300

[MrHat]

He called the Atheneans boy-lovers.  Only Spartan Men fuck other Spartan Men.

[Ironwood]

Fuck you all and your not having to wait until the 22nd to see this film. Seriously.

Indeed.

[HaemishM]

Unlike those other two though, the Spartans were not misogynists.

Though Frank Miller might be.

I'm pretty sure Lynn Varley will disagree with you vehemently.

Miller is not a misogynist. Misogynists don't create characters like Elektra, or really like the prostitute warriors in Sin City. He makes female characters that fit the genre of the story very well. Elektra is like the geek's ulitmate personification of super-hero chick; beautiful yet deadly. And unlike most of the superheroines out there, she doesn't (at least in Miller's writings) cave to the more dominant male hero, she actively seeks to destroy him or at least exert her dominance over him. And in the end, she finds absolution and salvation because he sacrifices for her, not the other way around. He chases her, she doesn't chase him, and in later works shows she doesn't need him.

He is the anti-misogynist, IMO.

[Ironwood]

Wow.  I totally disagree with your assesment of Miller.

[Merusk]

I dunno, from what I've seen most of Miller's women are whores, using men to get what they want and then tossing them aside when they're of no use.

It doesn't seem to come from the wellhead of, "this is just a woman using Men's rules & foibles against them," so much as, "this is a tramp who will use you and shit you out, like all women." 

[Ironwood]

Miller is exactly the same as Donaldson.  Even the heroines of his works are required to have either come into power by accident or by a cunning history of the most horrible degredation.

[HaemishM]

I see that as more of a cynical statement on the way women have had to fight to get their power as opposed to all women are whores. I don't think he's being dismissive of women so much as of how hard it's been for women throughout history to get the token bit of respect they have in society today. I've always thought of him as a feminist.

He's one of them self-hating men feminist.

[Ironwood]

Nah.

[jpark]

When I was doing my phd I took a non credit based course on Alexander the Great at the Museum in our city (Toronto).

This way you get to learn, without exposing youself to the risk that profs in another department have a completely different concept of grading.  Anyway, it was... splendid!

For trivia it is neat to know where the term "marathon" came from (now applied to the distance the messenger ran to alert the greeks during the Persian landing under Darius).

So...shall we open this up?  Does a film that portrays disparaging images of an ancient culture - imply that such imagery should also hold of the descendent culture today?  I am interested to know if Persians are entertained or offended by this film.

[Endie]

On the women thing, it'd be a shame if the portrayal of Spartan women is skewed: they had just about the best deal of all the Greek women.

In general, based on the trailers and the book (which I bought after seeing the trailers) I am gagging to see this.  Funnily enough, a couple of Saturdays ago I rewatched the trailer that starts with the cliff press-of-phalanx thing, and has the NiN soundtrack, a couple of times.  I then headed off and played one of the best games of rugby I've managed for years.  It helps that Leonidas is played by a Scot, even if his last role that I remember was noncing around in my native Greenock being wishy-washy.  Scots is just about the best accent for hamming up violence in, as well as for swearing in.

[shiznitz]

It was asked and touched on so I will expand a bit on the phalanx formation (which is explained clearly in the excellent novelization Gates of Fire.)

Not only did the shield protect the guy next to you, but the guy behind you put his shield in your back and pushed. And the guy behind him did the same thing. And the guy behind him, etc. Then, as was mentioned, the spears were longer than portrayed in the movie so that the deep ranks could stab the front ranks of the enemy. In fact, the front line of the phalanx basically did very little stabbing at all, just hunkered down behind their shields (their helmeted eyes peeking over) and pushed. This caused the enemy ranks to compress, making for plentiful, largely immobile targets for the 2nd-6th ranks to stab, 10-15 stabs per minute.  The Spartans also wore breastplates.

It would have made a boring movie, though, if Snyder had held true to that. Also, the '300' had 600 in support staff with extra shield and spears (which broke often) and there were 5,000 Thebans that used the same phalanx, they just didn't execute it as well as the Spartans. In fact, all Greek city-states used the phalanx. Imagine two phalanxes coming together with 10 or 20 ranks all pushing, shield to shield.

[HaemishM]

The phalanx was a fantastic tactical formation at the time. It pretty much dominated the battlefield until the Romans came along with the maniple formation. Here's a small discussion on the two formations, which I've skimmed.

[Endie]

It would have made a boring movie, though, if Snyder had held true to that. Also, the '300' had 600 in support staff with extra shield and spears (which broke often) and there were 5,000 Thebans that used the same phalanx, they just didn't execute it as well as the Spartans. In fact, all Greek city-states used the phalanx.

There was also a detachment of Phocians, who didn't exactly cover themselves in glory.  That's not to deny the Spartans their bravery, however.  The current trend is to debunk achievements, especially of dead white males.  The fact is that, when their situation became desperate near the end, the Spartans dismissed the allied contingent and fought on alone, though their position was clearly impossible.

[Ironwood]

That's because they were fucking Spartans.

[Johny Cee]

There were two systems of Greek phalanx:  a predecessor system which the Greek city states used and the Macedonean.

The Greeks did the whole business with large, metal shields and spears 6 to 9' long.  Basically,  came together against opposing troops where it became a shoving match.  This is the historical situation at the time "300" is set.

The Macedonean phalanx armored it's troops more heavily,  swapped out the short spears for 18-20' long pikes that needed to be used two handed,  and swapped the large heavy shields for small bucklers strapped to the arm.  Same deal as the other phalanx, coming together and shoving, except many more spears could connect.

The devastating tactic used with the Macedonian phalanx was to position cavalry or llight infantry on the wings.  Your phalanx would clog up and hold the middle,  while the cavalry swept around the wings and hit your enemies from the flanks.  It's just like Rome: Total War where you clog up the middle and hit the backs/sides of units with cavalry you curl around.

After Alexander,  Greek/Hellenistic nations just mainly used a phalanx without the flankers.  Roman legions ate them up using similar tactics to what Alexander used:  the Legions blocked up the middle, or strung out the Greek formations,  and auxilia (horse or skirmishers) worked around and hit from the back or rear.

The major advantage Sparta, Alexander, or Rome had was the fact they used a standing army of professionals rather then militia levies or part-time soldiers.

The article referenced by Haemish specifically refers to Macedonian formations.

[Johny Cee]

About the movie:

I was kind of confused by the whole "freedom" plot line.  I mean,  this is a city-state ruled by a king,  treats it's citizens with draconian measures, and keeps HUGE quantities of slaves.  How exactly are they differentiated from the Persians?

I thought the graphic novel (browsed through it when I heard about the film) played up the reason vs. superstition angle more?  Or am I just misremembering?

I'm also tired of the "identify the villain because he's the misogynist/rapist" way of setting up villains.  It's almost as trite as "identify the villain because he's the one that kills his subordinates when they mess up" method.  I'd prefer they go back to putting the villains in black hats,  and make them twirl their mustache.  It does less to damage the plot.

It was a very, very pretty movie... great shots.  Great action scenes.

[Llava]

I felt that the movie did a service to the reason vs mysticism theme.  It mentioned that several times, in fact.

And I think the difference in recognizing Leonidas as king versus Xerxes was that everyone respected that Leonidas had earned his position, whereas Xerxes did nothing to prove that- he had soldiers do his fighting for him, he wasn't on the front lines.  Also, Sparta had a council with decision making power outside the king's juristiction, presumably Xerxes did not.

But it's the reason vs mysticism that really makes me love this whole story, accurate or not.

[stray]

Hmm.. Reason vs Mysticism. It's a bit too anachronistic for me (though, of course, that really can't be avoided much). Same goes for the whole "Freedom" thing.

Besides, whatever conflict between reason and mysticism did exist between those two worlds was pretty much thrown out the door with Alexander anyways.

[Driakos]

All this history has me interested. I never really knew that Sparta had such odd traditions with training their warriors, though I did know they were seen as some of the greatest. Anyone suggest a book on this?

Gates of Fire - Steven Pressfield  Historical fiction account of the battle of Thermopylae.  While the characters are imaginative and dramatized, you'll get a good idea of Spartan life, battle tactics, and all the good stuff, while enjoying a very entertaining book. 

The movie was fucking epic.  I busted out my copies of 300 before I went to see it.  I'm glad it stayed so faithful to the print.  Beautiful.  I saw it with a girl friend, not a girlfriend, so the love scene (not in the comic) was a surprise.  Was an awkward moment since I do not know her that well yet.  Looking back, I shouldn't have yelled "titties!"

I can't wait for 301.

[MrHat]

Heh, I watched it Friday afternoon, and there were a few parents w/ their kids there.  Heads flying, np.  Boobies, omg Jimmy, cover your eyes.

Serious, wtf is up w/ us?  They were good tits.

Oh, and the last Ctrl-Alt-Del was funny re: 300.

[NowhereMan]

About the movie:

I was kind of confused by the whole "freedom" plot line.  I mean,  this is a city-state ruled by a king,  treats it's citizens with draconian measures, and keeps HUGE quantities of slaves.  How exactly are they differentiated from the Persians?

From my understanding of Greek culture (admittedly mostly based on Athenian culture) is that the position of all the men in the city state as citizens made them better than simple vassals of their ruler. Greeks saw themselves as superior and more cultured than foreign types. I'd imagine Greeks would find the idea of not being citizens, with all that was associated with that, but simply people in their city states a galling possibility. There's also the whole idea that their rulers were there because they deserved the position while the Persian emperors had simply inherited the position would tie into it a lot.

But as I said I mostly know of Athenians (and all the other great philosophy types) who the Spartans probably would have regarded as faggy and whiny.

[shiznitz]

The movie pushed the idea that the 300 volunteered to fight an enemy that had sent a messenger to their home and threatened slavery. I didn't take all the freedom talk as deeper than that.  Sparta was not a democracy, but all adult males of fighting age were largely equal - i.e. no nobility vs commoners dynamic.

[Strazos]

Oh, and the last Ctrl-Alt-Del was funny re: 300.

Huh? Heh, lolz

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php

[jpark]

But it's the reason vs mysticism that really makes me love this whole story, accurate or not.

On that account - a film every republican should see ;)

In exception for Sparta, I believe the city states used democracy - certainly that started in Athens - but I don't know the time line.

[Strazos]

Sparta thought Athens was nuts with their Democracy - every man having a say in every decision? Absurd and Inefficient, the Spartans said.

[Driakos]

About the movie:

I was kind of confused by the whole "freedom" plot line.  I mean,  this is a city-state ruled by a king,  treats it's citizens with draconian measures, and keeps HUGE quantities of slaves.  How exactly are they differentiated from the Persians?

From my understanding of Greek culture (admittedly mostly based on Athenian culture) is that the position of all the men in the city state as citizens made them better than simple vassals of their ruler. Greeks saw themselves as superior and more cultured than foreign types. I'd imagine Greeks would find the idea of not being citizens, with all that was associated with that, but simply people in their city states a galling possibility. There's also the whole idea that their rulers were there because they deserved the position while the Persian emperors had simply inherited the position would tie into it a lot.

But as I said I mostly know of Athenians (and all the other great philosophy types) who the Spartans probably would have regarded as faggy and whiny.

Sparta had a policy of two Kings.  One King could go off to war, and the other would stay behind, so there would always be someone in charge.  King of Sparta wasn't King in the traditional sense, mostly just a General with a few priestly duties.  They don't mention that part.  Having a second King waving you off to battle, not as dramatic. 

In this time period Sparta had a shitload of Messenian slaves.  They did all of the grunt work at home, so citizen Spartans could work full time as soldiers. The Spartans looked down upon an army of slaves, because they didn't let their slaves fight in the front ranks.  Only full citizens could be in the big show.  Helots and slaves, were bowmen, diggers, ammo runners.  Sparta usually acquired slaves through conquering.  I'm not sure why at some times, they fought a city/polis, and made a peace, and at other times they fought, and enslaved the losing polis.  But, in the years leading up to Thermopylae, Sparta was running all over Greece, beating the shit out of other cities, and forcing them into an alliance versus the Persian.

[Johny Cee]

About the movie:

I was kind of confused by the whole "freedom" plot line.  I mean,  this is a city-state ruled by a king,  treats it's citizens with draconian measures, and keeps HUGE quantities of slaves.  How exactly are they differentiated from the Persians?

From my understanding of Greek culture (admittedly mostly based on Athenian culture) is that the position of all the men in the city state as citizens made them better than simple vassals of their ruler. Greeks saw themselves as superior and more cultured than foreign types. I'd imagine Greeks would find the idea of not being citizens, with all that was associated with that, but simply people in their city states a galling possibility. There's also the whole idea that their rulers were there because they deserved the position while the Persian emperors had simply inherited the position would tie into it a lot.

But as I said I mostly know of Athenians (and all the other great philosophy types) who the Spartans probably would have regarded as faggy and whiny.

Well....  I think the Spartans badmouthed the Athenians for being merchants and pedophiles.  Wasn't it Socrates who famously said the only time he took a bath was before he met a new young boy?

[Endie]

As far as contemporary opinion goes, all we really have left to go on from the Greek side is a near-contemporary in Herodotus (who claims he spoke to eye-witnesses) and one very contemporary play by Aeschylus, who fought the Persians himself at Marathon, Plataea and Salamis.  Herodotus stresses the idea of liberty quite heavily in the thinking of the Athenians, the Spartans, Plateans and a few others, so it was at least believeable to his audience that a struggle against oppression and autocracy was a major motivation.  If it was post-facto rationalisation then it was fairly immediate in origin, so probably fairly reflects the views on eastern despotism of the greeks of the time.

As for Aeschylus, whether contemporary Athenians thought liberty was important can be gleaned from the Messenger's soliloquoy:

Forward, sons of the Greeks, liberate the fatherland, liberate your children, your women, the temples of your ancestral gods, the graves of your forebears: this is the battle for everything

[NowhereMan]

Well....  I think the Spartans badmouthed the Athenians for being merchants and pedophiles.  Wasn't it Socrates who famously said the only time he took a bath was before he met a new young boy?

Quite possibly, in Plato's Symposium they certainly spend a lot of time discussing the relationships between men and boys, not only as the highest form of love but also as a tool for introducing boys to society, etc. The Spartans certainly used it as part of bonding their soldiers together (how would that play as an argument for letting homosexuals into the army today?) so I wouldn't think it would be the paedophile thing especially. Possibly  it was about the Anthenians thinking it was love for love's sake but I think the criticism focused far more on to the Athenians spending all their time trading, holding drama festivals and encouraging philosophers rather than dedicating themselves to war.

Of course long term that didn't work out so well for them even if they spent quite a while being fucking hardcore.

[Teleku]

Iran is pissed (suprise suprise):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6446183.stm

Apparently they aren't aware that the comic was written well before Bush came into office.

Or that it was a comic long before it was a movie for that matter.

[Endie]

Hollywood should follow this up with a film about Heraclius and Chosroes II, just to piss off the Iranians even more.  The simple truth is that if you want favourable film coverage, don't lose your wars in the first place.  You don't see the French complaining about people making films about, oh, virtually every war they were in for the last 300 years, do you?  And after we gave them a very movie-friendly doing at Bannockburn, the English phoned their agents, got their act together, and subjected us to virtually weekly pumellings for the next 4 centuries.

[Samwise]

Iran is pissed (suprise suprise):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6446183.stm

Maybe they should track down Herodotus's estate and sue for libel.

[Krakrok]

This historian guy rips the historical accurancy of 300 a new one.

[Strazos]

I wish I was still in school to ask a prof or two about their thoughts on the movie.

Also, I wish I still had access to the campus databases so I can see what Ephraim Lytle has actually written.

[Llava]

it is strongly implied Xerxes is homosexual

What?

He touched Leonidas awkwardly
VS
Dozens of naked women shown all over his tent

Yup. Gay.
Good thinking professor.