300

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Going to see it on Sunday. Kind of leery about it though. Not getting too many good reviews.

Cheers.

[Skilly]

I want to see it too ... I am kinda disappointed though that it looks like it was shot with the same technique used in Sin City (which I thought was terrible). And they didn't need the mythical creatures in it either .... they weren't back in antiquity.

[duster]

Sadly, some will think this version is the true story. Spartans defending freedom? yikes...

An amusing review

www.mrcranky.com/movies/300.html

[jkr]

duster said:

Sadly, some will think this version is the true story. Spartans defending freedom? yikes...

An amusing review

www.mrcranky.com/movies/300.html

Mr Cranky? That handle sounds familiar.

[Cranky]

I hate the movie before I even see it. This was the turning point of Weatern civilization. Had the Spartans lost, there would be no Greece and there would be NO Greece and there would be NO FREE THINKING and there would be NO DEMOCRACY.

Our society is so caught up with the mundane and so self centered that they don't realize what others did in order to bring us to this point in our civilization. Then again, look at what we done with what was given to us......

As for the movie....it is a shame that it is not given the reverence of what it is. The few dying bravely to give freedom to the many.

[HABsurd]

habsaddict said:

I hate the movie before I even see it. This was the turning point of Weatern civilization. Had the Spartans lost, there would be no Greece and there would be NO Greece and there would be NO FREE THINKING and there would be NO DEMOCRACY.

Our society is so caught up with the mundane and so self centered that they don't realize what others did in order to bring us to this point in our civilization. Then again, look at what we done with what was given to us......

As for the movie....it is a shame that it is not given the reverence of what it is. The few dying bravely to give freedom to the many.

Umm, I thought the Spartans lost. (maybe one can call it a moral victory for the Greeks.)

Your analysis is somewhat ironic in that Sparta was very anti-democratic.

[Cranky]

habdomen said:

habsaddict said:

I hate the movie before I even see it. This was the turning point of Weatern civilization. Had the Spartans lost, there would be no Greece and there would be NO Greece and there would be NO FREE THINKING and there would be NO DEMOCRACY.

Our society is so caught up with the mundane and so self centered that they don't realize what others did in order to bring us to this point in our civilization. Then again, look at what we done with what was given to us......

As for the movie....it is a shame that it is not given the reverence of what it is. The few dying bravely to give freedom to the many.

Umm, I thought the Spartans lost. (maybe one can call it a moral victory for the Greeks.)

Your analysis is somewhat ironic in that Sparta was very anti-democratic.

Did I say Sparta was democratic? Athens developed democracy and Sparta was a kngdom. Mind you, it did have the ephors as a sort of "chamber of second thought". The point I am making is if the Spartans don't make a stand and Xerxes enters unfettered, there is no Greece....and there is no Hellenism.....and there is no Roman culture based on Hellenism.. Very much a defining point in Western history.

As for the Spartans, they did lose but that was the point. Xerxes was trying to devide the city states and the Spartan knew they stood no chance of fighting the entire Persian army. At best, they could only muster 12-15,000 soldiers and even if the kill ratio was 10 to 1 (normal fare), they still couldn't defeat an army of between 300,000 to 750,000 man. The intent was that if the small band of Spartans made a heroic stand and die bravely, then it sould galvanize the rest of Greece. It worked as intended.

I saw the movie and needless to say it is not historicaly accurate. Not that the real history itself is any less interesting but I guess if Hollywood doesn't give it some kind of spin, it just wouldn't be Hollywood.

I liked the movie more then I expected. I was hoped for a Gladiator type movie but I guess it's better then nothing.


BTW, I have walked every inch of Thermopyles. To me, it is sacred ground.

[Cranky]

CAUTION: EXTREME SPARTAN VIOLENCE.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbl9HJOfAxA

[franko]

habsaddict said:

CAUTION: EXTREME SPARTAN VIOLENCE.

Looked like my last board meeting ;D

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Just saw it this afternoon. I remember hearing a saying that you can produce a documentary or you can produce a movie. Producing a movie gives the producer an artistic license I guess.

Having as that, this film sort of reminded me of a cross between "Lord of the Rings" and Dungeons and Dragons."

Some of the things that stood out:

* The wolf at the beginning of the movie that Leonidas had encountered had green glowing eyes. Guess that's the way Leonidas must have recalled it. Anyway, it reminded me of a wolf from hell. Good for a fairy tale.

* When the first Persian emissaries rode up to deliver Xerxes' message, they clearly had stirrups. These weren't introduced to the West until the 4th century by the Huns. Yet, later in the film a Greek rider didn't have them.

* Speaking of Xerxes, he reminded me of a bi-sexual, Americanized basketball player with piercings throughout his body; a better sculpted Dennis Rodman I guess.

* The Spartan warriors reminded me of steroid-induced, six-pack laden, Ultimate fighting machines, only Randy Couture was not among them. They were superhuman specimens the world has never been able to reproduce.

* Never seen Spartan or Greek warriors with shorts words like that.

* The final death scene focuses on Leonidas' arrow-ridden corpse, which is now in almost perfect alignment to Jesus on the cross. I can't remember if his head is tilted.

* The Persian infantrymen seemed to be clad in the fighting attire of the day. The Immortals were dressed in black and wore metallic face masks that made the look like ogres. However, when the masks were removed they resembled Orcs.

* Speaking of Orcs, the Persians revealed their Uber-Orc midway through the battle. An 8-foot, heavily-scared oaf that could have been mistaken for Bigfoot had he any bodily hair to speak of.

* They did get a few things right. The Persians were indeed ousted from Greece for good at the Battle of Plataea. And, the brutality of the battle seemed to be caught right. They did get the number of Spartans right but forgot the 700 Thespians.

HA, a question for you. You've walked the battle site yourself. Was there a narrow pass such as this where the Spartans and Thespians made their last stand? Wasn't the pass actually quite a bit wider?

Very melodramatic movie.

Cheers.

[Cranky]

disgruntled70shab said:

Just saw it this afternoon. I remember hearing a saying that you can produce a documentary or you can produce a movie. Producing a movie gives the producer an artistic license I guess.

Having as that, this film sort of reminded me of a cross between "Lord of the Rings" and Dungeons and Dragons."

Some of the things that stood out:

* The wolf at the beginning of the movie that Leonidas had encountered had green glowing eyes. Guess that's the way Leonidas must have recalled it. Anyway, it reminded me of a wolf from hell. Good for a fairy tale.

* When the first Persian emissaries rode up to deliver Xerxes' message, they clearly had stirrups. These weren't introduced to the West until the 4th century by the Huns. Yet, later in the film a Greek rider didn't have them.

* Speaking of Xerxes, he reminded me of a bi-sexual, Americanized basketball player with piercings throughout his body; a better sculpted Dennis Rodman I guess.

* The Spartan warriors reminded me of steroid-induced, six-pack laden, Ultimate fighting machines, only Randy Couture was not among them. They were superhuman specimens the world has never been able to reproduce.

* Never seen Spartan or Greek warriors with shorts words like that.

* The final death scene focuses on Leonidas' arrow-ridden corpse, which is now in almost perfect alignment to Jesus on the cross. I can't remember if his head is tilted.

* The Persian infantrymen seemed to be clad in the fighting attire of the day. The Immortals were dressed in black and wore metallic face masks that made the look like ogres. However, when the masks were removed they resembled Orcs.

* Speaking of Orcs, the Persians revealed their Uber-Orc midway through the battle. An 8-foot, heavily-scared oaf that could have been mistaken for Bigfoot had he any bodily hair to speak of.

* They did get a few things right. The Persians were indeed ousted from Greece for good at the Battle of Plataea. And, the brutality of the battle seemed to be caught right. They did get the number of Spartans right but forgot the 700 Thespians.

HA, a question for you. You've walked the battle site yourself. Was there a narrow pass such as this where the Spartans and Thespians made their last stand? Wasn't the pass actually quite a bit wider?

Very melodramatic movie.

Cheers.

\

That's Hollywood for you Dis.

Today, it is much wider then could be defended by a few hundred men. However, even today, if one was to place an army of several thousand, it would be hell of a narrow choking point and highly defensible. Although a break through by far larger numbers would be devastating.

Mind you....

We really don't know how narrow it was in ancient times. With sea buildup and land erosion, it could have been no wider the a football field. At which point the choking effect would increase ten fold. This would also totally negate any cavalry advantages of the Persian army.

As for the Spartans...

Greece was war "honed" between city states fighting on a constant basis. These caused a very rapid advances in warfare techniques. When the Persian army met the Spartans, not only where the Spartans a formidable organized and disciplined army, they were also equiped with the latest body armour that was developed through centuries of hand to hand combat. Basically, the Spartans phalanx were a "heavy armored tanks" mowing down the Persian infantry. The Immortals and Egyptians didn't stand a chance in anything less then a several to one advantage.

Here is what a Spartan warrior looked like....

[Disgruntled70sHab]

habsaddict said:

That's Hollywood for you Dis.

Today, it is much wider then could be defended by a few hundred men. However, even today, if one was to place an army of several thousand, it would be hell of a narrow choking point and highly defensible. Although a break through by far larger numbers would be devastating.

Mind you....

We really don't know how narrow it was in ancient times. With sea buildup and land erosion, it could have been no wider the a football field. At which point the choking effect would increase ten fold. This would also totally negate any cavalry advantages of the Persian army.

As for the Spartans...

Greece was war "honed" between city states fighting on a constant basis. These caused a very rapid advances in warfare techniques. When the Persian army met the Spartans, not only where the Spartans a formidable organized and disciplined army, they were also equiped with the latest body armour that was developed through centuries of hand to hand combat. Basically, the Spartans phalanx were a "heavy armored tanks" mowing down the Persian infantry. The Immortals and Egyptians didn't stand a chance in anything less then a several to one advantage.

Here is what a Spartan warrior looked like....

Thanks HA. I have a book that I purchased in Germany many years ago called, "Warfare in the Classical World." It's been revised over the years, but mine is an older copy (got it around '84) and has a different cover (the picture of a helmeted Greek Hoplite. If anyone has an interest in Classical warfare this is the book you'll want.

The JPEG you used is one of the diagrams in that book.

HA, I tried not expecting too much but I was still disappointed. I took a good friend of the family with me and being 21, he really enjoyed it (and so he should). But, he knew I was a bit disappointed for sure.

It was my interest in the early Roman empire and the Greek civilization and mythology that tweaked my interest in ancient history. It's stayed with me all my life.

The movie really could have been much, much more. Too bad really. But, that's not to say some will enjoy it.

Cheers.

[Habit]

I do not believe the movie is supposed to be 100% accurate. From reports I have read on the Internet and on TV, the movie is based on a Comic Book of some sort. The movie was shot to resemble that book and not like a motion picture. Take for example 'Sin City' or 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow'. Both based on Comic Books and made to look like it. 'Sky Captain' was the first movie totally shot on green screen. It was more about the technology than anything else. Sort of a 'look what we can do now...'.

I think this movie is more about story telling than actual events. Take it for what it is, entertainment.

[franko]

habit said:

I think this movie is more about story telling than actual events. Take it for what it is, entertainment.

Hollywood never lets facts stand in the way of a good story (and the opportunity to make a buck).

[Disgruntled70sHab]

habit said:

I do not believe the movie is supposed to be 100% accurate. From reports I have read on the Internet and on TV, the movie is based on a Comic Book of some sort. The movie was shot to resemble that book and not like a motion picture. Take for example 'Sin City' or 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow'. Both based on Comic Books and made to look like it. 'Sky Captain' was the first movie totally shot on green screen. It was more about the technology than anything else. Sort of a 'look what we can do now...'.

I think this movie is more about story telling than actual events. Take it for what it is, entertainment.

I know what you're saying Habit. That's why I left myself an out with when I referred to a movie or a documentary in an earlier post.

However, I didn't know it was based on a comic book, Habit. I know I went in trying not to expect too much mainly because of the reviews I had read. Doesn't always work. But, come to think of it, the film did resemble a comic book. Every Spartan warrior was ripped and cut to the 9's. And the melodramatics reminded me of a comic book as well.

As far as entertainment value is concerned, at 48 I haven't read a comic book in years. Probably why I had no time for this movie or "Sin City."

Cheers.

[jkr]

disgruntled70shab said:

habit said:

I do not believe the movie is supposed to be 100% accurate. From reports I have read on the Internet and on TV, the movie is based on a Comic Book of some sort. The movie was shot to resemble that book and not like a motion picture. Take for example 'Sin City' or 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow'. Both based on Comic Books and made to look like it. 'Sky Captain' was the first movie totally shot on green screen. It was more about the technology than anything else. Sort of a 'look what we can do now...'.

I think this movie is more about story telling than actual events. Take it for what it is, entertainment.

I know what you're saying Habit. That's why I left myself an out with when I referred to a movie or a documentary in an earlier post.

However, I didn't know it was based on a comic book, Habit. I know I went in trying not to expect too much mainly because of the reviews I had read. Doesn't always work. But, come to think of it, the film did resemble a comic book. Every Spartan warrior was ripped and cut to the 9's. And the melodramatics reminded me of a comic book as well.

As far as entertainment value is concerned, at 48 I haven't read a comic book in years. Probably why I had no time for this movie or "Sin City."

Cheers.

They don't call them comic books any more Dis, they are graphic novels.

I am "few" years older than you. I have tried but I can't get into them.

[franko]

A rose by any other name . . .

[ropoflu]

FYI


Sparta? No. This is madness

An expert assesses the gruesome new epic

Ephraim Lytle
Professor of Hellenistic History
University of Toronto

Toronto Star

March 11, 2007

History is altered all the time. What matters is how and why. Thus I see no reason to quibble over the absence in 300 of breastplates or modest thigh-length tunics. I can see the graphic necessity of sculpted stomachs and three hundred Spartan-sized packages bulging in spandex thongs. On the other hand, the ways in which 300 selectively idealizes Spartan society are problematic, even disturbing.

We know little of King Leonidas, so creating a fictitious backstory for him is understandable. Spartan children were, indeed, taken from their mothers and given a martial education called the agoge. They were indeed toughened by beatings and dispatched into the countryside, forced to walk shoeless in winter and sleep uncovered on the ground. But future kings were exempt.

And had Leonidas undergone the agoge, he would have come of age not by slaying a wolf, but by murdering unarmed helots in a rite known as the Crypteia. These helots were the Greeks indigenous to Lakonia and Messenia, reduced to slavery by the tiny fraction of the population enjoying Spartan "freedom." By living off estates worked by helots, the Spartans could afford to be professional soldiers, although really they had no choice: securing a brutal apartheid state is a full-time job, to which end the Ephors were required to ritually declare war on the helots.

Elected annually, the five Ephors were Sparta's highest officials, their powers checking those of the dual kings. There is no evidence they opposed Leonidas' campaign, despite 300's subplot of Leonidas pursuing an illegal war to serve a higher good. For adolescents ready to graduate from the graphic novel to Ayn Rand, or vice-versa, the historical Leonidas would never suffice. They require a superman. And in the interests of portentous contrasts between good and evil, 300's Ephors are not only lecherous and corrupt, but also geriatric lepers.

Ephialtes, who betrays the Greeks, is likewise changed from a local Malian of sound body into a Spartan outcast, a grotesquely disfigured troll who by Spartan custom should have been left exposed as an infant to die. Leonidas points out that his hunched back means Ephialtes cannot lift his shield high enough to fight in the phalanx. This is a transparent defence of Spartan eugenics, and laughably convenient given that infanticide could as easily have been precipitated by an ill-omened birthmark.

300's Persians are ahistorical monsters and freaks. Xerxes is eight feet tall, clad chiefly in body piercings and garishly made up, but not disfigured. No need – it is strongly implied Xerxes is homosexual which, in the moral universe of 300, qualifies him for special freakhood. This is ironic given that pederasty was an obligatory part of a Spartan's education. This was a frequent target of Athenian comedy, wherein the verb "to Spartanize" meant "to bugger." In 300, Greek pederasty is, naturally, Athenian.

This touches on 300's most noteworthy abuse of history: the Persians are turned into monsters, but the non-Spartan Greeks are simply all too human. According to Herodotus, Leonidas led an army of perhaps 7,000 Greeks. These Greeks took turns rotating to the front of the phalanx stationed at Thermoplyae where, fighting in disciplined hoplite fashion, they held the narrow pass for two days. All told, some 4,000 Greeks perished there. In 300 the fighting is not in the hoplite fashion, and the Spartans do all of it, except for a brief interlude in which Leonidas allows a handful of untrained Greeks to taste the action, and they make a hash of it. When it becomes apparent they are surrounded, this contingent flees. In Herodotus' time there were various accounts of what transpired, but we know 700 hoplites from Thespiae remained, fighting beside the Spartans, they, too, dying to the last man.

No mention is made in 300 of the fact that at the same time a vastly outnumbered fleet led by Athenians was holding off the Persians in the straits adjacent to Thermopylae, or that Athenians would soon save all of Greece by destroying the Persian fleet at Salamis. This would wreck 300's vision, in which Greek ideals are selectively embodied in their only worthy champions, the Spartans.

This moral universe would have appeared as bizarre to ancient Greeks as it does to modern historians. Most Greeks would have traded their homes in Athens for hovels in Sparta about as willingly as I would trade my apartment in Toronto for a condo in Pyongyang.

[insomnius]

What was that about democracy?

[duster]

Sparta's implementation of Lycurgian discipline was inhuman. They reduced the original inhabitants of Laconia to slavery and, according to Thucydides, instituted autocratic rule on all of Greece after the Peloponnesian War. They had no interest in culture or art except for the flute players that preceded them on the battlefield. Yet, here they are portrayed as saviours of freedom and Classical civilization. Ironic.

Herodotus states, in fact, that Thermopylae was a military disaster. The politics of the time and Spartan superstition are actually the real cause of it as opposed to "fighting for freedom". The oracle at Delphi stated that either a king must die or Sparta be sacked. As a result, Leonidas and his personal guard had no choice but to stay, no matter what. The famous epitaph actually is pretty bleak:

"Go tell the Spartans, you who read:
We took their orders, and are dead "

If historical accuracy was attempted, well, they could have fooled me. Never mind the fictional weapons and armour (or lack of) and the "Hollywood" treatment of the Lacedaemonians, I think more mention should have been made of the Thespian contribution. According to Herodotus Book VII, they refused to listen to Leonidas' orders and stood side by side with the Spartans to the last man. They chose this fate willingly and not, unlike Leonidas, because they had to. Furthermore, each city's contingent, except the Phocians who were guarding the mountain passes and the Thebans who were being held hostage, took their turn in line facing the Persians and did equally well. The Greeks also stood behind a wall which helped the defense immeasurably. Only once they were surrounded did the Spartans and Thespians come out from behind it. Even then, Spartan and Greek tactics as a whole dictated close order fighting and not one to one.

No mention is made of the simultaneous and, perhaps, more important naval action taking place nearby at Artimisium described in Book VIII where the Greek fleet (not just Athenian) under Spartan command defeated a fleet twice their size over a period of several days.

I wish the Brits would have made this. The true story is far more exciting than this movie.

[Cranky]

duster said:

Sparta's implementation of Lycurgian discipline was inhuman. They reduced the original inhabitants of Laconia to slavery and, according to Thucydides, instituted autocratic rule on all of Greece after the Peloponnesian War. They had no interest in culture or art except for the flute players that preceded them on the battlefield. Yet, here they are portrayed as saviours of freedom and Classical civilization. Ironic.

Herodotus states, in fact, that Thermopylae was a military disaster. The politics of the time and Spartan superstition are actually the real cause of it as opposed to "fighting for freedom". The oracle at Delphi stated that either a king must die or Sparta be sacked. As a result, Leonidas and his personal guard had no choice but to stay, no matter what. The famous epitaph actually is pretty bleak:

"Go tell the Spartans, you who read:
We took their orders, and are dead "

If historical accuracy was attempted, well, they could have fooled me. Never mind the fictional weapons and armour (or lack of) and the "Hollywood" treatment of the Lacedaemonians, I think more mention should have been made of the Thespian contribution. According to Herodotus Book VII, they refused to listen to Leonidas' orders and stood side by side with the Spartans to the last man. They chose this fate willingly and not, unlike Leonidas, because they had to. Furthermore, each city's contingent, except the Phocians who were guarding the mountain passes and the Thebans who were being held hostage, took their turn in line facing the Persians and did equally well. The Greeks also stood behind a wall which helped the defense immeasurably. Only once they were surrounded did the Spartans and Thespians come out from behind it. Even then, Spartan and Greek tactics as a whole dictated close order fighting and not one to one.

No mention is made of the simultaneous and, perhaps, more important naval action taking place nearby at Artimisium described in Book VIII where the Greek fleet (not just Athenian) under Spartan command defeated a fleet twice their size over a period of several days.

I wish the Brits would have made this. The true story is far more exciting than this movie.

So I take it that you REALLY loved the movie! LOL!

Duster, the movie is based on a comic book. How much accuracy do you want form comic books? BTW, if you want to see the comic books, they are "stored" somewhere and I can give you a link.

You may already know all of this, but here goes.....

As for the Spartans....

The defense of Thermopile's was as much a political decision as it was military. The Spartans were debating whether or not to defend Peloponesso. They had concerns that many Greek City States were getting bought out or frightened by the Persians and there was no way Sparta could raise a big enough army to fight them by themselves. Sparta is NOT a big place. It is smaller then Montreal island. As for the "religious" or "superstitious" delay, it had nothing to do with religion as much as it had to do with Sparta not wanting to commit it's full force with questionable support from many city states.

As for Leonidas....

It was a suicide mission from the start and it had nothing to do with oracles. As I said previously, Sparta was concerned about the support or more importantly, the all out commitment that this war required from ALL Greek City states. By sending their King to what was basically a suicide mission, they would show the rest of Greece that they meant business and they were willing to sacrifice their own king. After Thermopyles, if the other city states did not join, Sparta was going to abandon the rest of Greece and defend Peloponesso.

As for fighting....

Spartans were not ninja warriors on steroids. The entire concept of the Phalanx was co-defense and then using it for systematic mowing down of the enemy. Very often, they killed the first few lines and moved slightly back to expose "fresh ground" so the enemy would have to step over their own dead, thus breaking up their own lines. Once the enemy line was broken, the Spartans would move forward and start mowing. if you held your line, you won, if you broke the line, you were dead. No Spartan would leap out of line EVEN if they broke the other line. Their strength was their discipline and training, not the ninja dancing skills.

As for Spartan rule....

Inhuman? Yes. These were ancient times and nobody sat around Starbucks debating political correcteness. If you lost, your family were slaves and you were dead. If you won, you played on the Hab's first line.

I wish the Brits would have made this. The true story is far more exciting than this movie.

Please don't say that! You will make a grown Spartan cry. I think that I would have died and gone to heaven if they did a TRUE story. The battle itself is fascinating and the pre and post politics/causes are just as interesting.

Meh, did you hear the latest and the greatest? They are making Rocky 14 next week.

[duster]

Not too often I get to debate Classics....

It was a suicide mission from the start and it had nothing to do with oracles...

According to Herodotus, Delphi was very much a factor. At the onset on the war, Delphi issued the following oracle as to its outcome. My Greek is very rusty but here it is in English :

"Hear your fate, O dwellers in Sparta of wide spaces;
Either your famed, great town must be sacked by Perseus sons,
Or, if that not be, the whole land of Lacedaemon
Shall mourn a king from the house of Heracles,
For not the strength of lions and of bulls shall hold him,
Strength against strength; for he has the power of Zeus,
And will not be checked till one of the two is consumed."

According to Megistias - an eyewitness, it was believed that this oracle, although not the sole reason, was instrumental in Leonidas reaching the decision to stay. In fact, I think the Ephors sent him in particular because of this. Politics and desire for fame aside, there was a sense of destiny on his part. Not only was Leonidas from the house of Heracles, son of Zeus, but Mount Oeta is nearby - the place where Heracles died according to legend. To Leonidas, (Son of the Lion) all this was likely more than just a simple coincidence. Contemporary Greeks would have certainly believed this sort of thing. Spartans were known for being especially religious. You'll recall that one of the main reasons for only bringing his personal guard was Sparta's refusal to mobilize until the Carneian festival of Apollo was completed.

[Cranky]

Herodotus...Smerodotus...he's just an old crank writting about Spartans 40 years after the fact.

The Athenians aristocrats were commited to their pockets (bribes) far more then they were commited to Athens and Themistocles was fighting a losing battle. Spartans knew this. In fact, at the Corintian meeting, there were some city states that wer so frightened, they contemplated surrender under favorable terms. The Spartans knew this.

To the Spartans, there was no such thing as surrender. They were all going to die to the last man and woman before they would surrender to anyone. Now here is the Spartan problem. If they commit all their troops, they have left Sparta expose through Yitheo to the south of them. Even a small Persian expedition would be calamitous. After all, they had all those slaves they had to keep under control, the last thing they needed was a revolt aided by Persian money and soldiers. Sparta ALWAYS had problems with slaves....and everybody knew it.

So what to do....what to do.....

Do you trust the Athenians fully commiting to the war? Or do they march and find they have no home to come too? They offered a solution. Meet the Persia army at Korinth. That suited the Spartans well but it drove the Athenians to the deep end. By definition, the Persians would be next door to Athens and if the Greeks lost, Athens was gpoing to have a million uninvited guests. For the Spartans, it was a sound plan. Even if they lost half their man, they could fight a rear guard action and mobilize another 50-70,000 locals while slaughtering Persians all the way to Sparta. Believe me, it is a LOOOONG mountanous treck to get from Korinth to Sparta by foot. The other thing that the Persian army needed was food and water, neither one of them would be easily gotten through the rocks of Peloponesso. Thirdly, once in the interior of Peloponesso, there is NO sea routes or ports near by for the Persian to resupply. They would have their army right in the middle of mountains and the nearest port was a mountain range or two away.

Meanwhile, ALL of the Greek city states are expecting Spartans to lead them and sacrifice themselves. They are expecting 12-15,000 Spartans to defeat a half million or so Persian army...with a little help from their friends. How kind of them.

With all this, you can see why Spartans sacrificed a King. They HAD to buy time and push to see how things would shake out.

And last but not least....

Sparta was equivilant to a superpower city state. They formed, broke, reformed, changed alliances almost on a yearly basis. They were very well versed in power politics and geostrategic thinking (within their world). They were reluctant to go to war and sought other reletivly peaceful means more often then not. Their reluctancy came about because of their size, not their will. They knew that it took a generation to replace a few hundred men so losing them was no small mater. Thus, anything that one reads about religion playing a role is Spartan politics is in reality Spartans using religion for strategic purposes.


So you see Duster, the Spartans indeed had a religious holiday.....of convinience.



BTW, I live a few hundred meters away from ancient Sparta. When we dug a well, we brought some artifacts up. When I dug up the land to plant some trees, I found some artifacts. Hell, you can't dig a latrene before you hit SOMETHING ancient.

[Toronthab]

habdomen said:

habsaddict said:

I hate the movie before I even see it. This was the turning point of Weatern civilization. Had the Spartans lost, there would be no Greece and there would be NO Greece and there would be NO FREE THINKING and there would be NO DEMOCRACY.

Our society is so caught up with the mundane and so self centered that they don't realize what others did in order to bring us to this point in our civilization. Then again, look at what we done with what was given to us......

As for the movie....it is a shame that it is not given the reverence of what it is. The few dying bravely to give freedom to the many.

Umm, I thought the Spartans lost. (maybe one can call it a moral victory for the Greeks.)

Your analysis is somewhat ironic in that Sparta was very anti-democratic.

The Greek pilars of democracy were ionic, not ironic. ;D

[Disgruntled70sHab]

habit said:

I do not believe the movie is supposed to be 100% accurate. From reports I have read on the Internet and on TV, the movie is based on a Comic Book of some sort. The movie was shot to resemble that book and not like a motion picture. Take for example 'Sin City' or 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow'. Both based on Comic Books and made to look like it. 'Sky Captain' was the first movie totally shot on green screen. It was more about the technology than anything else. Sort of a 'look what we can do now...'.

I think this movie is more about story telling than actual events. Take it for what it is, entertainment.

Here you go, Habit. As I was saying, I never knew it was based on a comic book. But, here's an opinion I found interesting. The Iranians are furious over this one; comic book or no.

Iranians outraged over '300,' calling it an insult to ancient Persia
March 13, 2007 - 17:08

By: NASSER KARIMI

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - The hit American movie "300" has angered Iranians who say the Greeks-vs-Persians action flick insults their ancient culture and provokes animosity against Iran.

"Hollywood declares war on Iranians," blared a headline in Tuesday's edition of the independent Ayende-No newspaper.

The movie, which raked in US$70 million in its opening weekend, is based on a comic-book fantasy version of the battle of Thermopylae in 480 B.C., in which a force of 300 Spartans held off a massive Persian army at a mountain pass in Greece for three days.

Even some American reviewers noted the political overtones of the West-against-Iran story line - and the way Persians are depicted as decadent, sexually flamboyant and evil in contrast to the noble Greeks.

In Iran, the movie hasn't opened and probably never will, given the government's restrictions on Western films, though one paper said bootleg DVDs were already available.

Still, it touched a sensitive nerve. Javad Shamghadri, cultural adviser to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said the United States tries to "humiliate" Iran in order to reverse historical reality and "compensate for its wrongdoings in order to provoke American soldiers and warmongers" against Iran.

The movie comes at a time of increased tensions between the United States and Iran over the Persian nation's nuclear program and the Iraq war.

But, aside from politics, the film was seen as an attack on Persian history, a source of pride for Iranians across the political spectrum, including critics of the current Islamic regime.

State-run television has run several commentaries the past two days calling the film insulting and has brought on Iranian film directors to point out its historical inaccuracies.

"The film depicts Iranians as demons, without culture, feeling or humanity, who think of nothing except attacking other nations and killing people," Ayende-No said in its article Tuesday.

"It is a new effort to slander the Iranian people and civilization before world public opinion at a time of increasing American threats against Iran," it said.

Iran's biggest circulation newspaper, Hamshahri, said "300" is "serving the policy of the U.S. leadership" and predicted it will "prompt a wave of protest in the world. . . . Iranians living in the U.S. and Europe will not be indifferent about this obvious insult."

www.570news.com/news/entertainment/article.jsp?content=e031335A

Cheers.