Like when the Spartan council doesn't want to go to war against the Persions, but Leonidas sends 300 of his best troops anyway. Then, they dont support him or want to send reinforcements. Sounds familiar?
2007-03-12 18:04:59 · 11 answers · asked by Red John 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
This is what is meant by 'art imitating life'. No doubt the filmmakers would like you to associate their Spartans v Persians plot with something that is somehow pertinent to the real world.
Alas, 300 is fiction. Highly racialized, totally historically inaccurate fiction. But I'm sure that the feelings of nationalist fervor that it may excite in some could help them sell a few more tickets.
Personally, I find the presentation of the entire film to be utterly racist. Scottish guy playing the Spartan hero? Persians as effeminate, screaming, pierced savages? Makes me think that Mel Gibson was involved somehow. Anyone else?
2007-03-12 18:12:35 · answer #1 · answered by coreyander 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Spartans didn't want to go to war? Learn history. As said that was inserted in as a rewrite.
The reason there were so few men (300 from Sparta 1200 other Greeks) was because the Olympics were going on and they couldn't get the other men in time.
2007-03-12 18:28:45 · answer #2 · answered by kittenbrower 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The spartan council didn't want to got to war was a Hollywood liberal idea, the Spartans were a warrior society, if you look at the actual facts that historians have put together, its nothing like the movie, remember, its just a movie, and if you want to compare a movie to real life, well the king, took his bravest with him because he couldn't get the council or politicians to do anything at all except for worry about agendas that they have, that would be the only familiar link to the movie.
2007-03-12 18:16:16 · answer #3 · answered by sofmatty 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
actually that was put in by the writers, it was not part of the original historical text, or Frank miller's original graphic novel.
I did catch that though, but most of the comments i read on that topic placed bush as Leonidas, fool hearty, reckless and doomed to failure. But I got a different take on the mater.
Leonidas did what was necessary even if it was unpopular and the end result was ultimate victory through the 300's ultimate sacrifice.
Personally I think that is more true of the actual historical and depicted events and applies well to today's events.
2007-03-12 18:13:04 · answer #4 · answered by Stone K 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Liberals are always the first to rewrite history. You would think they were embarrassed by it.
Congress approved by a wide margin the invasion of Iraq, and the UN didn't want an invasion but threatened Saddam to disarm "or face consequences" worse than sanctions already in place.
(You did know that, right?)
2007-03-12 18:14:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The battle at Thermopylae actually happened, so I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that if you can find similarities between what happened in 480BC and 2003AD it would be proof that history does in fact repeat itself.
2007-03-12 21:32:16 · answer #6 · answered by J H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you could say that sparta is the US and the Persia is suppose to be Iraq or Iran, but it is simply a movie based off a graphic novel that was written in 1998 i think, when we had a good president named Mr. Clinton and we were not is a crap load of a mess in Iraq.
2007-03-16 10:22:24 · answer #7 · answered by josh m 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, yeah Johnny and the Persians were the Ancestors of the Iranians and Iraqis.
2007-03-12 18:28:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Read some history please.This movie is the american version of Spartans.
2007-03-13 06:13:33 · answer #9 · answered by Μακεδών 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The similarities when happen if film producers change the Persians army with US on movie.
Holly wood cheats your mind with false stories.
2007-03-12 18:31:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋