You have the despot from the East threatening the civilized West, and the glorification of the tough conservative Spartans over the soft liberal Athenians.

So who are the Athenians suppose to be today? Canada?

Comment deleted for abusive language

Comment deleted for abusive language

What, no mention of the lesbian mutants that Xeres roles around with in his caravan of sexual deviants?

The movie had a lot of anti-submission and anti-gay propoganda. It wasn't in your face but totally playing off of straight guys' fears.

Aside from that, the movie was still pretty lame. Thin plot and repetitive violence.

Frank Miller is an EXTREME right wing homophobe! Plain and simple! His past depictions of
gays is deplorable! Yes! He's a fantastic artist no doubt but he and that religious right
wing blow up doll Ann Coulter should just keep their assine views and comments to themselves!