The 300

[JazMerkin]

I thought this film was more homoerotic than Brokeback Mountain. Plus it's historical accuracy was hideous. The Spartans were one of the most disgusting societies in history.

Although I guess 300 paedophiles standing up to the progressive empire built upon foundations of truth & justice wouldn't have made the best film adaptation

Actually, Athenians sexuality toward kids was much worst than in Sparta where virility was to be reckon; The spartans were in fact a bit monstrous with their kids but not that much sexually but for things like the "cripsy rite" (not sure how to write it in english) where children were more or less left alone having to steal to survive and being hardly punished if they were caught doing so. Also, in te movie they don't put out the fact that Sparta didn't had one but 2 kings as one was to go to war and the other one to stay in case the other king might die at war.
The only good thing actually about the historic facts is that effectively, spartans loved and spent their life for fighting for the glory of the city and were quite emotionless as if they would perish or not (dying for the glory of the city was one of the best thing that could potentially happen to a spartan citizen) so I enjoyed despite the mediocre historic approach how they depicted their state of mind through battle and its approach but that is all.

I found it all ridiculous. Oh & they did practice paedophilia quite widely, it was in fact part of the 'training' you see a bit of in the film. A young boy would have a 'mentor' who would teach him to fight & also some things that might have made Gary Glitter a fan of Sparta. Sick place.

[Nameless]

I thought this film was more homoerotic than Brokeback Mountain. Plus it's historical accuracy was hideous. The Spartans were one of the most disgusting societies in history.

Although I guess 300 paedophiles standing up to the progressive empire built upon foundations of truth & justice wouldn't have made the best film adaptation

Actually, Athenians sexuality toward kids was much worst than in Sparta where virility was to be reckon; The spartans were in fact a bit monstrous with their kids but not that much sexually but for things like the "cripsy rite" (not sure how to write it in english) where children were more or less left alone having to steal to survive and being hardly punished if they were caught doing so. Also, in te movie they don't put out the fact that Sparta didn't had one but 2 kings as one was to go to war and the other one to stay in case the other king might die at war.
The only good thing actually about the historic facts is that effectively, spartans loved and spent their life for fighting for the glory of the city and were quite emotionless as if they would perish or not (dying for the glory of the city was one of the best thing that could potentially happen to a spartan citizen) so I enjoyed despite the mediocre historic approach how they depicted their state of mind through battle and its approach but that is all.

I found it all ridiculous. Oh & they did practice paedophilia quite widely, it was in fact part of the 'training' you see a bit of in the film. A young boy would have a 'mentor' who would teach him to fight & also some things that might have made Gary Glitter a fan of Sparta. Sick place.

Theorically, not really, such practices were not seen as well (or accepted) as in the Athenian society, in the movie Leonidas even throw a dart to the athenians making some remarks about how they were queery or something. Sure, it must have happened at some point like in any other society but historical facts are a bit far off away from the image we have of it today, especially as we have more the athenian society image society in mind. On the other side, they were beating their kids like bad to teach them how to fight, which isn't a lot better; Sure, they produced perhaps collectively the best warriors earth ever saw but this was a very very sick and violent
society nowaday.
If you want to read what is perhaps the best book ever written on Sparta, look for a guy called Jean Levy and his book "Spartes", it is a real classics historically talking.

[Drago]

well i enjoyed the film until i read all this gay shit they did

[Cleon]

It was a good watch
The queen was hot

[HattonTheHammer]

watched the houston 500 the other day.....






very messy ending

[Wayne]

Wow. Why are ppl looking for this movie to be historically accurate? It's based on a comic book, not the actual events. Guess what, a man coming from a far off galaxy who can fly around and burn you up by staring at you is physiologically inaccurate, but we love Superman anyway. Spiders don't give you superpowers either and nobody grew up with bone claws popping out of their hands. All things inaccurate and 300 is no different. Hell, they didn't even put 'based on a true story' anywhere in the advertisements.

What you really gloss over, for those who saw it, was this was a story told by a soldier who survived to other soldiers to pump them all up. He exaggerated (and also had no idea what an elephant or rhino was) to make the enemy seem insurmountable, but yet the 300 thrived in battle against them.

The director made a more than faithful interpretation of the Frank Miller story. I get it if you have a problem, but your problem is with the wrong person.

[OumaFan]

I don't have a problem with the historical accuracy, just that it was such shit.

[Nameless]

Wow. Why are ppl looking for this movie to be historically accurate? It's based on a comic book, not the actual events. Guess what, a man coming from a far off galaxy who can fly around and burn you up by staring at you is physiologically inaccurate, but we love Superman anyway. Spiders don't give you superpowers either and nobody grew up with bone claws popping out of their hands. All things inaccurate and 300 is no different. Hell, they didn't even put 'based on a true story' anywhere in the advertisements.

What you really gloss over, for those who saw it, was this was a story told by a soldier who survived to other soldiers to pump them all up. He exaggerated (and also had no idea what an elephant or rhino was) to make the enemy seem insurmountable, but yet the 300 thrived in battle against them.

The director made a more than faithful interpretation of the Frank Miller story. I get it if you have a problem, but your problem is with the wrong person.

The thermopiles battle really happened. There was really 300 spartans lead by King Leonidas. They really were outnumbered and really killed more persians than they were (though the fight ended into the Persian camp where the spartans stormed and almost reach the tent of Xerces). SO why we are expecting some realism? Because it is an historical fact well documented IMO. If it was based solely on a fantasy I would understand but it is not.