Anyone see "300"?

[angrynight]

Okay, I have to ask someone, anyone, since I'm the only one to have seen this movie apparently. Am I the only one who thought it was one really long neo-con army recruiting film, or was I construing a message where there wasn't one? Seriously, it seemed that way, but I'm going to give Zack Snyder the benefit of the doubt for no specific reason.

[Tog]

I saw it this afternoon. I see the point that you're going for, but I'm not sure I agree with it. It would be hard to get into exactly why I think that given the political restrictions here on the board. Some of it was over the top, but I thought the queens speech before the council summed it up very well.

[HenrikOlsen]

You're probably seeing a message that isn't there, at least in my opinion it wasn't there in the comic which is the only source I have to go by as I haven't seen the movie yet.

Did you read the comic, so you're able to comment on any differences?

Also, the comic has several bad errors in it's history which made it a lot less enjoyable for me than it might have been, I doubt they where changed for thr movie.

[angrynight]

A few historical inaccuracies? I saw tons and tons. Without going into lots of politics and so on, a few kinds of statements really jump out. On at least one occasion someone says, "Freedom isn't free" and on numerous occasions they comment on how they are defending reason and freedom from blithering tyrranical hordes. Then there was a mocking of other Greeks as "boy lovers". Maybe I've been exposed to a lot of right wing media but that kind of language is so prevalent in it that you can see how I could come to the conclusion. (I say this without making any value judgments on right wing sentiments, I really don't want to start a flame war, and I realize the potential for it now.)

I haven't read the comic, but I know Frank Miller isn't that political. At least not in his comics. I'm just talking about the movie. Ironically, this kind of language is perfect for Zack Snyder's next movie adaptation of "Watchmen" my absolute favorite graphic novel of all time.

So instead I'll just move on to the tons of historical inaccuracies for the hell of it. I know it was highly fictionalized. This is all just FYI:

Spartan commanders wore the crests on their helmets from side to side, not from back to front like all the other soldiers.

Leonidas DID listen and believe in the Oracle, only the Oracle's prophecy was very different from the movie (though conveniently vague):

O ye men who dwell in the streets of broad Lacedaemon!
Either your glorious town shall be sacked by the children of Perseus,
Or, in exchange, must all through the whole Laconian country
Mourn for the loss of a king, descendant of great Heracles.
He cannot be withstood by the courage of bulls nor of lions,
Strive as they may; he is mighty as Jove; there is naught that shall stay him,
Till he have got for his prey your king, or your glorious city.

King Leonidas and the Greeks weren't stupid, the Spartans used more than 300 men, they mustered their full force which was still drastically outnumbered. The strategy of restricting combat through the pass was going to work though.

The Spartan phalanx never broke unless it was forced to too. In the movie, they did it so things kept moving.

The Spartans used a double edged sword.

The arrows would simply bounce off of the shields. The Persians used cheap bows in large numbers. They never even had a chance of penetrating for the most part.

Spartans individualized their shield designs.

The warriors placed to protect the trail around to the back of the formation weren't slain, they withdrew for fear of Persian retribution. After Spartan scouts reported on the trail's discovery, Leonidas slowly began a phased retreat of his men, until only his personal bodyguard of around about 300 soldiers remained. They stayed behind to keep the Persians occupied while Sparta evacuated. The Persians then razed the empty town. This sacrifice began the idea of a unified Greece, before the Spartans did this, Greece was still something of an abstract concept, so all of the talk about Greece as a high commitment may not be accurate, though I'll have to check.

There are probably a lot more that I've missed.

[Serenitude]

Valid points, for the most part, if you're that upset about historical accuracy in entertainment. I nit, though:

There isn't much evidence that any Greeks except for Spartans fought in that battle. On the first day, the phalanx held, and Spartans were refreshed after each wave. No other greeks are noted to have been cycled into the Phalanx.

The Phocians withdrew from cowardice and never fought.

The 300 then fought a tactical retread while the rest of the forces made withdrawal in small, stealthy groups so as to not alert the scouts of Xerxes.

By the 3rd day, there were only 300 Spartans and 700 Thespians. Once the 300 were dead and the Persians took the ground, the Thespians surrendered without a fight.

Of course, it was but half of the bigger picture with the Athenian navy under Themistocles, the brains behind the operation, but the movie never pretended to be anything than a fantasized retelling of the battle at Thermopylae.

Reading reviews, however, it seems people are reading themselves into the movie. Some find it homoerotic. Others find it homophobic. Some find it neo-con. Some find it bleeding-heart liberal. Some find it fascist. Others counter by pointing out the dialogue is utterly anti-fascist. Some people claim to find parallels is Xerxes/Bush. Others claim to find synchronicity between Leonidas/Bush. It seems people are bringing their own interpretations into the movie and reading them into the story

But all of the info you've presented so far was in the documentary on Discovery the other night. Is this where you're getting your info? Much of what they presented is, well, rather contested and not exactly agreed upon by the historical community

[angrynight]

I didn't catch that documentary, but you bet I would have tried to catch it had I known it was on. It'll repeat anyway.

No, a lot of my info is Wikipedian (Which may have come from the Discovery channel ). A lot of the historical points you made I made too, so I don't quite get what you mean.

I too did some googling and it does seem that people are reading a lot into it. At least I'm not alone there. How bizarre. Still, I thought it was so blatant it ruined the movie for me. I don't mind a message I disagree with in a movie, but it seemed so ham-fisted that I couldn't enjoy. Yet, it seems there was no message. Isn't it amazing how the human brain automatically seeks to perceive patterns? So I guess 300 was like the Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese sandwich.

[Gillianren]

I saw it twice, actually.

I really don't think it would be possible to show the Spartans at all accurately without showing some of the "neocon" elements. They were very into the glory of war; their whole culture was built on it. (And, not to put to fine a point on it, the Athenians were boy-lovers. It was a major aspect of Athenian culture.) The description of how the boys were taken away to be trained is pretty accurate. Sparta was a warrior society; to portray it as anything else would be to show a different culture.

Now, it's not my era; most of what I know about Greece has to do with its mythology and architecture. However, I know that, for example, it was considered one of those regular things for an Athenian to, er, introduce a teenage boy (or younger) into sexual activity. I know that the Spartan culture was built on training for war, and that the greatest love in all Greek societies of the era was the love between two men. (There, that's homophobia and homoeroticism out of the way; both of the attitudes are accurate descriptions of the time and have nothing to do with the judgements our society would impose.)

I know that the rhinoceros was just plain silly. I know that "freedom isn't free" is a much older sentiment than we realize, but that "freedom" would be a relative term in an era with so much slavery. I know that the movie only dabbled in the relative equality (that's relative to other women of the era, of course) of Spartan women.

However, I have noticed that quite a lot of movies serve as Rorschach tests; what you see in it is quite often what's in your head rather than what's on the screen.

[Tog]

A further comment about the remark about "boy-loving". There is a song that was on a radio program called the Dr. Demento show (no this ties in, honest), called "Standing on the Shoulders of Freaks". One of the lines in that song is:
"Ancient philosophy was framed by prodigies,
Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates.
And even though their thoughts were deemed the 'Aristocratic Voice'...
They also had a thing for little boys."
The point is, it's not an idea exclusive to this movie.
As Gillian pointed out, it's actually a pretty much accepted fact.

Also, that (what amounts to) an elite military force, which I don't think anyone would deny the Spartans were, would refer to any group that did not meet their standards of "manliness" really isn't that surprising. Ask a US marine what he thinks of the navy guys. Then ask the navy guys what they think of marines. You will get many comments from all branches about how useless/stupid/arrogant/whatever, the average person in the other branch is, but I would be surprised to find there is a single person from any branch that would refuse to assist, or to be assisted by, a member of different branch of the service. That's sort of what an inter service rivalry is. What I gathered from the movie was not that the Spartans were doing it to spite the Greek army, but to buy time for the rest of the are to actually see, and accept that there was a threat.

The political aspect of the film I thought were slanted a bit, but they may have just seemed that way due to the times in which we live, and current events. What I got from it all though is basically what I feel to be true anyway, and is actually summed up very well in another song: Gordon Lightfoot's "Don Quixote":
"See the soldier with his gun, who must be dead to be admired."

I did have a pretty big nit to pick about a step they took for dramatic reasons though, but it's a bit of a spoiler, so I'll hold off.

[Serenitude]

Indeed, Toq. In fact, the supreme commander of the combined forces of Greece was an Athenian naval commander named Themistocles. Even Sparta acknowledged his authority in the overall campaign. He was smart enough to know that if you have a land battle to be fought, you want your Delta Force, your Spartans, to head it

Also, what you said about the threat was correct. Most of Greece thought that after the whooping at Marathon, and the Ionian revolt, Persia was done with Greece. Although most of the city-states attended the gathering in Athens and paid lip-service to Athens, only Athens and Sparta initially took the threat seriously. That changed, dramatically, after the 300. That stand gave birth to the world's first democracy. And had it failed, democracy may never have evolved anywhere else.

History, much like movies, is also open to interpretation, perhaps to the prejudices and agenda of the reader. For instance, on Spartan boy-love, unlike Greece, where others have noted, it was common if not mandated, in Sparta it is known there was a law utterly forbidding coitus with boys. Some have suggested this to mean that everything but coitus was permitted as bonding ritual. Others have interpreted this, along with the very permissive courtship and marriage practices of Sparta, to suggest mass homophobia. The jury is out either way.

As for angrynight percieving me contradicting him, I did not. I actually said you pretty much nailed it. I expanded on only one point - where you stated that Leonidas used more than 300 men. I simply went into more detail on that I could nit a little more, though. For instance, there are more than one account of the words of the oracle. Citing one as canon is very difficult to do. The best source is probably Herodotus, but he was known to embellish, despite being the 'Father of Historians'. Even translating 1 single Greek passage to English can result in multiple, sometimes wildly different phrases.

Angrynight, for more interesting reading, I recommend research on the Athenian navy, and the battle at the pass they fought while the 300 fought on land. Also, read about the destruction of the fleeing Persian navy at the pincer battle at Salamis, and the subsequent Greek invasion of Persia. Utterly fascinating stuff - just as good a read as the 300

I DO highly recommend the documentary - I've TiVo'd it and watched it several times already, but take it with a grain of salt - many of the points are rather in dispute, and they went with certain points of view without offering any counter-opinion. For instance, there is known to have been a ritual of survival among the agoge. The boys were to survive on their own in the wild. Some historians will tell you they went out in organized groups with knives and lived off the land. Some will tell you the purpose was to sneak out and kill a Helot. We do know that if captured during this ritual, they were severely punished, but like most things Spartan, we know little factual information and have to interpret many vague things. The documentary ran with the "kill a Helot" angle. Very possibly true, but far from proven

Anyway, enjoy your research, and I'd be happy (as will others) to answer any questions or help you find out more

[HenrikOlsen]

Actually, from what I remember reading about the two cultures, the Athenians where about man-man love and the Spartans where the man-boy lovers,

And when people count the Spartans, they tend to focus on the 300 soldiers and completely forget the 900 support personnel they brought along; catering, hairdressers, etc. who died with them.

[Doodler]

Conan the Barbarian and his Sweaty Men versus the AD&D Horde?

Not yet, but its on the to do list.

[tofu]

On at least one occasion someone says, "Freedom isn't free"

I love it when people use code words like "neo con" while in the same breath complaining about the code phrase "freedom isn't free"

It's like saying, "I'm offended because one of those japs used a racial slur against me. whaaa!!!!"

I also love how you add that this occured on "at least one occasion" as if you are adding up criminal charges. "You stand charged with one count of using the word 'freedom' in the first degree. How do you plea?"

I also wonder, do you consider Heinlein to be neocon propaganda? He says all the same things that are said in this movie - except that he said them a long time ago. Maybe we could label him a protocon. I like the sound of that. Let the protocon book burnings begin!

[Blob]

Hum,
it's only a dramatised version of the battle, there is no attempt at portraying a realistic or factual account of what really happened; It would be similar to using a batman movie to depict a typical American city.
It should be enjoyed for what it is.

[Delvo]

The homosexual and pedophiliac talk about ancient Greece is almost always pretty widely exaggerated and misstated. It's not that ancient Greece had no homosexuals or pedophiles, it's just that that was never the standard. (Biologically, it couldn't be. You can't talk someone into having a sexuality he doesn't have.) Modern people just tend to "Rorshack" sexuality into relationships that were more like "mentor & student" or "work partners" than sexual. The ancient Greeks sometimes did the same "Rorshack" thing themselves when dealing with the works of earlier phases of Greek development. For example, the man who fought Hector at Troy and lost while wearing Achilles's armor (whose name I don't recall at the moment) was originally described as Achilles's cousin, but relabelled as his lover by later Greeks. Sparta apparently saw Athens at one time through similarly distorted glasses. They probably did it for the same reason we do it now: sensationalism.

Spartan commanders wore the crests on their helmets from side to side, not from back to front like all the other soldiers.

The Greeks' superior armor is also among the advantages that somehistorians say they had that let them "prevail" (in a sense) in this case, whereas the "armor" in the comic book and movie was somewhat unimpressive.

King Leonidas and the Greeks weren't stupid, the Spartans used more than 300 men, they mustered their full force which was still drastically outnumbered.

Only 300 Spartans went there. A few other cities also contributed hundreds so the total force was about one and a half thousand to start. But the rest either were sent away or retreated or surrendered, leaving the 300 Spartans alone in the end. The movie did show what the others did, including their positive contribution before surrendering or leaving, and showed the Spartans meeting them on the way and the others commenting on how few Spartans there were.

The warriors placed to protect the trail around to the back of the formation weren't slain, they withdrew for fear of Persian retribution.

That's what the movie said, too.

This sacrifice began the idea of a unified Greece, before the Spartans did this, Greece was still something of an abstract concept, so all of the talk about Greece as a high commitment may not be accurate, though I'll have to check.

That is what the movie showed, also.

* * *

I was interested in the sympathetic treatment of Ephialtes. Conventionally, he's not described as deformed, no motivation for him is given, or perhaps a bad one like bribery is. His name has since then been another word for "traitor" in Greek. But in this comic book and movie, the reader/viewer can feel sorry for him and understand how his desperation for acceptance would drive him to do what he did.

[Musashi]

At the time of the battle of Thermopylae, the helmets may have had crests running front to back. It is also possible that some helmets had raised crests (still running front to back). Historically, the kings and commanders wore their crests side to side, and at the battle that followed Thermopylae (Plataea), commanders were wearing side to side crests. I think some artistic license was taken to make Leonidas stand out (more than he would have with a side to side crest in a force all wearing front to back crests). At that time, it is probably likely that shields were individualized, but the matching lambdas were impressive. In fact, the matching shields probably happened pretty soon after Thermopylae. At around the same time, the Spartans discarded their bronze curiasses, but yes, at Thermopylae they were probably wearing those along with bronze greaves. We are just lucky (unluck?) that they were wearing pants or underwear or whatever those things were. Some Greek soldiers fare depicted fighting naked at the waist.

The Spartans were leading a larger force until the path behind them was discovered by the Persians. At that time they dismissed the bulk of the force. All that remained were the 300, 400 Thebans and about 700 Thespians under Demophilus.

Killed in the first phase of fighting was Leonidas himself, but that wouldn't have made a compelling movie (Xerxes lost two brothers in the same timeframe).

Surprisingly (or not), the line about fighting in the shade is historical (fact or fiction).

[Musashi]

But in any case, I will echo the comments of others and say, it was an entertaining movie, not an historical recreation. They seemed to gloss over the fact that Sparta ran so well because of their Helot labor (it was, in fact, why they could train a standing army). They ignored the probable pederasty of the agoge. They turned the Ephors into some kind off mutants. And that doesn't even begin to address the way the Persians were portrayed. I thought I was watching Stargate for a moment when Xerxes showed up and spoke.

[Tog]

I thought I was watching Stargate for a moment when Xerxes showed up and spoke.

Speaking of which, Michael Dorn was not listed in the credits, but both the GF and I would swear that Xerxes used his voice. It's kind of distictive.

[Disinfo Agent]

Then there was a mocking of other Greeks as "boy lovers".

I haven't seen this film, but it seems that the Athenians (was it the Athenians who said that?) did have similar derogatory expressions about the Spartans.* Not that they didn't enjoy the odd boy, themselves. Nationalist rhetoric...

The homosexual and pedophiliac talk about ancient Greece is almost always pretty widely exaggerated and misstated. It's not that ancient Greece had no homosexuals or pedophiles, it's just that that was never the standard. (Biologically, it couldn't be. You can't talk someone into having a sexuality he doesn't have.)

You are assuming that sexuality is 100% determined by biology. Comparative anthropology seems to show that it is partly social.

* Found a reference:

The alleged sexual indulgence of Spartan pederasty was a running gag in the repertoire of Athenian comedians, and the verb lakōnízō ("to do it the Lacedaemonian way"; literally, "to laconize") took on the meaning of "to sodomize." It is not clear to what extent this is a reflection of the enmity between Athens and Sparta.

[Lianachan]

Historical accuracy quibbles not applicable in this case - it's based on the graphic novel, not the battle of Thermopylae.

[Musashi]

It is still fun to quibble.

[HenrikOlsen]

And the quibbles are just as much with the graphic novel, errors repeated from that one are still errors.

[angrynight]

Yeesh Tofu, relax! All I'm saying is that it echoes and is similar to the kind of language and arguments used on the right. I'm not saying the aphorism is evil, but honestly, you don't hear that a lot from people not on the right. Ergo, the movie seems to carry a right wing message. Also, no need to mention a racial slur on these boards, aside from poisoning the well, I think it may not be right to mention one even in third person on this board.

I understand what you're saying Blob, but there's nothing wrong with having a chat about it. Maybe it isn't clear, but I'm not hugely mad about anything, I just want to discuss a movie I saw. That's all, I swear!:P

As for historical inaccuracy Delvo, you are right my bad on the number of Spartans, but that still is different from the film.

[Disinfo Agent]

"Go, stranger, and tell the Lacedaemonians that we lie here in obedience to their law" -- Simonides of Ceos.

Epitaph for the Spartan defenders at Thermopylae, slain to the last man in battle (480 BCE)

[Gillianren]

We are just lucky (unluck?) that they were wearing pants or underwear or whatever those things were. Some Greek soldiers fare depicted fighting naked at the waist.

Yeesh. And we thought the movie was skirting around an NC-17 as it was!

[Serenitude]

Interestling, many quotes from the movie that some are finding cheesy are in fact historically documented. Indeed, the term "laconic humor" comes from the characteristic humor of the Spartans, who hail from Laconia. "Fill your bellies well this morning, boys, because tonight we dine in Hades", "Come and get them (their arms)", "If I enter Laconia, I will burn it to the ground" - to which the Spartans sent a reply of just one word, "If".

Even the "More the better - we shall fight in the shade" is reported by Herodotus to have been said at the battle. Fun stuff that I'm not sure alot of people get. I know there are other cheesy one-liners in the movie that aren't historically documented, but from what I've read, they're, well, very Laconic

[HenrikOlsen]

Yeesh. And we thought the movie was skirting around an NC-17 as it was!

The comic has them sans pants.

[Lianachan]

And the quibbles are just as much with the graphic novel, errors repeated from that one are still errors.

Yes, but not errors of the film.

[Serenitude]

It's like watching "Star Trek".

If you sit back and say "That's absurd. There's no "faster than light" travel, and wormholes are inherently unstable and don't last for more than a billionth of a second, and you wouldn't be able to see laser blasts IRL, and slingshotting around the sun won't give you the speed to travel in time, etc...

You aren't going to enjoy Star Trek. Or any work of fiction...

[mike alexander]

On the other hand, the movie has generated some of the funniest reviews I've read in many years.

[Serenitude]

On the other hand, the movie has generated some of the funniest reviews I've read in many years.

Truly. There is a reviewer on rottentomatoes.com who said something to the effect that he is secure enough in his masculinity to admit that if he stood in the presence of the men for 10 minutes, he'd spontaneously sprout ovaries