do u think the director of this film is knowlegable about the history of PERSIA?!!?

Answer 1

I assume you're referring to the movie "300"....yes, it's horribly historically inaccurate which turned me off from really wanting to see it. I don't mind a good historical "story" but at least keep the known facts straight. It annoys me. I'm a nerd, I know.

Answer 2

I imagine you're referring to the film "The 300."
Well, some "dramatic liberties" definitely were taken in the making of the film, but the writer/director kept fairly close to the GREEK version of what happened
(and the Greek version is the one that the "Western
world adheres to.)
However, there was little, if any, attempt to show the Persian perspective, which, actually, would have required another film to be made, rather like Clint Eastwood recently did with "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima."

By the way, the New York Times didn't think much of the film:

“300” is about as violent as “Apocalypto” and twice as stupid."

Answer 3

its a movie...

did you make a stink about the movie "Valley of the wolves"? the cartoon about American soldiers killing Innocent Arab children and selling their organs to Jewish doctors? Did you point out how it was false and make wrongful accusation's about Americans and jews?

my guess is no.

It's fiction. loosely based on a comic book. loosely based on historical fact.

if you want to take this context you can say however it is a metaphor, the Persians were invading Greece, they were attempting to destroy the city states, they were trying to obliterate the people and governments of the region. So by the standards of the people defending their home the Persians could be seen as monsters in the figurative sense.

Or are you upset at the fact that Persia lost that war and 150 years later were defeated nearly completely by the same people they had attempted to destroy?

Don't accuse Hollywood of understanding history, but you should also know the difference in fiction and reality.

Answer 4

Assuming you are referring to '300' the answer is yes. I saw an interview with the director and he acknowledged that the film is not historically accurate and that he was going for a cinematic adventure rather than a historical documentary.

Answer 5

it is really fuuny!when they want to show unreal historical fact.it is clear that this film isnot a real film.they use art and cinema for politic purpose!if you read the life of "Cyrus the great " u find another fact about persian king and soldiers and people ... that is against this movie.i think just foolish person accept this lies.at last , you should know that "the first democratic text in tne world , is by Cyrus the great (persian king),550 bc.

Answer 6

Don't get too excited about it.

For a start - it is based on a comic book story, not on history.

For a second, Hollywood does not have a very good track record in representing historical fact.

For a third, its only a film and its meant be entertainment - not a documentary.

Answer 7

Which film would that be?

Answer 8

no