<p>How distorted is it from the actual history?</p>
<p>^</p>
<p>Not too sure, but I think trying to use 300 as a historical reference is like trying to use Sin City to form your opinions on urban development in the 21st century.</p>
<p>"graphic novel by Frank Miller"</p>
<p>Who was impressed as I was as a youngster by the original "the 300 spartans". Great movie. No political message, just about standing up with your friends against incredible odds. Loyalty, honor and bravery. </p>
<p>Don't get too hung up on trival things about the movie. I'm surprized the op didn't complain that is wasn't shot on location as well, instead of a sound stage in Toronto. It's a big bucket of popcorn movie. Sit back, enjoy the show. Trying to find meaning in everything is a sad way to go through life. </p>
<p>Go find the original and rent it. It's a good movie in itself. </p>
<p>Sparticus is also a good one to watch. Just to watch Tony Curtis say "I love you Sparticus". </p>
<p>You guys missed out on the good ole days of movies sword and sandels. Thank God for the italians and the hercules movies of the 60's. Really really bad cinema, but for a little kid (me) great escapism.</p>
<p>Tsk tsk tsk.</p>
<p>Oy...why can't folks realize that pretty much everyone's ancestors were blood thirsty and barbaric? </p>
<p>Is it really that easy to ignore the parts of the movie showing the tremendous cruelty of the Spartans? I mean, come on!</p>
<p>I think the Iranian response is paranoid (although given the Bush Doctrine, paranoid is healthy), but if the tables were turned, America would do the exact same thing. Actually, even if the tables weren't turned, America still DOES the same thing. Take Genghis Khan for example, perhaps the greatest conqueror in the world (Alexander and Napoleon might be good rivals for that title). To my knowledge, there has been two major productions about Khan, and in both instances, a White rather than an Asian man was chosen to portray him: John Wayne and Channing Tatum (???) respectively. Americans can take the high road and sneer at the "overreacting" Iranians, but history shows that Americans are just as sensitive and paranoid about not being portrayed as heroes and conquerors. Or what about the Vietnam War, a war that America lost. In all the 'Nam movies I've seen, the loss is attributed to moral decay in the soul of the American soldier, as opposed to presenting the Viet Cong as a formidable foe. I wonder if a movie called "Khan" was made, which glorifies the Mongolian horde as they first encounter and soundly defeat European knights would be met without resistance from White Americans.</p>
<p>I totally understand the point of the the original poster actually.</p>
<p>Yes, the movie is based on a comic book which is far far far far far from being realistic or based on actual history; other than the fact that it uses words like "Persians" and "Spartans" and "thermopylae" and features sword fighting etc. etc. </p>
<p>Xerxes looked nothing like he is portrayed in the movie. There were around 300 Spartans AND 1000 other Greeks involved in the battle. Sparta was in no way a democracy (just read about Spartan training and how babies who weren't "good enough" were simply killed. Even the movie shows this). In reality, the Persian Empire and Xerxes were not tyrannical considering the times. There were not 2,000,000 Persians, more like 200,000 or 300,000 TOTAL. And of course, there were no mutants or Uber Immortals. lol And the main reason why Persia suffered so many causalities was due to poor equipment and armor, and most importantly, because they lost over 200 ships in a storm at sea.</p>
<p>However, the themes of the movie (east vs west, democracy vs tyranny etc) and the timing of the production and release do obviously lead to some suspicion.</p>
<p>If the movie is criticized, then the defense will be "well it's based off a comic book. Of course it's not realistic". </p>
<p>But then again the movie will result in a negative view of persians/iranians in some areas and groups within this country. Not everyone knows even the simplest details of the actual history behind the event and the parties involved. Does the movie have some sort of disclaimer that says that the movie is based on the COMIC BOOK and that it is mostly FICTION and that it is not really based on historical events?</p>
<p>Anyways, I wish they would make a more historical and realistic movie about thermopylae for once.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Anyways, I wish they would make a more historical and realistic movie about thermopylae for once.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While I really enjoyed 300, I totally agree with you about that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, but there is nothing stopping you from participating in an intellectual debate on it. You are on this board, aren't you? Furthermore, how is it not ignorance if you choose to dismiss an issue that is blatantly characteristic of biased western media? Your posts imply that you are aware of it, but opt to not respond to it.
[/quote]
"Ignorance: the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc."</p>
<p>Because someone chooses not to debate an issue it does not make one ignorant. Futhermore, you can't call someone ignorant of a subject but yet at the same time say that they are aware of that subject as well. She simply made a choice not to debate the points you are making because she doesn't agree with them.</p>
<p>I saw this movie last night. The movie touched me. It really did. I mean I left the theater feeling like I want to fight in the army. Then I realized it's the 21st century and I'm living in the US. Any movie that can get me thinking about that though has to be pretty damn good. Those Spartans were some really kick ass people. As for those Persians, well all I can say is that that king of theirs was a bit too out there. The lesbian orgy scene was pretty awesome though.</p>
<p>All in all, I could care less about the historical details. The movie was entertaining. That's why I went to see it. If I wanted to know about historical facts I would have gotten a documentary or something. I really don't get the big fuss being made over this movie. You either liked it, or you didn't. What's ironic is that the original poster is making all these points about the movie, without actually having seen the movie........</p>
<p>By the way, to those that saw the movie, you should find this pretty funny:
<a href="http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comics/20070312.jpg%5B/url%5D">http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comics/20070312.jpg</a></p>
<p>Anyone who doesn't understand why the Middle East is so rightfully suspicious of the West needs to read some history. Movies like "300" in a time of the Iraq War and possible Iran War definitely do not help. This is not some isolated incident of perceived slights; no, it's rather a small addition in a long line of dehumanization and betrayal of the Middle East by the West.</p>
<p>So it's a white-man conspiracy?</p>
<p>300 is about a historical event. Of course it won't be 100% accurate; it's Hollywood. So if they don't hire actual Persians and Greeks for the film, you automatically write them off as adding to racism against Middle Easterners?</p>
<p>The only propaganda I noticed from that movie was to hit the gym so you can have abs like the Spartans =]</p>
<p>SuperGrad,</p>
<p>Depends on your source. Herodotus claimed that the Persian army had over two million soldiers.</p>
<p>The pass at Thermopylae was so narrow that it counteracted the numerical advantage of Xerxes's invasion force. Of course, the fact that the Spartans had longer spears and tougher attitudes helped immensely.</p>
<p>Xerxes may have had more soldiers, but he certainly didn't have more men.</p>
<p>Greatest Movie Ever</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only propaganda I noticed from that movie was to hit the gym so you can have abs like the Spartans =]
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And then invest in a leather speedo ;)</p>
<p>Fabrizio,</p>
<p>You can't really rely on Herodotus. He also talks about a big bird in Caucasus mountains that lays golden eggs.</p>
<p>Based on research and limitations of that time, I've read that it would be impossible for the Persian army to be larger than 500,000. There simply was not enough men in Persia, and even if they recruited soldiers from conquered territories, there was not enough food or water in Greece to keep that many people alive.</p>
<p>Think about it. Herodotus is Greek. Ofcourse he wants to exaggerate a Greek success.</p>
<p>Quote:
The only propaganda I noticed from that movie was to hit the gym so you can have abs like the Spartans =]
And then invest in a leather speedo </p>
<p>You forgot a long flowing crimson cape that even Vincent Valentine would envy.
You also forgot the hot wife.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But then again the movie will result in a negative view of persians/iranians in some areas and groups within this country. Not everyone knows even the simplest details of the actual history behind the event and the parties involved. Does the movie have some sort of disclaimer that says that the movie is based on the COMIC BOOK and that it is mostly FICTION and that it is not really based on historical events?
[/quote]
Sorry to burst your bubble on this one but US views of Persians/Iranians will hardly be affected by this movie. Firstly, I think it probably just results in a poorer view of dark skinned people from the Middle East (because the average American likely doesn't know the difference between Persians & Arabs). Secondly, the views of dark skinned people from the Middle East are more likely to be controlled by things of higher importance...ie: 9/11, Iraq, Israel vs. Palestine, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Based on research and limitations of that time, I've read that it would be impossible for the Persian army to be larger than 500,000. There simply was not enough men in Persia, and even if they recruited soldiers from conquered territories, there was not enough food or water in Greece to keep that many people alive.
[/quote]
The Persian Empire at the time was 20 million people. He could recruit enough men. I do agree with the logistics problem though. It was probably a mere 1.3K vs. 200K.</p>