Karen sent me another Townhall.com article on the movie “300”. It’s by Megan Basham. I’m not doing a paragraph-by paragraph response this time because I’m kind of bored with the subject. I left off most of the gratuitous “liberal” bashing because with stuff from the Townhall site, that just rapidly approaches the level of punctuation (ubiquitous, and only meaningful when done well).
Despite its hard R rating for nudity and violence, there’s good reason for this. Where last year's despicable, pro-terrorist comic-book-based flick, V for Vendetta, made pathetic claims for cultural relevance, 300 is the real deal. The filmmakers didn't have to impose parallels with today’s geo-political reality; history had already done it for them.
Careful Megan, you said “hard” and we all know what that does to poor Ben Shapiro’s brain. He won’t be able to see beyond your terrible affliction of anti-subtlty.
Wait…DESPITE the “hard” R rating for nudity and violence? Who in their right mind saw the previews for this movie and went to see it in the hopes that it would offer something besides eye candy and frame after frame of spectacular, Technicolor slayage?
V for Vendetta; did we watch the same movie? I thought conservatives LOVED terrorism when it was aimed at totalitarianism? Did I mis-read the flag-waving adulation for Red Dawn and that Rambo movie when he went and fought for the Taliban?
Sparta's Ephors, the cloistered academics of their time, claim that the gods don’t want war and won’t support Leonidas' stand.
Actually, it’s pretty clear that Leonidas was the scholar, with his appeals to rationality and logic. The Ephors were superstitious, religionists pretending at mystic power while indulging their human desires with young, easily manipulated prey.
In the meantime, back in the city, an oily politician (Dominic West of The Wire) undermines the King's mission at every turn, arguing for diplomatic resolutions and claiming that Leonidas has started an "illegal" war that will draw destruction down on all. Leonidas wife, Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey), counters that it is Persia who began the war and urges the Spartan congress to commit more troops.
What Ms. Basham fails to mention in the above summary was that the “illegal” war involved an ACTUAL invasion on Greek soil. So, a war to destroy the actual people who were involved in an attack on the nation’s soil was appropriate. Had Leonidas gone off an attacked a country that had nothing to do with Persia’s invasion attempt, it would have been right to call it madness.
Not the least of which is that that a people that honors its artists and scholars above its warriors eventually becomes a weak, effeminate people. The grim efficiency of the Spartan career soldiers stands in stark contrast to the brave but incompetent Athenians who hack away at the enemy like, well, like a bunch of actors and craftsmen.
I’m shocked! Shocked! I tell you to hear a conservative commentator show such disrespect and such a dismissive attitude of the contributions to our “citizen soldiers” in the National Guard who are serving in Iraq. Truly, “support the troops” means something different to the ilk of Megan Basham. But on the other hand, there are worthy things in her review as well, such as this nugget that can only be read to be a criticism of able-bodied armchair cheerleaders:
Going hand in hand with this is the demonstration that high military standards must be kindly but firmly maintained, regardless of the hurt feelings such standards might engender. When a well-meaning but physically unfit applicant is turned away from battle, it is clear that Leonidas does not mean to be cruel but to preserve strength of his troop.
Yes, Megan, I agree, we should not tolerate arm-chair cheerleading from able-bodied, service aged young men and women who cheer for the war yet neglect to enlist and fill our ranks. They say they support the war, but if they REALLY did, the army would not have had to lower its’ recruiting standards. At least we can find one area where we can agree.