What a ridiculously narcissistic misogynistic viewpoint.

I feel so sorry for your wife, who I imagine you must jab at constantly for making you such a constant and complete loser. She must feel so loved and appreciated, knowing how you feel, that she's nothing but a leech on your life, only taking never giving....in fact giving you nothing while taking from you...everything.- Leonidas

My marriage is nearing 23 years. It was a definite win win for me, and my wife seems to feel the same. We've both carried the other in hard times, and as importantly enjoyed the good times together as a team.

The fact that you've only attracted women with nothing to lose and nothing to offer says a lot more about you than it does about women.

Kept waiting for Leonidas to yell "Madness??? THIS. IS. FUS-RO-DAHHHHHH!!!!"

Leonidas would have been proud of that play.

*begging for Leonidas & Chuckie

FAKE! Chuck Norris is King Leonidas re-incarnated.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'potus, scotus, brotus, ponceus, leonus, leonidas, sparta' to 'smooth summer lips' - edited by kronosposeidon

That was a LOLer!

In reply to this comment by Kevlar:
Man, Leonidas has really let himself go.

Man, Leonidas has really let himself go.

thanks!

In reply to this comment by Fusionaut:
*promote

>> ^Kreegath:
Why must the heroes of today be such villains? Whatever happened to the old kind of heroes, who were actually promoting ideals and not cold-blooded murder?
Neither this nor the Sparta scene referenced sparked the kind of admiration in me that it apparently did in the majority. It just felt disgustingly nonchalant of human life.


Did you seriously just call Leonidas a "hero of today"? That was almost 2500 years ago and, yes, he really did have Xerxes' messengers thrown into the well.

"Maybe one of these days Hollywood will get it right and do their research and use the facts, which are even more interesting than the half truths they sell to get the average person to go and see this garbage."

As skrob says its best to think of 300 as a stylized story the Greeks would have told among themselves and in that respect the film is extremely accurate.

Much has been made of how the Spartans don't wear any armor in the film, which is of course completely ahistorical. In a stylized account of Thermopylae, the near-naked bodies of the Spartans is entirely Greek. Were it not for US homophobia I'm sure the film-makers would've filmed the Spartans without their loincloths. In Greek art there is something called heroic nudity. All Greek men worked out nude, daily, as a community in preparation for when they would have to fight shoulder-to-shoulder together in the phalanx. This obsession with physical fitness caused them to idealize masculine beauty. As a result, much of their more stylized art depicts heroic men as being nude and buff as hell. Hercules, for example, frequently shows up just wearing his lion skin cloak. Were the Greeks to have had access to film, and decided to make a movie about Thermopylae, I am certain that the Spartans and other Greeks would have been depicted naked, just like in 300.

Another issue that is often raised is the depiction of Xerxes. No, he probably wasn't 10 feet tall and probably didn't have the voice of god. That however isn't the point. Xerxes was treated as god-king by his subjects and he ruled the largest, wealthiest and most powerful empire in the world. The Greeks were well aware of how powerful and impressive a guy he was. In fact, they frequently referred to Xerxes, and his descendants, simply as the King, as if the Persian Emperors were the only rulers of all that wasn't Greece. Given all of this, it is entirely appropriate for Xerxes to have the appearance of a god in the movie.

Another interesting thing they did with Xerxes was gold imagery. This goes back to Aeschylus's Persians where the imagery of wealth permeates the entire play, shifting in meaning to symbolize Persian wealth and power in the beginning of the play, to symbolizing Persian weakness and downfall. Ancient Greece was not a wealthy land by any measure. The great public works projects of Classical Athens were payed for by imperial tribute, not some inherent money-making ability of the Athenians. The Greeks, therefore, viewed extreme wealth with suspicion. They felt that a man that doesn't work for his living isn't fully a man. Wealth and leisure was therefore associated with effeminacy. Going back to 300, note how Xerxes wears golden chains over his body and has both golden nail polish and eye shadow. The effect the filmmakers were clearly trying to acheive was the association of gold with makeup, and therefore the feminine. Xerxes, despite his god-like stature, strikes the audience, with his makeup, as being much less manly than Leonidas. This is of course exactly how the Greeks viewed it.

I could go on, there are plenty of interesting examples of "Greekness" in 300. The point is that while 300 is not completely historical, it is very, very Greek. The filmmakers clearly did their research and read their classical texts.

I like how Leonidas has to look back at his wife for permission to kill the Persian. That dude is so whipped!

"The film is deliberately left open to interpretation - thus, whatever baggage you bring into 300 is what you will bring out.

American hawks will see Bush as Leonidas, anti-war types will see Bush as Xerxes, and the rest of us will note such parallels yet still enjoy the film on its own. "

Snowflakes must be falling in Hell, because I actually agree with you.

The film is deliberately left open to interpretation - thus, whatever baggage you bring into 300 is what you will bring out.

American hawks will see Bush as Leonidas, anti-war types will see Bush as Xerxes, and the rest of us will note such parallels yet still enjoy the film on its own.

I think you are partially correct Wumpus, yes, the Islamic Republic of Iran is definitely being hypocritical given their own policy on history.... probably their complaints are an attempt to galvanize one of their own disenfranchised factions in the fight against the Great Satan, I won't argue that.

But I also think that even if there aren't direct, literal parallels, there is enough in the general theme of the film that one doesn't need to read much into it. As for pointing out that the original graphic novel was published in 1998, you must keep in mind that much has been added to that original text... and much of that is what I am taking issue with. The major themes that are repeatedly beat out over and over again may have been presented in that original book but not to the extent that they are in the film.

Also, I think you bring up another salient point (that, no offense, undermines your argument) by noting the similar film from 1962, with its Cold War overtones. The story of the Spartans at Thermopylae is one of those tales that has been repeatedly hijacked to suit whatever current political message is relevant... post-Revolutionary Napoleonic France was noted for the appropriation of many stories of antiquity, notably, during Napoleon's campaigns in the East he was compared to not only Alexander, but also at times Leonidas (the proverbial defender of the West), see Jacques Louis David's (Napoleon's official portrait artist) Leonidas at Thermopylae
http://www.abcgallery.com/D/david/david33.html

Also, Hollywood is exactly where Iran should be looking... the film just did another 31.2 million dollars this weekend. People, lots and lots, and lots, of people are going to see this film. Even if they are uneducated, and have no idea that there are these overtones, they will still get the message. After all, the best propaganda is subliminal, the audience shouldn't know it is being fed this stuff... in fact, it is all the more effective if most of your audience doesn't really know what a Persian is (although I think you are underestimating the viewing audience by saying that no one knew what a Persian was before this story broke).

On top of that, the visuals that go with it, brutal violence, sex and death, are classic primal triggers of all the urges that one could hope to gain through a campaign such as this. Nothing psychologically solidifies a nation of people better than a group viewing of such materials... just look at the long human history of public executions, gladiatorial events, witch burnings, etc, etc. Nothing gets a group of people to rally around the flag better than having them witness the smiting of the enemy, it is a proven fact... and it works all the better if the audience does not realize it is happening and simply thinks they are there to be entertained!