300 Revisited project

[Timotheus]

You forget though. The storyteller as part of his story tells of how the Ephors allowed themselves to be bribed by the Persian agent. Once they accepted gold to create a pro-Persian divination they would have lost all respect and credibility in the eyes of the Spartan soldiers.

But this too is a fiction of Miller. Their reluctance was due, if not to religeous scruples, to a wish to fight at Corinth and not so far from their own lands.

Honor was foremost in the eyes of Spartan soldiers,

No honor, but fear. They had a prominant temple to her for this reason (another being to eros, for the love that binds brothers). Fear of failing to live up to the standards set forth by the rhetra and embodied by their fellows. This is why the Karneia is so important. These great civic/religious pageants were an element in the glue that held spartan society together.

especially the story-teller who I am assuming is supposed to be the historical soldier who wasnt at the final battle and thus derided (wore the patched cloak and all) by his fellow Spartans for being a coward.

As I recall there were two. One who hung himself and the other who went a bit berzerk at the opening of Plataea.

You are correct. I assumed that the storyteller was supposed to be the second one who went beserk.

I always kind of figured that the Spartans so worshipped fear because it was really fear that kept the helots in line. One moment of weakness and the helots would lose their fear and rise up to swamp the Spartans.

[PMBardunias]

I always kind of figured that the Spartans so worshipped fear because it was really fear that kept the helots in line. One moment of weakness and the helots would lose their fear and rise up to swamp the Spartans.

That's true and probably part of it. But consider that it is also fear of the helots that keeps spartans together. In a sense fear is the basis of their whole society. Perhaps that's why they had so little left for trivial maters like death :wink:

Someplace I have a paper on "fear and the spartan character". If you'd like a copy I can email it, just send me a message to reply to.

[Timotheus]

I always kind of figured that the Spartans so worshipped fear because it was really fear that kept the helots in line. One moment of weakness and the helots would lose their fear and rise up to swamp the Spartans.

That's true and probably part of it. But consider that it is also fear of the helots that keeps spartans together. In a sense fear is the basis of their whole society. Perhaps that's why they had so little left for trivial maters like death :wink:

Someplace I have a paper on "fear and the spartan character". If you'd like a copy I can email it, just send me a message to reply to.

Email sent. Thanks for the offer.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

One thing I can't understand,Timotheus,is why you try to present that movie as something natural and something it does not deserve the criticism it gets,especially from people like raters,who love history so much, Nor the comic book nor the movie were made to represent the reality(obviously). Everything OK with that. One would say it is "legally" correct. What about the moral part though? Matt was right,this movie and its success will "inspire" at least one generation,and if some of them will want to learn the truth,well to me it's not enough compared with the 99,9% of the rest who will just stay to the image of the monstrous Persians, the black institution of Sparta and the 300 rebel heroes of Thermopylae. I already see it with my eyes happening in Greece itself. And don't forget. The story maybe fictional in the movie. But the names, places and time is not fictional at all. Did you like the action scenes? Fine, without them it would be boring. Just there is something more beyond the inaccuracy of one more movie. Something that makes the job of us re-enactors, historians and teachers much more difficult.
Khaire
Giannis

PS. One thing I can't believe is the people get excited with such kind fictional gear,when the real things were so much more elegant,beautiful and impressive! And this is the case with all period films.

[Timotheus]

One thing I can't understand,Timotheus,is why you try to present that movie as something natural and something it does not deserve the criticism it gets,especially from people like raters,who love history so much, Nor the comic book nor the movie were made to represent the reality(obviously). Everything OK with that. One would say it is "legally" correct. What about the moral part though? Matt was right,this movie and its success will "inspire" at least one generation,and if some of them will want to learn the truth,well to me it's not enough compared with the 99,9% of the rest who will just stay to the image of the monstrous Persians, the black institution of Sparta and the 300 rebel heroes of Thermopylae. I already see it with my eyes happening in Greece itself. And don't forget. The story maybe fictional in the movie. But the names, places and time is not fictional at all. Did you like the action scenes? Fine, without them it would be boring. Just there is something more beyond the inaccuracy of one more movie. Something that makes the job of us re-enactors, historians and teachers much more difficult.
Khaire
Giannis

PS. One thing I can't believe is the people get excited with such kind fictional gear,when the real things were so much more elegant,beautiful and impressive! And this is the case with all period films.

I am not sure I really feel like having this discussion but I will make one point. Why are you attacking the film while letting off the hook millions of mentally lazy movie-goers who dont seem to realize that the movie is nothing more than a campfire story?

[Ironhand]

What 300 the movie represents is a fairly accurate depiction of the graphic novel by Frank Miller with a few additions such as the executioner which was never depicted in the novel. Frank Miller's graphic novel is loosely based on history, but only extremely very loosely so. My view on it is that the movie is true to the graphic novel and that personally I would rather see a totally unrealistic, unbelievable version of Thermopylae that only fools would believe is accurate than a "Gladiator" type movie that pretty much anybody will believe the more believeable and realistic if uneducated inaccuracies in that type of movie. If you believe that the Persians were a bunch of Toxic Avenger extras who filed their teeth, employed rhinoceros in battle formation, giant freaks, ninja sword wielding Immortals, Xerses was a giant sadist piercing nut, and so on and the Spartans dressed in speedos and cloaks and were ruled by lecherous old mutants themselves, well I probably would be wasting my time talking much to you anyhow since I would need to teach you logic and common sense that should have been started to be instilled from birth up til' now on top of a simple history lesson.

[Historylover]

I liked the movie in the action sense, it was a great action movie. However, the more over reason I support this movie is the fact that it has encouraged (as said before) people to take a look at history and see what really happened, its doing for Ancient Times what Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers did for WWII.

And even as said above it wasnt even completely based off the book (executioner, the political stuff at home with the Senate, the wife giving her body as a bribe etc).

But still, this movie is definitely a gateway into getting to the real facts, quite a few people in my highschool when it came out saw it and then found me and asked me what I thought of it and was it true and from this I was able to separate the fact from fiction and they seemed genuinely interested.

IMO anything that opens the door to knowledge and truth is an excellent tool and because it has done that its a great thing. Thanks to this movie I think history is seeing a revival amongst the younger generation that definitely wasnt there before. All the best, Jon

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Because the children (and not only) who watch the film simply presume that the Spartan who tells the story,and is the king's fellow and was present to all the facts described and talking to people who also were present to the facts,knows well what he's talking about. And because it's common practise in films to have someone tell a story,very often supposedly a fantasy story, that ironically is full of facts and the speaker was present. And the audience is meant to believe the story,especially when the story is about one of the most famous battles ever in history.
However this thread is not the place to speak about this movie,you're right.
Khaire
Giannis

[Ironhand]

True, thats one of the funny things about the movie. The narrator isn't present for more than half of what happens in the movie. He wasn't there when Leonidas met with the Ephors, I don't remember seeing him in the window when Leonidas was shagging his wife, wasn't with Leonidas meeting with Xerses, wasn't on the hilltop with the hunchback, definately wasn't back in Sparta to know about the politics, and didn't see the final fate of the Spartans. I could write it off as bardic exagerating and filling the details in with knowledge gained later, but I don't know any storyteller who would embellish it in this manner, well except Frank Miller. If going the more fanciful route, it probably would have had a lot of involvement by the Gods, etc. but the story would have been a lot more realistic in its telling. It probably would have either been told so matter of fact as to be bland to modern ears (the Spartans were warriors and didn't need to have a lot of things explained to them like modern people like honor and fighting spirit etc.) or told with a more supernatural bend like the Iliad. Personally that is what I would have liked to have seen if going that route. However, I'm not like 98% of the movie watching population either.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Just a note,my previous post was a reply to Timotheus' previous message. Sorry for the confusion,I should have quoted it.
I didn't have in mind,nor ever wished to speak about the odds of this movie(at least not in a history forum). I'm just saying I'm of the opinion that the movie has done more bad than good. Everyone had heard about Thermopylae. What more did they learn about the battle with this movie? Not only they didn't gain anything but they probably also forgot the somewhat more accurate things that they had once heard at school. And unfortunately,Jon, I'd not be so optimistic about students wanting to learn more about the truth. The comments i have heard concern mostly the actors' muscles,and discussions about if they were real and if the actual Spartans could be so muscled! And the conclusion most of the times was that "since they were warriors for their whole life,they must all have looked like that. hock: :!:
What the public does gain is some ideas in their subconscious with suspicion with Sparta's government, of course the Persians are the bad in whatever situation and by the way there are cultures even today in Africa which they do file their teeth :lol:
Khairete
Giannis

[PMBardunias]

And don't forget. The story maybe fictional in the movie. But the names, places and time is not fictional at all.

Giannis makes an important point here that is too often glossed over. Were they to make a movie about the Alamo with the defenders in racoon-skin loin cloths and airbrushed abdominals, or perhaps Lord Nelson at Trafalgar as a one-eyed Heracles whose exhortations were shouted at the top of his lungs from his uber-manly jaw-jutting mouth, there would be more outrage.

The problem stems from the fact that Thermopylae, and much of Greek history in general, has been coopted as part of the mythic foundation of western civilization. This has great positives, we would know about as much of Greek history, culture, and art as we do Hittite without it, but it also lends itself to the "true" history stories being treated like Homeric tales.

Perhaps no culture in history has required more "unlearning" of the common perception that that of Sparta in order to achieve something close to a realistic understanding. This just adds to that problem, thoug as stated, on the plus it means that some will be inspired to find out the truth.

[Narukami]

You make good points PMB but of course this "re-working" of history is not restricted to remote times or places.

World War Two, just barely 60 years past, is prime ground for Hollywood myth making. Look at the film "Battle of the Bulge" which perpetuates several "myths" and fabrications in the name of drama (or plot).

We have been down this road several times and I believe there is another thread (in Reviews?) dedicated to this very question with regards to "300" however the fact that it keeps coming up only serves to reinforce just how near and dear this topic of History & Hollywood is to all of us.

No doubt this next year will bring us yet another bumper crop of films to "digest."

:wink:

Narukami