Jan 27 '20
300 as a Commentary on Propaganda
View all comments
Show parent comments
His choice transformed Watchmen into a satire of comics to a satire of comic book movies - which is why the rubber suits have nipples and its hyper-violence is forefront, he specifically had to change to music during the sex scene because people thought it was "sweet and emotional" to something weird and destabilizing to reinforce the message. You're not supposed to take these characters seriously and all the proof is there in the subtext (and even in the forefront), yet the public still think he missed the point by glorifying its visual and simply doing the adaptation at face-value despite all the proof to the contrary.
Sucker Punch is a three-layered argument between feminist theories that argues if such movies and entertainments should use the pretense of "feminist representation through self-sexualisation emancipation" - in other words, it asks and answer the question "is it okay for a character like Wonder Woman to be a feminist icon even though she was created by a male psychologist who projected his own sexualisation of a 'strong woman' onto her?" - yet people still take the movie at face value of being visual eye candy and nothing else despite all the substance and content behind it.
And yet here we are again, the same arguments being made against 300. See a pattern here?
I won't argue that 300 achieves the same that Starship Troopers did, OP went a bit hyperbole here, but this idea that Snyder is a thoughtless brute who only make visuals and unable to make any subtext is objectively wrong. Now, if these subtexts work on a subjective manner is a whole other debate, and I'd argue that it doesn't considering how many people don't care about them in his movies, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.