Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

"300" - Merged Thread

Twitch

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,133
Location
City of the Angels
Saw it this weekend. The local cinema complex was using 2 of their shoebox theaters to run it and the viewing I attended was 3/4th full...200? people. Too many dumbazzed parents with little kiddies though. This ain't no Sponge Bob romp of fantasy folks!

But fantasy it is in some sense. While it is based on the events of the Battle of the Thermopylae Pass in 480 BC we must realize that much license has to be taken with any story where the principle participants could not give eyewitness accounts. Dialogue in those situations in any movie is simply a guess.

There was nothing of Themistocles' epic battle with the Persian fleet and the scene of 200 Persian warships floundering in a storm was never seen by Leonidas who led the Spartan warriors. In fact it happened a couple days later as they attempted an end run to flank Themistocles.

If you want absolute historical accuracy you may be disappointed. That's what libraries and the History Channel are for.

The movie itself was all very graphic novel-like in its look and feel as was the intent. Certainly it would have been impossible to re-create much of the visuals that Greek historian Herodotus later described pieced together by Greeks who were at the first day's slaughter.

The time span concentrates on the 2-day epic holding action that the Spartans mounted against Xerces' Persian hordes. The Spartan warriors were simply that and nothing else- warriors by profession- led by King Leonidas. The scenes are extremely bloody as was the actual battle enhanced by CGI. Severed limbs and stacks of Persian bodies rule the film in an effort to depict not the glory of war but more the futility of it I believe.

There is simply no way that regular cinimephotography integrated with CGI could have illustrated the screenplay which was shot indoors against green screen. In some respects it is a fantasy but not in the goofy Lord of the Rings or Star Wars way. This is a script taking liberties on actual historical events short on historical development but long on combat details specifically depicting the battle.

There is little lovey-dovey stuff but if one pays attention they will understand the Spartan fighting philosophy of comradery amongst men in combat and the fact that men in battle mostly do what they do to protect their pals. The Spartans lived for battle and they are not unlike the elite forces of today that train and train for one purpose. These men were the equivelent of fighter pilots and Delta Force personnel today. One purpose- hold the line.

Leonidas was not the persona that carried the film. While he was a central character he was simply another warrior when it all came together. The choreography of the actors involved in re-creating the discipline of true warriors from defensive phalanx formations to the mechanics of close quarters blade-weapon combat was superb. The way each man cross covered his comrades in fighting was accurate and well done. While it wasn't particulary apparent the Greek bronze weaponry was far superior to the Persians from shields to spears and swords. The Persians used wicker shields and their body armor was inferior. Their weapons were not on par in tensile quality to the bronze Greek ones either.

Leonidas' strategy was to confront the Persians where their superior numbers would mean little in the narrow confines of the Thermopylae pass. And that strategy was good since the Spartans dispatched some 20,000 Persians in the 2 day battle. It was only due to a Greek spy who told of the path that would lead the Persians behind the Spartans in an encirclement maneuver the spelled their doom.

The movie did not tell of the 1,000 other Greeks who chose to stay and fight with Leonidas either but their added number mattered little when the fight was on 2 fronts so to speak. Leonidas had the opportunity to retreat if he so chosen but that would have meant confronting the masses of Persians on less favorable terrain. Instead he decided to inflict as much punishment as possible on them so Greek forces could gain a couple days to regroup. He managed an astounding 20-to-1 kill ratio.

Later Themistocles defeated the Persian navy soundly, forcing their complete withdrawal but not before Athens was burned. The conflict continued with Phillip of Macenonia consolidating the separate Greek city states into a true nation and his son Alexander vanquished and conquered the Persian threat as he purged the known world of the enemies of Greece.

But without the sacrifice of the men at Thermopylae democracy would have been extinguished perhaps never to exist again. Their actions galvanized the Greeks into a united nation of free democray that lives today.

I feel that is the true, subtle message the producers and directors were aiming at in this cinematic endeavour. They depicted what free-thinking people hold valuable under the threat of invasion and slavery from abroad.

So you will either love or hate the movie in its technical aspects of production and direction. I can't say it is entertaining unless you enjoyed Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It is thought provoking. I would categorize it as a lesson of ancient history illustrated in the most modern technical sense. You don't leave the theater feeling good like you saw Little Miss Sunshine. You leave it sober to reality that fanatical dictators bent on domination at all costs can be thwarted by a few dedicated men and you marvel at the fact that men such as these once lived, while you hope that some vestige of their deeds lives on today in some of us.
 

Doh!

One Too Many
Messages
1,079
Location
Tinsel Town
Thanks, Fleur (but I can't see him). Also, if anyone hasn't seen the film and wants to, that trailer gives away a LOT of the movie -- and it's pretty graphic.

Twitch: nice posting. It makes me want to read a detailed account of the real struggle.
 

carebear

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,220
Location
Anchorage, AK
Doh! said:
Thanks, Fleur (but I can't see him). Also, if anyone hasn't seen the film and wants to, that trailer gives away a LOT of the movie -- and it's pretty graphic.

Twitch: nice posting. It makes me want to read a detailed account of the real struggle.

You have to go frame by frame, it is just one frame at 1:52.

good catch Fleur :eusa_clap
 

Doh!

One Too Many
Messages
1,079
Location
Tinsel Town
A ha -- I found it! It's basically subliminal.

Looks pretty good, too!

If the movie gets made, I'll probably want to be Rorschach for Halloween. I wonder where I could find a fedora...
 

Hondo

One Too Many
Messages
1,655
Location
Northern California
Iranians

Iranians outraged over hit movie ‘300’
Blockbuster depicting Persian siege called an ‘obvious insult’


Its Persians!!! Good grief, wasn't there a declaimer regarding fact and fiction? If Iranians want to tell there side of the story, or history to set the record straight by all means go a head, I will agree the Persians depicted in "300" didn't look like Persians, and it had comic book effict, feel to it, I'll take the original 1962, The 300 Spartans, now they looked like Persians, even low budget and made for an all ages audience without much blood and gore, told the story, just my opinion.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17599641/
 

carebear

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,220
Location
Anchorage, AK
Hondo said:
Iranians outraged over hit movie ‘300’
Blockbuster depicting Persian siege called an ‘obvious insult’


Its Persians!!! Good grief, wasn't there a declaimer regarding fact and fiction? If Iranians want to tell there side of the story, or history to set the record straight by all means go a head, I will agree the Persians depicted in "300" didn't look like Persians, and it had comic book effict, feel to it, I'll take the original 1962, The 300 Spartans, now they looked like Persians, even low budget and made for an all ages audience without much blood and gore, told the story, just my opinion.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17599641/

The Persians have had 2500 years to write down their side of the story.
Unfortunately their culture didn't have the tradition of free inquiry and ability to criticize their leadership that the Greeks had, so history was written by the winners.
 

Twitch

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,133
Location
City of the Angels
The curious thing is that ALL of Asia Minor's people were considered Persians back then before Iran existed as such. And today the people of Jordan, Syria, Iraq etc., do not call themselves Persian- only Iranians do:eusa_doh: [huh]
 

Haversack

One Too Many
Messages
1,194
Location
Clipperton Island
Twitch wrote: "The curious thing is that ALL of Asia Minor's people were considered Persians back then before Iran existed as such."

Nah, One man's Mede is another man's Persian.

Haversack.
 

carebear

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,220
Location
Anchorage, AK
At the time it was the "Thousand Nations of the Persian Empire". There were all sorts of people who had their own tribal or national identities and styles of warfare but were client states by conquest.

That's one other advantage the Greeks had, a much more uniform style of warfare and a common language and concept of what it meant to be free.
 

Flitcraft

One Too Many
Messages
1,037
I was under the impression that "official" Iranian history didn't begin until the acceptance of Islam- long after mighty Xerxes was laid to rest. Why are the modern day Iranians suddenly so protective of a history they've largely chosen to ignore?

Besides, "300" is obviously a work of fiction. It has a few kernels of historical fact, but it is obviously a work of fiction- for entertainment, mind you, not propaganda.
 

Will

One of the Regulars
Messages
100
Location
San Francisco Bay area
I loved Sin City.

The best thing about 300 was that it was shown in IMAX. That was also the worst thing about it - a bad swordplay movie on a screen 100 feet wide and 40 feet tall, with seat vibrating bass.
 

Haversack

One Too Many
Messages
1,194
Location
Clipperton Island
Flitcraft wrote: "I was under the impression that "official" Iranian history didn't begin until the acceptance of Islam- long after mighty Xerxes was laid to rest. Why are the modern day Iranians suddenly so protective of a history they've largely chosen to ignore?"

Well, one reason the Zorastrian period of Persian history hasn't been played up heavily under the Islamic Republic is that the Shah did play it up. However, after Khomeni died it has gradually become more recognized. The ruins of Persepolis and Pasargardae are popular tourist sites. The Zoroastrian celebration of the new year, Now Ruz, is still celebrated by most Iranians regardless of religion. Zoroastrianism is still permitted to exist. There is a great deal of ethnic pride in Iran that often over-rides that of religion.

Haversack.
 

Flitcraft

One Too Many
Messages
1,037
That makes sense- I just have difficulty taking this film seriously. The historical inaccuracies are cringe-inducing- especially since the real story is certainly dramatic enough.
 

Quigley Brown

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,745
Location
Des Moines, Iowa
Flitcraft said:
That makes sense- I just have difficulty taking this film seriously. The historical inaccuracies are cringe-inducing- especially since the real story is certainly dramatic enough.

A lot of films have historical inaccuracies...ficticious stories surrounded by real events like 'Saving Private Ryan' or 'Pearl Harbor.' As to the battle of Thermopylae...that happened 2500 years ago so I'm sure the details may have been altered a bit over the centuries.
 

Flitcraft

One Too Many
Messages
1,037
Too true, my friend...

"300" is meant to be entertainment- I have difficulty fathoming why the Iranian Government felt it necessary to single it out for its depiction of long dead "Persians". It would be analagous to the current German government protesting the depiction of Germans in "The Battle of The Bulge".
 

carebear

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,220
Location
Anchorage, AK
When it's been a long while since you've had anything to crow about, the stuff from yesteryear (being a world-spanning empire) becomes more important.

And as has been mentioned, today's Iranians are distinct from their Arab neighbors/competitors, neither side lets go of that, even with a shared religion for 1400 years.

Iran as a country is a modern Western construct, the people view themselves as Persians still, it isn't the Arab Gulf or Iranian Gulf.
 

Haversack

One Too Many
Messages
1,194
Location
Clipperton Island
Carebear wrote: "Iran as a country is a modern Western construct, the people view themselves as Persians still, it isn't the Arab Gulf or Iranian Gulf."

If I am remembering correctly, the name of Persia was changed to Iran back in the 1920s by the late Shah's father after he took over from the previous dynasty.

And as to the name of the Persian Gulf, Ever since the early 1960s when the serious oil money began flowing into the countries on the Arabian Peninsula, there has been a concerted effort by the governments of those countries to change the name of the Persian Gulf to the Arab Gulf. Wikipedia has a decent encapsulation of the dispute:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Gulf_naming_dispute

As the body of water has been called the Persian Gulf since the time of Ancient Greece, this dispute would likely be moot if those countries wishing the change didn't have all that oil and money. However, as the topic is intensely political among those who care, it should probably best lie dormant. The wikipedia site does have some great old maps of the area however.

Haversack.
 

carebear

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,220
Location
Anchorage, AK
Didn't know that about the Shah's papa. Though I would bet one or more of the victorius allies had something to do with his installation and the formalization of the modern borders.

When Persia ran both sides of the Gulf I'm sure the name made more sense to everyone. :D
 

Haversack

One Too Many
Messages
1,194
Location
Clipperton Island
Carebear wrote: "Didn't know that about the Shah's papa. Though I would bet one or more of the victorius allies had something to do with his installation and the formalization of the modern borders."

Persia in the 18th and especially the 19th C. was caught in the middle between and expanding Russia and a Great Britain that sought to protect its empire in India. Both used Persia, and Persia played the other two off against each other. A lot of Russia's expansion into the Caucuses and Central Asia was at the expense of Persia. What is now Azerbaijan was once part of Persia. Of course when oil became important in the late 19th C. the British expanded their interests in Persia. Still when Reza Shah established the Pahlavi Dynasty in 1919, he was very astute in taking advantage of the post WWI weakness of Britain and Russia. He also started the modernization/industrialization of the country. However, because he was rather pro-fascist, he was encouraged to abdicate in 1941 in favour of his son by the threat of both the Soviet and British forces on his border.

Iran/Persia is a true survivor. It has maintained a national/cultural identity and independance on its orignial territory and with its own language since ancient times. There are not many countries that can make that claim.

Haversack.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,666
Messages
3,086,105
Members
54,480
Latest member
PISoftware
Top