Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
300 the movie?
#16
Kinginatus, any chance of reducing the size of your avatar so I can read the posts better, please? :wink: Ta.
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#17
Quote:Kinginatus, any chance of reducing the size of your avatar so I can read the posts better, please? :wink: Ta.

I'm sorry Tarbicus, I had not seen how it looks...hope it's better now.
Honor to those who in their lives
have defined and guard their Thermopylae.
............
And more honor is due to them
when they foresee (and many do foresee)
that Ephialtes will finally appear,
and that the Medes in the end will go through.
Reply
#18
I was hoping beyond hope that Hollywood would film "Gates of Fire" instead of "300." Does this mean that "Gates of Fire" is officially dead?

I will, of course, see this film when it comes out but it would be so much better to see a more historically accurate production. All I can do is cross my fingers that "300" isn't as bad as "Troy."

Thanks for listening.

Quinton[/quote]
________________
Quinton Carr
Reply
#19
No no no no. !!!! Hollywood cant be allowed to do this anymore!! Revolt, Revolt !! The time for rebellion is now, rise up my brothers and sisters!

But in all seriousness, this is going to end up a horrible movie and historically a joke. In school when we were learning about ancient greece all the kids would talk about is the movie TROY. It is unbelievable how people think these movies are what the battles were really like and that is how it is historically. I could rant on about this but i'll stop.
~~Gavin Nugent~~

Who told you to die! Keep fighting!

If anyone knows of anything in Long Island, New York please tell me.
Reply
#20
First off, I LOVED reading 300. I knew it wasn't going to be totally researched or faithful to the history, but I took it for what it was and just really enjoyed it as a seperate-but-related story and characters...And his visuals and composition is just awesome.

That's what I'm going to do for the movie when it comes out. Go into it with a grain of salt accuracy wise, hope it's true to the comic itself and enjoy that aspect of it. I'm eager to see it.

Secondly...
I'm having a change of heart on my soapbox stance on Hollywood. Before I was always outraged and frustrated with Hollywood being closed-profit-minded little monkeys with snobby better-than-you additudes....Some movies like Troy I know I won't ever see, so Hollywood doesn't get my money. I guess I've just come to the harsh realization that Hollywood won't ever change, so it's better to just get into the mindset that the accuracy will be trash as you get your seat in the theatre, and take the movie for what it is - a movie...To Entertain.

It's all a catch-22 double edged sword. We, the reenactors, historians, Geeks and academics are going to have to "clean up the mess" after a movie, like "300" per se, and re-educate people on how it Really Was. I think the same is true for "Gladiator" - I know myself and several Roman buddies got into Roman Reenacting because of that movie...Sure, we were heartbroken/frustrated when we discovered how horribly off the accuracy was, BUT, we found the Real stuff far more interesting anyway, and I have to say I have a certain, demented sense of pride destroying other people's preconcieved notions by re-educatiing them about REAL history compared to Hollywood. Sure, it gets repetitive, but it's Par for the Course.

So let Hollywood make thier silly little movies. Something abismal and outright slap-in-the-face to History like "King Arthur" will make me twitch and want to go rampage Hollywood, but then they won't ever get my money to see that trashfest. (it's really the audacity to say "See the Untold True Story..." and here comes Arthur in Lor. Segmentata and an Attic helmet...In 500 someodd AD. That is such a blatant screwoff of historical evidence, but then so was Guenivere in nothing but Woad (but dead sexy I admit)

Let Hollywood continue to make trash, and watch as thier ticket sales and attendance crumble to nothing. Maybe then they will realize it's time to take another approach and make good, accurate movies. Until that time, I'll wait to rent and continue enjoying real research with real buddies and fellow history Geeks, and to spread the true word of accurate research to the Public. (and, if we get enough public to demand accuracy, hopefully Hollywood will listen)
Andy Volpe
"Build a time machine, it would make this [hobby] a lot easier."
https://www.facebook.com/LegionIIICyr/
Legion III Cyrenaica ~ New England U.S.
Higgins Armory Museum 1931-2013 (worked there 2001-2013)
(Collection moved to Worcester Art Museum)
Reply
#21
Quote:So let Hollywood make thier silly little movies. Something abismal and outright slap-in-the-face to History like "King Arthur" will make me twitch and want to go rampage Hollywood, but then they won't ever get my money to see that trashfest. (it's really the audacity to say "See the Untold True Story..." and here comes Arthur in Lor. Segmentata and an Attic helmet...In 500 someodd AD. That is such a blatant screwoff of historical evidence, but then so was Guenivere in nothing but Woad (but dead sexy I admit)

Actually, was there any Lorica Segmentata in KA? Don't think so. Clive
Owen wore a musculata over mail. And most of his knights wore scale.
Attic helmet - yes. But then Russel Crowe wore one in Gladiator, too.
As does every officer ever seen in a Hollywood movie about Rome, and
it's just as inaccurate in the 1st c. as in 500AD. Face it, that's just what
the public have always expected to see Romans wear in movies, and
Hollywood is only too glad to oblige that expectation. :wink:

Actually, for a Pict, Gwen looked about right. Pict is short for 'Picti', which
is what the 5th c. Romans called them. It's 'cos they were 'painted people'
who wore Woad. There's actually evidence from modern re-enactors that
Woad has astringent properties. So it helps to reduce bloodloss from cuts
if you cannot afford armour. Which is probably why they wore it. 8)

Ambrosius
"Feel the fire in your bones."
Reply
#22
Quote:Actually, was there any Lorica Segmentata in KA? Don't think so. Clive Owen wore a musculata over mail.

[url:anx2ayze]http://images.movie-gazette.com/displayimage.php?album=14&pos=47[/url]
Yes and no, it was (true to form) yet another horrible 'fantasy hybrid', musculata above, segmentata below.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#23
I didn't have a problem with the historical accuracy of "Gladiator" - it was so well done and such a great story that it represented the Ancient world admirably and was entertaining at the same time. The key to the movie was that it was an ORIGINAL story, with no distinct historical parallel.

Troy and Thermopylae (using "Gates of Fire"), on the other hand, are well documented tales that already contain loads of material to create thoroughly entertaining movies. With Troy, Hollywood chose to follow their own ridiculous agenda and the result was an insult to the "real" story of the Trojan War. Now they've chosen "300" for Thermopylae, and I don't think its comic book surreality does justice to the heroic deeds of Leonidas and his men.
________________
Quinton Carr
Reply
#24
The asesthetic of the original comic was nice and the historical "deviations" could be tolerated, at least in the comic.
What I find strange is that with all the wealth of information why "accurate" depiction of ancient times especially when in case of a historical event is not considerd spectacular or " moneybringer".

Also as an example the armour would not be iron or bronze but can't they make the visual effect to look "correct" in the specific time frame or period?
The clothes would not be natural fabric but the colouras and fashion at least could "look historicaly accurate"?

Also the style of fighting could be modeled to show how it was done at that time. I belive there is just a mentality of "lazyness" in film making.

Kind regards
Reply
#25
Quote:[Yes and no, it was (true to form) yet another horrible 'fantasy hybrid', musculata above, segmentata below.

Hey... a Musmentata! :lol:

Ambrosius
"Feel the fire in your bones."
Reply
#26
Greetings,
my own theory on Arthur and the Attic helm was that it belonged to an ancestor, Lucius Artorius Castus was in Britain sometime between 175 - 185ce...!
Maximus, of course borrowed it from Lucius Artorius Castus, who was in the general area at the time of the battle.......! :roll: Big Grin
regards
Arthes
Cristina
The Hoplite Association
[url:n2diviuq]http://www.hoplites.org[/url]
The enemy is less likely to get wind of an advance of cavalry, if the orders for march were passed from mouth to mouth rather than announced by voice of herald, or public notice. Xenophon
-
Reply
#27
In fact,
it had simply been modernised a little.....ready to fight those Germanics again.....
see - [url:7b7ar16l]http://www.krescendo.com/gladiatorlatin/script/english/gladiator.html[/url](scroll down to second picture)
and [url:7b7ar16l]http://home.accglobal.net/~707727/images/king_arthur/king-arthur-movie-lg-05.jpg[/url]
regards
Arthes
Cristina
The Hoplite Association
[url:n2diviuq]http://www.hoplites.org[/url]
The enemy is less likely to get wind of an advance of cavalry, if the orders for march were passed from mouth to mouth rather than announced by voice of herald, or public notice. Xenophon
-
Reply
#28
Quote:In fact, it had simply been modernised a little.....ready to fight those Germanics again.....see - [url:3se1egur]http://www.krescendo.com/gladiatorlatin/script/english/gladiator.html[/url](scroll down to second picture)and [url:3se1egur]http://home.accglobal.net/~707727/images/king_arthur/king-arthur-movie-lg-05.jpg[/url]

Well done, Arthes 8) Yes, those are the pictures I meant. Actually, we
can see both Maximus & Arthur wearing identical kit, here: Attic helmets
and musculata - complete with segmentata style pauldrons over the
shoulder. Which I think look as though they work (even though there's
no evidence for them, of course) :lol: But I wouldn't fancy having to
wear a musculata while fighting on horseback. Too rigid. Sad I much prefer
the scale being worn by Arthur's men. :wink:

Ambrosius
"Feel the fire in your bones."
Reply
#29
Quote:I didn't have a problem with the historical accuracy of "Gladiator" - it was so well done and such a great story that it represented the Ancient world admirably and was entertaining at the same time. The key to the movie was that it was an ORIGINAL story, with no distinct historical parallel.

Troy and Thermopylae (using "Gates of Fire"), on the other hand, are well documented tales that already contain loads of material to create thoroughly entertaining movies. With Troy, Hollywood chose to follow their own ridiculous agenda and the result was an insult to the "real" story of the Trojan War. Now they've chosen "300" for Thermopylae, and I don't think its comic book surreality does justice to the heroic deeds of Leonidas and his men.

I agree with all of your second paragraph, Quinton, but I have to challenge the notion that the plot of "Gladiator" was original. To an enormous degree, it was a rip-off of "The fall of the Roman Empire" starring Sophia Loren, Jeff Chandler and (I think - it's a long time ago) Laurence Harvey as the Commodus character. Alec Guinness played Commodus' father, Anthony Quayle his real father and James Mason a Greek philosopher. "Gladiator" wasn't bad entertainment, but it was spoilt for me by the fact that they had done a remake and refused to admit it.
Reply
#30
Quote: I agree with all of your second paragraph, Quinton, but I have to challenge the notion that the plot of "Gladiator" was original. To an enormous degree, it was a rip-off of "The fall of the Roman Empire" starring Sophia Loren, Jeff Chandler and (I think - it's a long time ago) Laurence Harvey as the Commodus character. Alec Guinness played Commodus' father, Anthony Quayle his real father and James Mason a Greek philosopher. "Gladiator" wasn't bad entertainment, but it was spoilt for me by the fact that they had done a remake and refused to admit it.

I do seem to dimly remember that movie... I'll have to see if I can find it. What I'm getting at is that "Gladiator" didn't attempt to pass itself off as a retelling of a mythological or historical event and was so well done that it sparked interest in the ancient world for the general public.

What did you think of "Alexander?" I thought the costumes were good, the battles pretty well done and the acting not bad, but its omissions and the overall presentation were bad - contributing to its flop at the box office. Another project that fell short of its immense potential.
________________
Quinton Carr
Reply


Forum Jump: