| Summary: | In 2004 Hollywood produced three purportedly blockbuster epic films:Troy, King Arthur and Alexander. Many critics suggested a direct linkbetween the 1950s “sword and sandal” epic and this new crop of movies.Similarities between the two cycles certainly exist but in this essay I want to emphasize a crucial difference between the contemporary,cosmopolitan, epic and the previous, more nation-bound, 1950s cycle.Rather than being in tune with key elements of American foreign policy, the new cycle of “sword and sandal” films offers a somber assessment of American imperial adventures. I shall contend, in fact, that the new crop of epic films had to choose between two generic conventions that are, at present, not compatible. On the one hand, epic films had traditionally been the bearers of the foreign policy vision of the country that produced them. On the other, their inflated budgets made them dependent on an international market. Deeply aware of a globalized and rising opposition to US foreign policy and of the fact that foreign box office now exceeds the domestic take of a blockbuster, it may be no wonder that the makers of these films chose to craft them into citizens of the world.
|
|---|