| JoxerTheDeityPirate 23.03.2007 21:50 |
anyone seen the movie yet? the trailors seem cool. |
| Lisser 23.03.2007 23:21 |
Have not seen it but i intend to. I'll probably wait until it comes out on DVD though. I hate paying so much to go see a movie in a theatre only to have idiots sit behind me and kick my chair while they talk the entire time. But yes, I will see it. Can't wait. |
| sparrow 21754 23.03.2007 23:28 |
havent seen it yet but i hear it's great! |
| Deacon Fan 23.03.2007 23:48 |
I dunno anything about it. I just finally finished 1900 though. Was boring as hell and gratui--uh, overly violent and explicit. I started it in December and finished the other night. That's how long and boring it was. 1969 is pretty good. But 9 to 5 is my favourite of the numbered films. 1999 and 25 or 6 to 4 are pretty good songs too. |
| Dan C. 24.03.2007 00:38 |
Quality violence. |
| The Real Wizard 24.03.2007 00:44 |
the insane bunny wrote: 1999 and 25 or 6 to 4 are pretty good songs too.Chicago Transit Authority.... rock on! I saw 300... it was fantastic. Anyone who is remotely fascinated by ancient history will enjoy this movie for sure. |
| onevsion 24.03.2007 02:05 |
saw it with my mates in a theater in Belgium a week before the Dutch premiere... nice movie. Much better than I thought it would be... BUT.. if you really want to see a great movie: go see : "das leben der anderen" great great great movie...! |
| eenaweena 24.03.2007 10:04 |
this movie is nice. i love the effects and the cinematography. oh screw that. i love the whole package. the only thing lacking is more blood. :D and gore. :D it's a must-watch for all y'all! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 24.03.2007 10:15 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: I saw 300... it was fantastic. Anyone who is remotely fascinated by ancient history will enjoy this movie for sure.I gather from your enthusiasm that it's historically accurate, yes? At least somewhat? I ask because I know there was an uproar in Iran about it. They're saying it's an American propaganda film aimed at shedding a dark light on their people. |
| eenaweena 24.03.2007 10:21 |
^i heard about that, mfm... about Xerxes being depicted as androgynous... apparently the iranians have respect for their gods and when they found out about the androgyny in the king-god, they got mad. |
| wstüssyb 24.03.2007 12:14 |
Saw it at the IMAX, opening night, fantastic Movie, totally worth paying 15 bucks to see. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 24.03.2007 12:44 |
I saw it at the IMAX in Lansing opening weekend with my boyfriend and another couple from the CMU History Department. It was a GREAT movie. Now, to be fair, most of it is historically shit (we were probably the worst people to be sitting next to during the movie, because we just kept ticking off things that were inaccurate). Lots of blood, gore, gratuitous violence and sex...but that's not a bad thing :-) I'd say it's definitely worth the money to see it! |
| AspiringPhilosophe 24.03.2007 13:01 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote:The people in Iran are in an uproar about it, but that's called paranoia. The movie historically is shit, and I honestly don't know why they are so upset. They are claiming that the portrayal of the Persians makes them look bad, but they forget something....no one knows who in the hell the Persians are now a days. And the people who do...well, they are educated enough to know how crap the movie was historically. You could try to read a political message into it...but you won't get very far.Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: I saw 300... it was fantastic. Anyone who is remotely fascinated by ancient history will enjoy this movie for sure.I gather from your enthusiasm that it's historically accurate, yes? At least somewhat? I ask because I know there was an uproar in Iran about it. They're saying it's an American propaganda film aimed at shedding a dark light on their people. Some of the things that are wrong in the movie: 1) Leonidas wasn't king of the Spartans. He was the commander of the unit that went to Thermopolae. Sparta had two kings, but they were elected from the Council, and you had to be at least 60 years old to be on the Council, because you were technically in the military until age 60 (or until you died, whatever came first) 2) The Spartans weren't wearing enough armor. Now granted this provides for an excellent opprotunity for women to view some nice six packs on the Spartan men, but in real life they wore full chest plates as part of their armor. 3) The Persians were wearing too much armor. They didn't wear hardly any at all, and what they did wear consisted mostly of tightly woven reed mats worn under their clothes 4) The Spartans weren't alone at Thermopolae. They were joined by regiments from Athens, Corinth and other major city states in the Greek world. They do briefly mention the Athenians being there, but only to say that the Athenians were into the whole "Greek Love" thing...which actually was started by the Spartans as part of their military training/living in the barracks until age 30 thing 5) The rest of the Greek army didn't desert the forces at Thermopolae. Leonidas was the commander in charge of ALL the Greek forces, and he sent them all home once he knew that they were gunna loose the battle. He did this to give the Athenians and others time to gather larger forces and meet the Persians at a different location once they got through the pass. The Spartans under his command stayed with him, but he'd sent everyone else home to prep for the major battle he knew was coming. 6) The Persian king Xerxes was not an 8 foot tall, makeup wearing, pierced to high heaven, nearly naked, transvestite looking thing. He actually looked more like the messenger they chopped the hand off of after the first battle. 7) There were no mutants running around. The Immortals were real, but they weren't monsterous looking things. Neither were the Ephors. And I'm pretty sure the Hunchback of Notre Dame never made an appearance at the real battle either. 8) Xerxes never sent elephants into the pass. He knew this would be pointless. There are more...but the movie never claimed to be based on history. It claimed to be based on the graphic novel that was inspired by a historical event. Big difference. |
| The Real Wizard 24.03.2007 18:43 |
Holy crap... you know your stuff. I watched the movie with someone who is in their fourth year of studying history, and they said it was historically correct. Maybe I should show her this topic and see what she says...!! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 24.03.2007 21:41 |
Amazing, HistoryGirl! And very interesting. When I asked if it was historically accurate, I never expected such a response. :-) Cool. |
| iGSM 25.03.2007 06:46 |
Looks...interesting!? |
| AspiringPhilosophe 25.03.2007 11:10 |
Thanks guys. I teach Western Civ Part I, so I know most of this stuff at least on a basic level. I know more about 300 because I prepped for it before I saw the movie. I made it extra credit for my students, so I had to be able to grade the extra credit fairly by knowing the answers. Now granted, they did get some things right. The whole part in the beginning with the little boy and the training starting at age 7...that's accurate. One thing they did get wrong about that, though, was they never sent them out into the woods to survive the night and that meant they were a man. They sent you out to kill a helot (The slave labor that ran the Spartan economy since the men were in the military constantly) and the objective was not to kill the helot, but to not get caught doing it. Calling Thermopolae "The Hot Gates" was accurate to, as Thermopolae in Greek translates into "The Hot Gates" The whole them not bringing the whole army because it was a state religious holiday and the army couldn't fight, that was accurate as well. But, like I said before. This never claimed to be based on history. It claimed to be based on a graphic novel based on a historical event, so a twice-deluded source. From what I understand, it follows the lines from the book almost verbatim. Oh...that's another thing that's accurate. The part when the Persian messenger says that "Our arrows will blot out the sun" and the Spartan says, "Then we will have out battle in the shade." That's accurate (at least as far as we can tell). Also accurate is the part where the Queen tells Leonidas to "Come back with your shield, or on it." We actually have records of a Spartan mother telling her son that as he leaves for battle. Also, when they are in the phalanx, the fighting style that they used (the shields forming a barrier and stabbing over, under and through them with spears) is accurate. The only inaccuracy there is that they would have been constantly in the phalanx formation...in the movie they abandoned that style after about 10 minutes in the first battle. |
| kimmithee 26.03.2007 10:57 |
i really want to see that movie soooooo bad!!! need to get my bf to take me to see that movie |
| iGSM 26.03.2007 11:22 |
Hey, heyssss...'as you read Spartan by Valerio Massimo Manfredi? I am reading it (as I have been doing for the last 3 years). It's a bleedin' good read! Yes, I feel justified to post a book in a movie thread. Don't like it? Go to Florida, pinko(s). |
| Poo, again 27.03.2007 12:40 |
kimmithee wrote: i really want to see that movie soooooo bad!!! need to get my bf to take me to see that movieWow, you have a boyfriend. |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 27.03.2007 12:49 |
I'm defo seeing this movie soon. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 27.03.2007 12:53 |
<font color=pink>Account Deleted wrote:and typically expects the man to take her to the pics.kimmithee wrote: i really want to see that movie soooooo bad!!! need to get my bf to take me to see that movieWow, you have a boyfriend. treat him to it... :-] |