300?

[Traitorfish]

My problem with "300" is that the story was idiotic. It was for 7 year olds. The characters were awful, the dialogues a catastrophe. It was all about killing a bunch of weird looking persians for what seemed like a century.

"Story"? As in, the Battle of Thermopalye? That kind of, y'know, happened. In real life. All 300 is a retelling of it. Characterisation and dialog are flaws in how they retold it, not in the story itself.

I don't think there is anything to "get" in that movie.

Well, a lot of people have made the "bad history" complaint, so I'd say that they, at least, "didn't get" that aspect of it.

 

[luiz]

"Story"? As in, the Battle of Thermopalye? That kind of, y'know, happened. In real life. All 300 is a retelling of it. Characterisation and dialog are flaws in how they retold it, not in the story itself.

Story, plot, whatever may be the appropriate term to say that I did not like at all the way they were telling the story.

I know that the battle at Thermopylae happened, and it was of course a fascinating historical event. But one can still write a terrible story about it, no? Like a story where 300 half-naked greeks keep on hacking and slashing through a million orc-like persians for what seemed like a lifetime.

Well, a lot of people have made the "bad history" complaint, so I'd say that they, at least, "didn't get" that aspect of it.

It's pretty hard not to get that movie is not going for historical accuracy when they have goat-men and dinossaur like monsters.

My problem with 300 is not the orcs or the dinossaurs (though they certainly do not appeal to my movie taste), but rather the terrible story-telling. How can there be a bearable movie when all the dialogues and all the characters suck?

If I wanted to see a movie just for the animation effects I'd go see Speed Racer or something like that.

 

[Shekwan]

I think the reason people who don't like 300 is simple - they take it too seriously. And I don't mean the historical side - if you take THAT seriously you need help. All the stuff people don't like - the narrator, the dialog, the ridiculous Sparta scenes are entertaining for me beacuse they're so fantastically cheesy in a film that takes itslef so seriously. I'm no film buff and I have no idea if thats wah the director was trying to achieve, but thats what I take out of it and I'm grateful for it because it entertaining.

Also I'm not sure that saomebody casually looking for a bit of info on Thermopylae is best served by reading Herodotus.... Maybe wikipedia or ''Persian Fire''.

 

[JohnRM]

If you're going to study the battle, make sure you cover the naval portion of the conflict, as well.

 

[Traitorfish]

I think the reason people who don't like 300 is simple - they take it too seriously. And I don't mean the historical side - if you take THAT seriously you need help. All the stuff people don't like - the narrator, the dialog, the ridiculous Sparta scenes are entertaining for me beacuse they're so fantastically cheesy in a film that takes itslef so seriously. I'm no film buff and I have no idea if thats wah the director was trying to achieve, but thats what I take out of it and I'm grateful for it because it entertaining.

Good point. The film is intended to be big, impressive and less-than-substantial. Even within the film itself, it's shown to end up as the narrator telling the story to other Spartans before a battle.
I think the problem might be that some of the dialog- such as Leonidas' vague references to freedom- implies that the film is supposed to have more depth than, as Snider put it, "two groups of guys stomping the snot out of each other".

 

[Wilphe]

Has anyone here seen the other movie i was talking about ?

Yes, interesting Cold War background where it makes out the Democracy loving Spartans out as champions against Communist hordes from the East.

So different issues to 300 (which I've not seen).

The Spartans were so moronic and one-dimensional

They're Spartans, moronic and one dimensional is pretty much what they do. if you want depth go to Athens.

 

[caketastydelish]

It was all about the action. The action scenes redeem everything bad about 300. Also, the Iranian controversy. That was funny.

People got offended of a movie that demoralizes their heritage. ROFL

They make their leader look like a homosexual (which was historically inacurate, there is no evidence of Xerxes being homosexual, as a matter of fact he married a Jewish woman). They exaggerated the numbers BIG time. It was NOT millions of soldiers. Not to mention, believe it or not, Persians were actual human beings, not monsters. They also made the Persian messanger black. I have nothing against black people, but in terms of historical accuracy, it was not correct. Since the race of people that made up the empire was not black, there is no reason to presume the messanger was black. They also tried to make all the Persian soldiers look like Arabs, because thats the western ignorant steriotype. Persian soldiers did not look twin to arabs. (again, I have nothing agaisnt Arabs, but its just not historically accurate)

They made Persian women look like lisbeans and also disgusting. Once again, this is nothing like how 99 percent of them were. And they made the Greeks all look so glorified. Kind of a racist movie if you ask me.

All the historical accuracy wouldn't even bother me, but the producers have claimed the movie to be "at least 90 percent accurate" and I can promise you it is the other way around. It is at least 90 percent inaccurate.

Changing how history really was in a movie just to make it "better" is not right.
And you may reason "but oh, its just a movie, they should get over it."
But let me ask you this: What if they made a movie, making the Nazis look like the good guys, and the Americans, British, Russians, etc look like the bad guys? And of coarse, Churchill would be a homosexual, the Nazis would all be good-looking, and allied soldiers would look sub-human. Its just a movie, right? Wrong. Could you imagine the well deserved protest to a movie like that? Its because they're changing around history to make a movie, and thats never right. Most westerns are pretty unfamiliar with Persian history, and the few times they study it, its with a Greek bias. They quote some Greek philosopher talking about how "evil" the Persians were.

Iranians have every right in the world to be offended by that movie. Who can blame them?

 

[scy12]

ovie, making the Nazis look like the good guys, and the Americans, British, Russians, etc look like the bad guys? And of coarse, Churchill would be a homosexual, the Nazis would all be good-looking, and allied soldiers would look sub-human. Its just a movie, right? Wrong. Could you imagine the well deserved protest to a movie like that? Its because they're changing around history to make a movie, and thats never right. Most westerns are pretty unfamiliar with Persian history, and the few times they study it, its with a Greek bias.

If they did such Movie i would not be against it. Would you ? Why ? As for 300 and historical accuracy ... That was lost when the dinosaurs , monsters started to appear. Before 300 there was Troy and before Troy there was Dunno. It would be nice if Holywood did not cartoonize everything.

 

[caketastydelish]

If they did such Movie i would not be against it. Would you ? Why ? As for 300 and historical accuracy ... That was lost when the dinosaurs , monsters started to appear. Before 300 there was Troy and before Troy there was Dunno. It would be nice if Holywood did not cartoonize everything.

So you would not be against a movie that glorified Nazi Germany and made the allied forces, and Jewish people look evil? Ok. Suit yourself. I won't even argue with you.

 

[holy king]

this thread got awfully godwinned.
godwinning a thread about the battle of thermopylae and the movie 300 really is an accomplishment...

 

[scy12]

So you would not be against a movie that glorified Nazi Germany and made the allied forces, and Jewish people look evil? Ok. Suit yourself. I won't even argue with you.

No because that film would almost be a parody of itself.

 

[classical_hero]

this thread got awfully godwinned.
godwinning a thread about the battle of thermopylae and the movie 300 really is an accomplishment...

It is basically just a comic book retelling of the battle. And since a comic book is generaly about fantasy, I don't see why you can't make a historical event and turn into a fantasy tale, when it is made out to be that way. Anyway back the real history.

 

[caketastydelish]

No because that film would almost be a parody of itself.

A movie that would be a parody of itself would be like Borat. He claims to be anti-semetic and such, but you know this is a lie because the actor is Jewish himself, and it is obvious he is using satire. But imagine a "serious" film like that. Just as serious as 300. No, I don't think that would be ok at all.

 

[scy12]

A movie that would be a parody of itself would be like Borat. He claims to be anti-semetic and such, but you know this is a lie because the actor is Jewish himself, and it is obvious he is using satire. But imagine a "serious" film like that. Just as serious as 300. No, I don't think that would be ok at all.

Just as serious as 300 ?

The thing is even if one imagines that 300 attempted to be serious , it failed at being serious.

So indeed the just as serious as 300 film sounds like a self parody. In fact wasn't 300 just that ?

 

[caketastydelish]

Just as serious as 300 ?

The thing is even if one imagines that 300 attempted to be serious , it failed at being serious.

So indeed the just as serious as 300 film sounds like a self parody. In fact wasn't 300 just that ?

It wasn't a comedy movie or anything. The producers even claimed it to be "at least 90 percent accurate". Seriously, how many funny lines were in that movie. It was not satire or whatever in the least. How was it a parody of itself?

 

[Traitorfish]

So you would not be against a movie that glorified Nazi Germany and made the allied forces, and Jewish people look evil? Ok. Suit yourself. I won't even argue with you.

That is quite possibly the most utterly feeble argument I've ever heard for anything, ever. I mean, really, that was horrible. Awful. Godf***ingawful.

300 is legendary, not historical. There's a subtle but ever so significant difference. Learn it before passing comment on this sort of thing.

 

[CivLuvah]

Look at my signature peroid

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I meant "idiotic story", but my limited english skills prevented me from writing right.

I of course have no problems with a fiction film not portraying history accurately. I quite liked Gladiator, for example.

My problem with "300" is that the story was idiotic. It was for 7 year olds. The characters were awful, the dialogues a catastrophe. It was all about killing a bunch of weird looking persians for what seemed like a century.

I don't think there is anything to "get" in that movie.

There, you see? You and I can agree on something.

I've yet to see Alexander, though. I'm kind of "eh" about Collin Farrell, but I've heard reasonably good things about it. Apparently it's by the same dude who did City of Heaven, or whatever it was called, with Orlando Bloom in the Crusades, though that's on my to-do list, too.

 

[caketastydelish]

There, you see? You and I can agree on something.

I've yet to see Alexander, though. I'm kind of "eh" about Collin Farrell, but I've heard reasonably good things about it. Apparently it's by the same dude who did City of Heaven, or whatever it was called, with Orlando Bloom in the Crusades, though that's on my to-do list, too.

Not city of heaven, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, and that is my favorite movie ever!!!!

 

[caketastydelish]

That is quite possibly the most utterly feeble argument I've ever heard for anything, ever. I mean, really, that was horrible. Awful. Godf***ingawful.

300 is legendary, not historical. There's a subtle but ever so significant difference. Learn it before passing comment on this sort of thing.

Ok, if my argument is so bad, make one against it. Surely you can since its so bad... In the example I gave, people should and would be offended because what they're doing is changing history in the movie to glorify one side, and humiliate the other. The same thing is happening in 300.