300 (History Rewritten)

[Smokey]

The 2007 fantasy-action film 300 is probably one of those type of movie which some reviewers will love for its unique visual and super action scenes, or some that don't care for because of its historical inaccuracy and political incorrectness.

After seeing the movie couple of times, I say I'm somewhere in between. Loved its "comic book" look and visual sequences, but hate its inconsistency and history inaccuracy that are peppered thruout the movie.

For example at the beggining, it shows the king wrestling with his son to teach him the ropes. And at end of session he told his son to always Honor and Respect. And what does king do right after that scene. He turns around and the kill the messenger from Persia which is a brutal act. Its like killing a person that is carrying a white flag in a battle field. So much for Honnor and Respect.

Another inaccuracy and in much bigger picture is portraying of Persians as half human who thrives on barbarism and slavery. But if you look at history, Persians were the first empire to declare human rights in written form long before the Greeks. It is a documented fact (google Cyrus Cylinder).

This movie works much better as purely fictional rather than based loosley on historical facts.

[Feanor]

I hear ya, Smokey.

I love historical dramas and the more accurate to actual history the better. '300' is based on a comic novel (or concept) and has all too little to do with actual history, so you definitely have to watch it on its own merits.

As a history lover I found the treatment of Xerxes, the Persian "Great King", and the Immortals, his elite troops, particularly egregious, absurd, and offensive to my historic sensibilities -- apparently Iranians took a lot of offence too.

Xerxes ... ... NOT

[RGA]

History is better served through documentary - but it can be done well - generally not by Hollywood.

Personally I prefer what Tarantino did with the likes of Inglorious Bastards - take well known history and then create a revenge tale "what I wish I coulda done" kinda of treatment - what a hoot that film was. Now I wonder if there is a poll out to document how many people thought this was the real history of WWII.

I saw 300 on the big screen - and to be honest I can't remember a thing about it - seemed more like a video game than a movie as I recall. Completely forgettable movie.

[Feanor]

...
Personally I prefer what Tarantino did with the likes of Inglorious Bastards - take well known history and then create a revenge tale "what I wish I coulda done" kinda of treatment - what a hoot that film was. Now I wonder if there is a poll out to document how many people thought this was the real history of WWII.
....

Inglorious Bastards was the same sort of thing though much better done. Like I said, my thing is accurate history, in which case Bastards was a travesty for me. The best/worst part was its over-the-top clichéd Nazi bashing.

[Smokey]

Xerxes ... ... NOT

Maybe Xerxes, the African Queen

[Worf101]

Personally, I love Frank Miller's work... in print. HIs "Batman Returns", his run on the "Daredevil" comic and a thousand other projects, rewrote comics and took it into the provence of "graphic novels". His graphic novel "300" should be viewed as what it was, a comic book. Same thing about the movie... it should be considered a comic adaptation, NOT history. It differed from Inglorious Basterds in that most viewers of "300" had probably never heard of Xerxes or Sparta or any of the ancient greek city states and hence had little idea where fiction left off and history began. I'd hope that even the most braindead cretin would know that uncle Adolph didn't meet his end in a Paris movie theatre.. but hey... you never know.

Worf