300

When's the last time you've seen a 'human' Mongol barbarian in a movie? A 'human' Hun?
If I wanted to make a movie about the Mongols, would it make any sense for me to have black actors playing the Mongols, merely because the Mongols are the 'bad guys' of the movie? Or to have some of the Mongols portrayed as demons?

I beg you, please dont say thats its ok, because its based on a comic book:cry:
 
If I wanted to make a movie about the Mongols, would it make any sense for me to have black actors playing the Mongols, merely because the Mongols are the 'bad guys' of the movie?

The Persian Empire, though, ruled over a huge amount of land and hired many mercenaries, so it would be plausible for them to have black soldiers.
 
What do you mean, "most evidence"? I don't think that's clear at all. If Athenian comedy is to be believed, then the Spartans were notorious for the worst excesses of the pederastic system.

Athens isnt going to have a neutral stance now is it? But from what I heard Thebes was the main culprit.
 
The Persian Empire, though, ruled over a huge amount of land and hired many mercenaries, so it would be plausible for them to have black soldiers.

Well, yes, but if I recall correctly, Persian army used very... uh, Persian soldiers. Mercenaries were not that common.
 
Athens isnt going to have a neutral stance now is it?

They probably aren't going to have a particularly well-informed view, having never been to Sparta, but I wouldn't attribute it to a sort of propaganda. It isn't as if Athenian comedies made fun of Spartans only, or even chiefly; they made fun of many other city-states too, and even (usually?) themselves. The laughs are in exploiting popular jokes and prejudices, not making fun of the enemy.
 
Well, yes, but if I recall correctly, Persian army used very... uh, Persian soldiers. Mercenaries were not that common.

The persian army relied on the populace it controlled for military support. As a result their army was very diverse, included mercenaries, and was poorly equipped and trained.
 
The persian army relied on the populace it controlled for military support. As a result their army was very diverse, included mercenaries, and was poorly equipped and trained.

I see nothing this could be based on. Early Persian army consisted entirely of Persian warriors, but later only the standing army was made of Persians... while I was wrong, Persian army had some foreigners, I don't think its safe to say that there were large amounts of mercenaries until the days of Alexander. Also, Persian military was relatively complex, many of their tactics were not used in Asiatic army until the Mongols, for example. So, to claim that Persian army was "poorly equipped and trained" would be baseless.
 
I see nothing this could be based on. Early Persian army consisted entirely of Persian warriors, but later only the standing army was made of Persians... while I was wrong, Persian army had some foreigners, I don't think its safe to say that there were large amounts of mercenaries until the days of Alexander. Also, Persian military was relatively complex, many of their tactics were not used in Asiatic army until the Mongols, for example. So, to claim that Persian army was "poorly equipped and trained" would be baseless.

You are incorrect. They conscripted throughout the Empire and the men went from Black,White,Persian and Asian. And it wasn;t a professional army. It was poorly trained.

edit: Alexander was only 100 years later.
 
Problems with '300'

1. Persians are neither black, nor monsters. I was struck dumb when I saw the Persians being depicted this way. Its amazing, youd think this movie was made in 1937, not 2007.

2. Spartans werent freedom loving freedom fighters. They were much greater enemies of freedom than the 'demonic' Persians were. But we know the Spartans are the good guys because in addition to being white, they all move in slow motion.

3. There isnt a single photon of natural light in the entire film. The movie has a closed in claustrophobic feel to it as if every scene was shot in front of a green screen, because it was.

4. The sets look like warehouses of Hollywood 'ancient Greek' props were dumped on a tiny stage for a school auditorium.
Wow, you clearly don't get it at all. It wasn't supposed to be an accurate and serious historical representation, it's based on a graphic novel :rolleyes: You've basically described exactly how it was intended to look and feel, it just obviously went completely over your head. The Persians weren't black because they're the 'bad guys' it was clearly obvious that the army had been gathered from around the world at the time.

Anyway, best film I've seen in years.

Spoiler :
At the end, when Leonidas threw his spear at Xerxes, did the movie try to portray him as missing or simply to make Xerxes bleed so to shatter his belief that he was a god?
I think it was to show that he was still human.
 
Wow, you clearly don't get it at all. It wasn't supposed to be an accurate and serious historical representation, it's based on a graphic novel :rolleyes:
:lol:If you read the preceding pages, you'll understand why you saying that makes me laugh.
You've basically described exactly how it was intended to look and feel, it just obviously went completely over your head.
Yeah, theres no way I could ever cope with a serious, high brow film like '300' :lol:
The Persians weren't black because they're the 'bad guys' it was clearly obvious that the army had been conscripted from around the world at the time.
Of course. And 'around the world' in that time period meant Africa, is that it?

Anyway, best film I've seen in years.
One word for you: Netflix
 
No, not really. So about 10 other people also think you made a bunch of stupid points about the film which totally missed any sort of mark that you were attempting to spearhead... and..?

The fact you're trying to squeeze some kind of underlying racism from the film just shows your ignorance. It's people like you who fuel racism.
Hmmm...Migthegreek sees me as such a vile lowlife, no doubt he sees me as black, or a monster. Mig, you dont understand you shouldnt get upset by my opinions, you see, all my opinions are based on a comic book. Phew, glad thats settled.
 
Just seen the film. LOVE IT.
 
Yes, rather stupidly i expected more of a battle.. than, erm 300 guys fighting :hammer2:
 
The film should have ended with that Greek army lying dead on the field, would have been amusing
 
The film should have ended with that Greek army lying dead on the field, would have been amusing

It should have ended with an "almost 1,000 years later" starwipe, where they show Sassanid King Shapur I capturing Roman Emperor Valerian, and Valerian bowing before him :satan:
 
If I wanted to make a movie about the Mongols, would it make any sense for me to have black actors playing the Mongols, merely because the Mongols are the 'bad guys' of the movie? Or to have some of the Mongols portrayed as demons?
Couldn't you just get Omar Shariff?

Sorry for not reading the whole thread. I quite liked 300 although I can understand why some people don't and their reasons why. I went expecting it to be awful, since I hated Sin City, but as entertainment I thought it was alright. It's a movie, not a documentary.

Some people really don't like it though other's just think it's hostile behaviour, even more so than kidnapping sailors
 
i watched twice with the same girl and paid 3 times. So anyone telling me this show sucks is going to get it from me... :D

kiddin... i have no idea why the girl wants to watch this twice.
 
i watched twice with the same girl and paid 3 times. So anyone telling me this show sucks is going to get it from me... :D

kiddin... i have no idea why the girl wants to watch this twice.

She wants to drool over the muscular bodies of the Spartan soldiers... which means you should go to gym and do some exercise, before she leaves you ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom