300 (and more) flat-out evil lies

Frank Miller’s Sin City follow-up, Sin City: A Dame to Kill For, has apparently bombed at the box office. Has this lemon -- plus the epic failure of Miller’s The Spirit -- marked him as a “Hollywood one hit wonder?” Well not quite.  Miller had his hands in many pies. Still, one can trace a big, common theme.

In almost every work, his message is the same: “Give up on civilization; there’s no such thing. Democracy is a farce, all civil servants are inherently corrupt and your fellow “citizens” are sheep. The only justice you will ever get is from the muzzle of a gun or the edge of a sword. So pledge your souls to the righteously violent.”

And yes, I deem this noxious. But one Frank Miller franchise, in particular, ticked me off more than the others. Not because of his obsessive hatred toward America and its enlightenment experiment. (He’s entitled; it’s a free country, after all.) But because this series features a fountain, a flash-flood, a veritable tsunami of outright and deliberate lies. 

Orwellian-scale falsehoods that seek to teach a generation of semi-literate viewers his vile version of history.  

== The earlier "300" lie-festival ==

My evisceration of “300” — Miller’s 2007 collaboration with Zack Snyder — exposed one blatant falsehood or omission after another, attempting to convince you that down is up and day is night. 

For example, in portraying ancient Spartans as noble fighters for freedom, Miller and Snyder never hinted at their legendary brutality toward their Helot slaves, several thousand of whom carried luggage and wine for King Leonidas’s three hundred Spartan bullies, into the Thermopylae pass. Slaves who were then thrown into the front battle line, with spears but no armor.  (Real hoplites did not expose their abs, but went into combat covered, tip-to-toe. It’s those never-mentioned slaves who fought half naked.) 

Miller wrote out entirely the 2,000 Thespian volunteers (farmers and shopkeepers) who stayed with Leonidas to the end, but who were inconvenient to “300’s” nonstop rant against citizenship, propagandizing in favor of military rule by tyrants.

I concluded my piece on “300” (years ago) by fantasizing how great it would be to see a film about the Persian Wars from an Athenian perspective! Showing not only their spectacular victory at Marathon but their fantastic second feat, that very same day. Running 26 miles in full armor to face down another army, by nightfall. What epic cinema that would be! 

Then moving on ten years to show the brave stand of citizen volunteers against Persia’s huge navy in the Artemesium Straits, their fighting retreat, after the Spartans let them down at Thermopylae. Plus the deft way Athenian women handled the evacuation of their city, and the bold skill with which their great admiral, Themistocles, lured Xerxes’s fleet into a trap, at Salamis.

I mused publicly about that epic tale, hoping someone might make that film, partly for the sheer dramatic excitement of that story — one of the greatest of all epics in the West — but also as a clear answer to Frank Miller’s fabrication-propaganda …

… little realizing that Miller and Snyder would, after my essay came out, decide to tell that side of things themselves!  

Alas… in their own way.

== The Rise of a Farce ==

All right, I finally rented that sequel — “300: Rise of an Empire” — having waited till I could do it in a way that, while legal, sent as little cash as possible to Frank Miller.  Moreover, sitting down with popcorn at my elbow, I felt cognitive dissonance! We all have, within our human natures, many conflicting impulses.  The trick is to be aware — and wary — of them.  

Hence a real part of me hoped that Miller and his partner, Zack Snyder, might have seen the light, or had some kind of awakening.  After all, here they were, about to tell another side of the Greek-Persian wars.  A side that I had urged someone to tell, after “300’s” travesty of slanders.  A side of the story that they suppressed earlier — how Athenian “bakers, tradesmen, farmers and poets” won all the important victories that preserved the seed of Western Civilization. 

In my denunciation of that first “300” travesty, I showed that Leonidas would never - in real life - have sneered at the victors of Marathon.  And he would have at minimum turned his head, during his own battle, at least once, to give a nod of grudging respect toward the heroic Athenian fleet, guarding his flank, holding out much longer than his own pathetic three days.  

Perhaps now Snyder and Miller were about to correct it all! Or so I hoped. (Note: Miller's comic book Xerxes has yet to be finished or handed-in.)

And yet, I admit that another side of me - (all too human) - does like to be proved right. Hence for honesty's sake, when I watched “300: the Rise of an Empire,” I kept careful track of any redeeming qualities. Let’s start with those.

== Some truth, this time! ==

Proposed cover of Xerxes - uncompleted

1) At least the sequence of major historical events was correct.  The gross outline of things that some grizzled Miller fan might dimly recall from high school world history class:

- that Athenians wrecked the first Persian invasion sent by Darius, at Marathon.

- that Xerxes swore vengeance on those who had humiliated his father.

- that Xerxes ordered built a great rope-linked bridge across the Bosporus, so his giant army could march into Greece by land.

- that a mostly-Greek queen named Artemesia did serve Xerxes, with some distinction.

- that a mostly-Athenian, vastly-outnumbered fleet battled the Persian navy to a standstill in the straits, not far from Thermopylae, and that they retreated only when Leonidas failed there.

- that Xerxes took and burned Athens.

- that his fleet was lured into the passage at Salamis, where the Spartans arrived, at last, to help, and where the Persian Navy was largely destroyed.

- that this victory enabled a united Greek force to eliminate Persian ground forces at Platea.

That sequence correlates in both film and history. On can argue that Snyder and Miller had to do that much. Too many in their intended audience would notice, otherwise.

2) Okay, I must admit another redeeming moment. Just showing the Bosporus rope and pontoon bridge was way-cool. And it happened, a spectacular accomplishment of parthian engineering, no lie.

3) To my shock and disbelief, Snyder and Miller actually allowed Themistocles to point out… twice! … that his force was largely amateur, not professional fighters — fishermen, merchants, farmers and poets.  Two brief moments of actual retraction-rebuttal vs. the relentless ranting against citizenship that made the first “300” flick little better than an ode to Leni Riefenstahl. Unfortunately, those twin glimmers never go anywhere. And Miller-Snyder still set things up so that Spartan professionals wind up saving the amateurs’ hash.

That’s pretty much all the quality that you’ll find in “300:2”  A sequence of basic bullet points that Miller had to follow, because his audiences aren’t completely ignorant. Plus a way-cool bridge…

… oh, and action!  Lots and lots of eye-candy, distracting action! 

Ships ramming ships! Slow-motion stabs and decapitations! Ab-flexing and homoerotic kill-em-all prancing! Hey, I can wallow in that stuff as well as the next guy.  I was able to put down my pencil and enjoy the wowzer visuals. (Heck I have to confess: I even pay to see Transformers flicks!) As I said, we are many people, inside of each of our complex heads… and one of me is forever-twelve!  So give let me give this thing an 8.5 score when it comes to gleeful, gladiatorial choreography.

Oh, and the infamous sex scene between Artemesia and Themistocles? Sure. It never happened, but why not? Kinda rough, but consenting adults and all that.  Probably the film’s most creative and memorable moment.

And so, we complete our list of good aspects assigned to “300: The Rise of an Empire.” None of which even begin to stack up against the litany of noxious, disgusting, batshit-evil other-crap that filled this monstrosity to overflowing.  Starting and ending with a gusher of outright lies.

== 300-plus fibs ==

I’m not the only one to call-out this franchise for “inaccuracies.” Let’s start with an excerpt from Wikipedia… “Paul Cartledge, a professor of Greek culture at Cambridge University, noted that the film contains historical errors. For example, Darius was not killed as depicted as neither Xerxes nor Darius were present at the Battle of Marathon. Artemisia in reality argued against sailing into the (Salamis) straits and survived the Persian Wars. The Spartan navy contributed a mere 16 warships to the Greek fleet of 400 warships in the ending battle scene, and not a huge army.”  

The History vs. Hollywood site is no kinder: “Unlike in the film where Artemisia (Eva Green) demands that Xerxes order the Persian fleet into Salamis to finish off the Greeks, the real Artemisia had actually advised the Persian King Xerxes against the battle, arguing that it is not wise to engage the Greeks at sea.”

From the same site: “Was Artemisia's family murdered by Greek hoplites, after which she was taken as a slave?… No. This backstory for Artemisia was invented by Frank Miller and the filmmakers to explain the motivations behind Artemisia's ruthless thirst for vengeance in the film.”  

A blogger, Bob Dekle, summed up his own objections far better than any of the standard critics: …”Aside from the bleak scenery and the gallons of spilled blood, I enjoyed it. The movie did not, however, even make a feeble attempt at being an accurate retelling of the history of the Greco-Persian War.  This is unfortunate, because the history of the Greco-Persian War as recounted by Herodotus is a much more interesting story populated by much more interesting people than the cardboard characters who populated the movie.”  

While we're at it, here's a link to an extensive article by Alex Pappademas on  Frank Miller's Dark Night.

Fair sized indictments. But way too mild. I will not be so kind.

== It wasn’t like that… at all ==

Some of the lies in this film are somewhat understandable, when you can at least see the propaganda point that Frank Miller wants to push. For example, in the real battle at the Straits of Artemesium there was no trick with a barge-fulla-oil. Themistocles and the Athenians weren’t routed, but fought a well-ordered retreat, after Leonidas let them down by losing the Hot Gates.  

But you can see that Frank Miller can’t leave things that way. He cannot allow the Athenian merchants and fishermen to seem more effective than his beloved Spartans. They must be just as soundly defeated as Leonidas. It is a lie, but at least one with a (vile) purpose.

Likewise, at Salamis, Themistocles is shown rowing out with his few survivors to perform a final gesture of macho defiance, just like Leonidas, instead of coolly and carefully springing the strategic and tactical trap that (in real life) changed the world. Moreover, while amputating the historical Athenian-allied fleet down to a pathetic remnant — a damsel-needing-rescuing — Miller expands the measly, 16 ship Spartan contingent at Salamis into a triumphant armada, arriving in the nick of time to save the foppish Athenians’ hash.  That is no mere quibble.  His central aim in life is to proclaim the futility of citizenship and to extoll the primacy of take-everything lords.

Again, Miller’s reasons for telling these outright falsehoods this are evil reasons… but at least he had reasons for those lies.  

Other betrayals of fact, however, left me deeply puzzled.

== Lies without any purpose at all ==

Not only was Darius not at Marathon (as we’ve seen), but when he died (of natural causes) he made a reluctant Xerxes vow to take vengeance on Athens. That vow and its consequences would have been just as dramatic as the utterly-reversed father-son interplay created by Miller.  It’s one thing to reverse history if you have a point to make. But why do it, when it serves no purpose?

Likewise, for Xerxes to impetuously order the cautious Artemesia into the channel at Salamis would have not only been historically accurate, but made far more sense for the characters, dramatically.  Her film character had every reason to be the wary one!  (As she was, in real life.) Making her the impetuous-imperious one was unnecessary and… weird.

Yes, the Persians torched Athens to the ground. But which portrayal of that event would make better cinema? Showing them slaughtering the population in yet another (yawn) atrocity? Or portraying the skillful way Athenian women snuck everyone out of town, right under Xerxes’s nose, leaving him only wooden timbers to burn? Ashes upon which returning citizens would soon build a beacon -- the beacon -- of civilization?

Time and again, Snyder and Miller chose to do that… to reverse a true-history that was already plenty-dramatic! Leaving one head-scratching and asking… why?

The same goes for all the mystic claptrap. Does Xerxes have to be Artemesia’s leering-silly puppet and a mumbo-jumbo-mutant god-king?  Hey, I didn’t mind the sea serpents… much… though Annalee Newitz at io9 riffs hilariously about them... but are they necessary? Don’t they imply that : “none of this ever really happened; it’s just another Hollywood fantasy”? 

Must you mutate this conflict - one of the foundational epics of our civilization - into the equivalent of “George Washington, Exorcist”? With King George in the role of Lucifer and Benedict Arnold as a talking-flying snake… that has laser beams mounted on its head?  (Come to think of it, that’s a great elevator pitch!  A real winner, in today’s Hollywood. Get agent on phone.)

Let’s go back again to Marathon, at which Themistocles was only a common foot-soldier.  The Athenian bakers and poets would never have stood a chance against Darius’s Immortals in leap-n-slash, showoffy-dance-cavort style combat. Anyway, we saw the Spartans doing that in the first flick. Been there, done that.  So how about letting us see what really happened? Farmers and potters lowering their spears, shoulder-to-shoulder in a thin blue line, pushing forward against a great mass of professionals that outnumbered them ten to one? Rushing just in time to fill gaps in that wavering line? Swerving to confront cavalry charges, grunting and shoving death all the way into the surf, until the invaders were overcome… and then…

…and then — almost without pause — turning around to run those grueling 26 miles, and confront a second force before nightfall? Did Spartans ever come close to equalling such incredible… 

…oh, but I’ve said all that, before.

== The aim and the Lesson ==

Summing up, we must divide the falsehoods spewed by “300: The Rise of an Empire” into those two categories.  First are lies that served Frank Miller’s purpose — to undermine confidence in our Athenian, citizen-centered civilization.  It is an ambition that Miller shares with science fiction author Orson Scott Card — a message that Card also pushes relentlessly, in all of his works, but especially in a recent book called “Empire.”

Democracy? Citizenship? An open society of laws and flawed-but-improving justice? Institutions and occasional public servants that sometimes do their jobs and that we can criticize and tweak, until they get better? Or, at least, the aspiration for such a nation and society? To achieve perhaps someday? 

These hopes are declared inherently futile by Miller and Card, who always, always prescribe: “find yourselves a demigod to admire. It’s your only hope.”

(I admit that Card spins out demigods who are less brutal, more conflicted and tormented, than Miller's, perpetually wringing their hands -- before always deciding to take over... for our own good, of course.)

Okay, I understand the lies in 300 and 300:2 that actually served Miller's propaganda purpose. But the other, second category of deceit is more telling.  Lies that served no purpose. That didn’t even preach the author’s (evil) message!  Lies made the tale less dramatic and interesting! 

Lies that could only have spilled forth out of habit, a reflex for preferring any falsehood, always, over truth.

== An escape clause ==

Oh, but is there an out? An escape clause? 

There is! Right there, in “300:II”! An excuse for every drooling fabulation and reversal of fact.

The film begins and ends with a narration by Gorgo, the widow of Leonidas, a pep talk for the benefit of her Spartan horde.  

This implies that every exaggeration or historical anomaly is her fault! It is only natural that she would put a superstitious, Spartan spin on things, all the way to sea serpents! And demeaning those Athenians, proclaiming that her own armies saved their bacon.

 Yeah, that’s the ticket. It’s all Gorgo’s fault.

Alas, even this doesn’t help with the TITLE of Miller’s flop: “300: The Rise of an Empire.”  Huh?  What empire arose from this story?  

Oh, sure, across the next 50 years, Athens would gradually climb ever-higher, invigorated by democracy, emboldened by commercial and technological innovation and stimulated by leaders like Pericles, the George Washington of his time.  But that Athenian “empire” (it would become flawed, vainglorious and foolish, in time) isn’t even hinted at, in the movie. Hence one has to wonder, were the makers of this thing stoned, the entire time?

That is easy enough to believe.

== Enough ==

There are so many flaws, so why must I flog a flop and dismal failure?

Because we need to lift our heads — as consumers — and demand better.  

One can have vivid action without lobotomization.  We can have movies that are true to their subject matter (e.g. history) without being dry or boring. Indeed, some historical events make great drama! Especially if you simply retell what actually happened, with truth and heart. Have a look at ZULU, or Ted Turner’s GETTYSBURG, or THE CROSSING.

The question arises again and again “why lie about any of it!”   

One can easily hear the whispered reply of the makers of this wretched mess.

“Why lie?  Because we can!”