Here's a photo showing an Iranian women enjoying her liberation outside of Iran supporting her football team. The other is of her back in Iran having her rights suppressed. The abuse of human rights in Iran has to stop now.
So you trully believe that chanting "Death to America"is a daly activity of people living in Iran? They get up they eat their breakfast and before they go to work, they all stand in the street chanting "Death to America"?? That is Sad.
I could give a rat's tail end that they chant "death to America" or whatever...Same for their belief the holocaust was not, same for how they feel about a f-ing movie...They need to be more concerned when they rape women and then condemn the women to prison on idiotic reasoning and such...
I think the Iranians are making too much about this and as MadMax pointed out most Americans probably don't even know that modern Iran was ancient Persia. What bother's me more is that there are people who might actually think there is some historical accuracy in this movie. Historical accuracy has never been a strong point for Hollywood, i.e The Patriot, and for movie purposes its easier and more entertaining to make a simple story of good and evil than reflect the complexities of real history. As long as people understand that what they see in movies isn't history then I don't see a problem. Perhaps instead of beyatchin Iranians should make their own movie about the Persians. For that matter Persian history is pretty cool so I could see Hollywood making a movie about Darius the Great defeating the decadent Babylonians for Persian freedom. I was wondering about that myself and I think its like why there are a lot of movies about the Alamo but very few about the battle of San Jacinto. I think there is something very romantic about martyrhood and there is a manly appeal about a handful of doomed heroes facing down overwhelming odds even though they know they are already defeated. In the climactic battle of The Last Samurai Ken Watanabe's character explains this as its not enough to defeat overwhelming odds but its more honorable to die in the face of overwhelming odds.
I think this could be a great movie. And it would do especially well here if told from two points of view: Darius's and Daniel's. Your reasoning is probably correct, but you can add to that the fact that we mostly like our heroes to "fight fair". Winning by catching the Mexican Army with their pants down (literally and figuratively) can't be seen as particularly heroic.
Well..maybe not that often. But, when they get together for their rallies. And, my understanding from previous reading is that phrase is plastered around parts of Iran for people to look at every day. Obviously, it doesn't apply to all Iranians daily. So, yea, I exagerated... .
Yeah this movie "300" is like for kids, with like spears and shield and stuff. I really don't care too much about "300" dudes screaming at the top of their lungs like a camp counsel at summer camp. Not that i was molested or anything, but my penis was for sure. Poor little 12yr old penis; Why can't they do something or protest against camp counsel and the freaking catholic priest. I like fruit roll-ups!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YAHAHHAYAHAHYA!!!
In assocuation with this film, I would like to remind everybody about the extreme anger raised by some for the Turkish film, Kurtlar Vadisi Irak, which had Gary Busey Billy Zane in very bloodthirsty, unplesant, and I think most would agree unrealistic depictions of Americans. [rquoter] The film has been controversial due to its portrayal of US military personnel as well as Jewish characters engaging in the harvesting of organs from civilian prisoners. In one sequence, the American commander Sam William Marshall (the film's villain) raids an Arab wedding and massacres a number of civilians, which might allude to a May 19, 2004 incident in Mukaradeeb. US soldiers torture detainees in Abu Ghraib prison. A female soldier makes a human pyramid. Referring to Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse. It is the first depiction of actions by American soldiers at the Abu Ghraib prison on film. While captives are transported on a long journey in a container on a truck, one guard says to the other: "They might suffocate in the container because there is no fresh air supply". The truck stops, the (American) guard gets off the truck and fires hundreds of bullet-holes into the container with an automatic gun "in order to make holes for the air to get in", but many detainees are injured or die. A similar event is reported to have occurred in Afghanistan after the battle for Mazari Sharif on November 9, 2001, with Taliban soldiers in the container and soldiers of the Afghan Northern Alliance as their guardians, as described in the documentary film Massacre at Mazar by Irish filmmaker Jamie Doran. This event is also reenacted in the film The Road to Guantanamo. The film features a Jewish-American Army doctor (Gary Busey) who harvests fresh organs from injured Iraqi prisoners to sell to rich people in New York, London and Tel Aviv for transplantation. The actor's agent has reportedly claimed the role was "just a paycheck." [/rquoter] Since I think most people around here have forgotten about it, I think it would be interesting to compare people's reactions to both films. Also, it would be interesting to see if there are any quotes from highly placed Iranians defending this film.
I read about this film. too bad its not going to make any money. 300 is gonna be a world wide blockbuster. little kids will yell "THIS IS SPARTA" in many languages.
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. BTW: [rquoter] Filmed with a budget of $10.2 million Valley of the Wolves is the most expensive Turkish film ever. The film grossed $24.9 million[1] - $22,100,000 in Turkey and $2,800,000 in Europe. [/rquoter] If a net profit of $14.7 milion 'is nothing' to you, please feel free to not give me anything whenever you like.
Yea, but it seems the victims are severely punished as well... http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5183
I don't know Ottomaton, I don't think it's realistic at all to compare a major Hollywood, English-language film with a broad audience to a Turkish production. You can't compare anything to the power of Hollywood. People all around the world are familiar with Hollywood movies and major Hollywood actors, it's a huge part of American pop culture. Turkish movies just don't quite have the global appeal or reach of Hollywood movies, nor is or will Turkish pop culture ever be able to compete with American pop culture. I just don't think you can compare the two...
So are you saying that Holywood has more stringent moral obligations because they are more successful? What about Bollywood? Do they have 47.4% of the obligation of Hollywood due to their relative success? The Turkish film was shown all over Europe, BTW. It seems to me that this should work from the other direction. Every producer makes whatever film they want to make. If it offends people, they will loose market share, and then the Iranian, or Turkish, or Tuvaluan films can take their place. Perhaps if I were to accept the Iranian supposition that this was part of a conspiracy, I might agree that there is something to discuss, but right now all I can say is, if it is fundimentally offensive to you, don't go see it. It is not like it is ever going to be shown on the screens in Iran anyway. I know that the film 'Bruce Almighty' didn't get shown in the Muslim world because the depiction of God as a person (Morgan Freeman) was offensive. Should they have altered the story because they have obligations as Hollywood? To come up with a similar situation which applies to me, I never went to see 'The Passion of the Christ' because of various misgivings that have to do with production decisions, but I don't think for a minute that because it is a film from Hollywood they have any sort of obligation to address the fact that parts of it are offensive as I understand them.
The movie trailer should read -- "a fun way to stick it to the Iranians...I mean Persians...watch 'em lay down and die!"
