Instead, I hope that people who are interested in this event read about what actually happened. This film is enjoyable to watch, but accurate it surely isn't.
It should be titled something more like "The Myth of the 300."
Doing nothing is hard. You never know when you're done.
Well most people do not know this but this is actually based on the comicbook 300 which was a a fictional tale from the perspective of Leonidas of Sparta and was loosely based on the real event. They actually wanted a retelling of it in their own vision. Sad how most people do not know this though
shareFor sure, and that's the problem. Unlike a lot of other films inspired by real events (in this case a comic book inspired by real events and the film based on the comic book), even most of the largest points of this film aren't even accurate. Not that it really matters in the long run, but I just hope that this film inspires people to do their own research (if the subject interests them) instead of them taking it as simply an exaggerated retelling of real events, as it's FAR beyond that.
Doing nothing is hard. You never know when you're done.
i think they are confused because some things are true in its on right such as a small portion of the army going to fight with Leonidas and the fact that the small group of spartans did do well against the large army but the other stuff hey a movie is a movie lol
......................Want to discover a great way to make good money from home check this out
http://kenhawk18.Underdog.cpa.clicksure.com
damn this movie...
because its a big lie if you knew
sadly you aren't
What film was accurate? ;)
--
Ant @ The Ant Farm (http://antfarm.ma.cx) and Ant's Quality Foraged Links (http://aqfl.net).
Well, there are films that are mostly accurate, with a bit of fluff thrown in for dramatic purposes, and there are films that are mostly fluff, with a little bit of fact thrown in to just make it barely relatable to an actual event. This film would most certainly fit the latter description.
Why aren't cookies called bakies?
I don't think anyone would take a movie as an accurate account of history. It's not a documentary.
shareSure, it's not a documentary. That said, there are still films about historical events that are mostly accurate in their portrayal, though they all add some amount of fiction for dramatic effect. I'm speaking about this film in comparison to them. It's so altered that this film is practically fiction with a smidgen of history sprinkled here and there, not the other way around.
The problem is, of course, there are people out there they are going to take the non fantastical aspects of it as accurate. My title is actually incorrect, in that I should have said "I hope the people that take this film as accurate learn that it isn't," or something to that effect.
I just threw up a little in my mouth.
I took it as a propaganda piece used to pump up the Spartans before they fought the Persians at Plataea. It's entertaining, not a documentary.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
ROFLMAO!
Time wounds all heels.
You did notice the speech Delios was giving the other Spartans before the Battle of Platea... it's only the beginning and ending of the movie.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
What does that have to do with anything?
I laughed because your post made it sound like the Spartans watched this film to pump themselves up before battle. I thought you were making a joke.
Time wounds all heels.
It's how I accepted the glaring inconsistencies with the actual battle.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
You shouldn't have. That kind of propaganda was more of a WWII thing, and was not a part of Greek/Spartan ethos of the time.
Greeks respected their enemies, praised their valor and skill (two Spartans even volunteered to go to Persian court to be killed because of the killing of Persian herald)...even Greek historians who offered inevitably biased reports and were as close to propaganda as we can get.
So it is even more tragic that director tried to suggest that Greeks had that kind of mindset, and 'smart' audience who 'knows the difference between real history and art' but who, as yourself, bought that nonsense.
Movie did try to be historical at certain parts...and it failed even then. The sources for certain claims in opening sequences for example, though juicy, were historical. But Roman...semi fantastic stories told by Romans centuries after Spartans and Thermopylae battle. In other places, as with Ephors, the complete misunderstanding of what the ephors were is obvious.
When you have a comic book or a movie that has a dozen or so characters in it but can't get them all to have at least an ancient name, you know how 'deep' the research for both was.
Never said it was a traditional Greek/spartan thing to do. It's how the movie was presented to me.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
I dont think anyone thinks 300 is accurate about what happened at Thermopilas. It is a movie and every movie is a tale about something: love, courage, piety, redention, whatever.
So i dont believe any movie, no movie is accurate even some are more fantastic than others.
300 Hundred is a movie about sacrifice and honor.
Quite a few things actually are:
They did fight the Persians
There were allied Greeks there
There was a pass that lead around the back that was disclosed to Xerxes by Ephialtes
They were finished off by arrows because the Persians still wouldn't close with them
The Persian navy was wiped out by a storm
A Greek did say that they liked to fight in the shade
300 is a movie about sacrifice an honor... just like the actual battle.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
What heavy armored but naked with cloaks and leather underwear soldiers didn't fight Xerxès in slow motion ????
shareNo bro.I dont think so..
Im an iranian and i fuc...ng hate this movie and ZACK because you know why.... my friend
this isnt just my feeling...