>>680974 Come on OP. The movie actually begins as a story told by a story teller, not a historian. The embellishments are rather reasonable if you're not incorrectly assuming you're in for a 70s/80s historical drama with British actors.
For all it's theatrical embellishments, it does depict the primary historical events accurately. If anything, I wish the film showed more of them. There was a massive, brutal fight over the body of Leonidas.
>>680977 >>680984 It triggers me because while it does say that it's just a fanciful retelling of a battle, to most uncritical audience members it's just going to be seen as "glorified history."
I know as an impressionable middle schooler I certainly came off with the impression that it was "what happened but greatly exaggerated," and it wasn't until later that I learned about just how inaccurate the portrayal of the different societies/cultures was. Like, I genuinely believed that the Persians were the "bad guys" in history because of it, and it was only later that I realised they were actually not that bad.
>>680974 >be me >seventh grade >every time someone mentions 300 i feel it >the rage >the pain >those beady persian eyes >those disgusting man-worshippers >walk up to persian kid in my class >"hey anon, are you ok" >my first clenches >"we-we will fight in the shade." >"lolwhat?" >"WE WILL FIGHT IN THE SHADE" >suspended for racial slurs two days later >great time, middle school >but this movie got to me.
>>681356 I wasn't so jaded as I am now on anything post 2003 invasion when I saw that movie but I felt it wasn't as hardcore of a propaganda job as *gasp American sniper. That movie in its entirety is criminal.
Because the last act is a complete fabrication. The evil Taliban goes to massacre the innocent Pashtuns, Marcus Lutrell is about to be dragged out and killed, but then! Suddenly American gunships roar in and start blasting them away! Chinooks swoop in and disgorge heroic Rangers to chase them into the hills! Good and justice prevail and the day is saved thanks to American military might!
In reality, Lutrell was kept concealed and slowly nursed back to health by Mohammed Gulab Khan, at great risk to the latter's own life and that of his family. When he was able, they smuggled him out of the village and into a cave, where Gulab continued to wait on him, smuggling food and water out of the village. He also marched overland to the local FOB to say, "Hey, I found your guy." It took him several tries before the U.S. forces finally got their heads out of their asses and went to retrieve Lutrell.
The whole story of Operation Red Wings is one of caution: about how even the most elite operatives in the U.S. arsenal are but men, and that they can be broken. It's about human decency and goodness winning out against extremism, and about how sophistication can be found in even the most unsophisticated places.
But no. That's too complex for American audiences to ponder. They might hurt their little brains. Give them explosions and soldiers and victory, that'll make money.
I admit my ignorance, but I'd think he wouldn't say anything bad about it. Lutrell is pretty obviously a hard-on serviceman; I doubt he'd disparage any depiction which places the military on a pedestal.
See, I'd buy that interpretation if, say, the final scene at Plataea had shown the Spartans in period-accurate costume instead of glistening nakedness to show the dichotomy between the storytelling and reality. Or if the whole thing wasn't about the very American theme of democracy triumphing over tyranny. Or any number of things which reveal Frank Miller to be unironically ignorant of the era in which he was writing.
>be persian teen in western country >dont think much of ethnicity, nationality, history and shit. too busy discovering masturbation >300 releases >watch it with family >look to my father >"are we the baddies?"
>>682782 >be with my friend Hans of the front line >invading Russia >just sent off a crack SS unit >lets see how the Russian's deal with them >suddenly get a bad feeling about the skulls on our hats >realise I'm sending people off to their deaths >turn to my friend >Hans...are we the bad guys?
>>681004 >I genuinely believed that the Persians were the "bad guys" in history they were. Absolute Monarchy, the deification of monarchs is an import from the east. Roman and Greeks were societies with slaves ruled by cliques of free men; Persia and everything east were socieities of slaves ruled by a tyrant called a god.
Movie inaccuracy has ruined my life OP, but 300 in fucking particular
>300 released on my 19th birthday >Manage to invite a girl to go and see it >I am a University student studying history >We go to the cinema and start watching the movie >She seems to really enjoy it >After the movie she is talking about how the movie was great and how I am probably muscular like a Spartan (used to be fit) >I am seething with rage at the historical inaccuracies >When she mentions enjoying the muscles I get triggered because spartans wore fucking armour of course >ask her playfully to touch my chest to feel a spartans chest >she does and starts giggling >I squeel in her face and smash her hand into a fence >she asks what the fuck am I doing >explain spartans wore METAL ARMOUR SO A SPARTANS CHEST WOULD BE HARD LIKE A FENCE >she gets upset >starts clutching her hand, almost crying, I think I broke her finger >she tells everyone we know what I did >lose all my friends >fail University due to loneliness, drop out >have had a horrible life working at wal mart
There's that one scene in Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves, where some minion of the sheriff nails a wanted poster at a tree and all peasants *read* it. I didn't think anything was able to trigger me that hard.
>>682119 Your problem is that you want a whole different movie. Lone survivor was an action movie through and through. The fact that he was saved at the end was not the point, or else every gunfight in the movie would have been condensed into twenty minutes. Clearly, if youre looking for a movie about the theme of human decency trumping extremism, then Lone Survivor is not your movie. But it wasnt made to be that way either. It would be a different story if you criticized the film for its portrayal of how the Taliban fought, or how the weapons are un authentic, but to criticize it for something that the movie was not intended to provide is unwarranted.
>>683136 It doesn't sound unreasonable to have an action flick not change major events in a story. Altered gunfights? Sure. Square chinned heroes and a clear bad guy? Whatever. Adding a gunfight that never happened instead of ratcheting up the intensity of an already tense stretch of time with guns instead of the threat of detection? Silly.
>>683152 At the same time though, you cant expect a movie that uses action and gunfights for tense moments to suddenly switch to a heartfelt message. Its like watching Die Hard 5 and expecting a moral message instead of a classic yippee Kay aye moment. The film is based in action, and therefore only makes sense to end in action. Obviously as a history nerd it does annoy me a bit as well that the movie isnt entirely true. At the same time though, the movie is "based on a true story" not simply is a true story. At the end of the day, its just a movie and its meant to (in this case) provide alot of action content, not a historical message. In this it does very well.
>>681602 The only good thing about the second one is the sex scene, i stopped watching after i had a wank. The first one is amazing in comparisson, the second one had even worse special effects and was much more obnoxious.
>>683360 >News flash the Germans were the bad guys Anyways though WW2 propaganda films are like the classics. Theyre obviously swayed one way or another, but they can teach you alot about the time provided you look passed the bias.
>>683360 Dresden really wasn't you fucking butthurt faggot, I bet you think 200,000 Germans died there too right? >>683689 This, I bet the guy doesn't love shit like The Longest Day or A Bridge Too Far
people are actually ok with being manipulated to feel a certain way, especially if it feels good to them. this alone triggers me beyond belief. but i'm a hypocrite in feeling this, because there are moments when im vulnerable to the same thing.
>>685785 There are problems with figuring out the truth, mainly due to every source on the Achaemenids being biased in some way or other. The sources are either Persian, who are obviously biased, biblical, who are biased due to them being allowed to move from Babylon by the Persians, or Greek, who were in opposition/rebellion against the Persians, and are thus also biased.
Saying they "were actually not that bad" has the same problems as "they were that bad" - The only thing the sources truly tell us is that the Greeks disliked them, and the Israelites liked them.
Simply put, Commissars didn't really need to shoot their own guys. The Germans did that for them, and quite handily.
One of the other inaccuracies is the whole "one man gets a rifle, the next ammunition" bit. The Soviet Union was absolutely swimming in small arms by the time Stalingrad kicked off, but ammunition was at a premium. So really, it ought to have been the reverse.
It triggers me when people try to defend this by pointing out that Harryhausen's "original" wasn't accurate at all either. Nobody forced the people behind this to make a remake of that movie in particular, stick to its innacuracies, and add a lot more. So not only is the remake taking atention away from Harryhausen's last film, but people are throwing the original under the bus.
>>681684 > My main complain about Xerxes representation is that he's bald OK Anyway, fuck other peoples. 300 is a fun movie, if some take it literally, too bad for them. This kind of people doesn't give a shit about Greek history anyway so what's the point.
>>687310 should have been said in the first reply Although 300 also has many historical derivatives, such as most of the memorable quotes being real, and the portrayal of strong women in Spartan society, n the cultural customs of "true" Spartans (Spartans raised in the city of Sparta by pure Spartan parents and destined to birth one boy and one girl and probably have a gay lover). /thread
>>686436 I don't see your point, those monsters are part of a mythology and a culture that is being misrepresented. They didn't even bother to replace the Kraken, a norse monster, with an actual greek monster like the Cetus from the actual story, wich is specially stupid because their kraken doesn't even resemble the eponymous monster more than the Harryhausen film.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.