Iranians angered by the movie 300

  • Thread starter Thread starter Keltoi
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 53
  • Views Views 7K
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Achaemenian Empire(Iran) was a noble Empire that introduced the first human rights declaration aswell as freed the Judaic slaves from the Babylonian Emperors (Iraqies), writing off this wrong depiction of their ancestors as simply another innocent ''comic'' to ''movie'' case and therefore the Iranians should look the other way is quite disrespectfull since this movie goes global and therefore is indeed important since all people value their history fanaticly and wouldn't like their ancestors to be shown in a wrong light, but then again i heard Cyrus the Great is in production with the same budget as ''300'' so it might balance everything out.
 
I saw the movie and I have to say it was pretty good. It would have been better had they made it a little more realistic though. I saw nothing to make the Iranians mad though

Psychological effect on the people that the Persians are barbaric, if you did not pick that up from the movie, then you have a wrong sense of comprehension in identifying the Psychological aspects of movie and its effect on the viewers. The movie had consider the aspects of the Persian King, and his warriors as heartless evil men. Complete lies, the Persian king was not bald headed with rings all over him. He had no overweight beasts with choppy arms, nor did he have beasts or unexplained lifeforms working for him. The Spartans basically got their rear handed to them and made it sound as if the Spartans are the freedom fighters and undefeated, yet they got defeated horribly. However the 300 Spartans and 700 Thespians did deliver strong blows.
 
Psychological effect on the people that the Persians are barbaric
Barbaric? Naw. Forever at war, I think yes.
http://www.farhangsara.com/history_parthian.htm
In 250 BC a new Iranian people, the Parthians, proclaimed their independence from the Seleucids, and went on to re-establish an Oriental Empire which extended to the Euphrates.
Under Mithridates I (171-138 B.C.), the Parthians continued their conquests and annexed Media, Fars, Babylonia and Assyria, creating an empire that extended from the Euphrates to Herat in Afghanistan. This in effect was a restoration of the ancient Achaemenian Empire of Cyrus the Great.
In addition to the nomads that were a constant menace on its eastern frontier the Parthians also had to face another powerful adversary, Rome. For almost three centuries, Rome and Parthia were to battle over Syria, Mesopotamia and Armenia, without ever achieving any lasting results.
 
Barbaric? Naw. Forever at war, I think yes.
http://www.farhangsara.com/history_parthian.htm
In 250 BC a new Iranian people, the Parthians, proclaimed their independence from the Seleucids, and went on to re-establish an Oriental Empire which extended to the Euphrates.
Under Mithridates I (171-138 B.C.), the Parthians continued their conquests and annexed Media, Fars, Babylonia and Assyria, creating an empire that extended from the Euphrates to Herat in Afghanistan. This in effect was a restoration of the ancient Achaemenian Empire of Cyrus the Great.
In addition to the nomads that were a constant menace on its eastern frontier the Parthians also had to face another powerful adversary, Rome. For almost three centuries, Rome and Parthia were to battle over Syria, Mesopotamia and Armenia, without ever achieving any lasting results.

You should look more towards your beloved Western Empires, from Rome to colonial Britain. Then you'll know what barbaric really means.
 
The film itself is not hisotrically accurate and its not suppose to be, its about 300 dudes with six pack abs kicking some butt, thats it.

Was there an argument on this board when Iran complained about the movie "Alexander"?

some spoilerish stuff below.

Do not, however, read 300 expecting a strictly accurate history. The Phocians did not "scatter," as Miller describes. His Spartans are mildly homophobic, which is goofy in such a gay society. Miller doesn't say how many Greeks remained for the climactic battle--you'd think 300 Spartans and maybe a dozen others, when there were between 700 and 1,100 Greeks. Herodotus's Histories does not identify the traitor Ephialtes as ugly and hunchbacked, or even as Spartan. 300 establishes a believable connection between Ephialtes's affliction and behavior, but his monstrous appearance, King Xerxes's effeminacy, and the Persians' inexplicable pierced-GenX-African looks make for an eyebrow-raising choice of villain imagery. Nonetheless, 300 is a brilliant dramatization.
 
Psychological effect on the people that the Persians are barbaric, if you did not pick that up from the movie, then you have a wrong sense of comprehension in identifying the Psychological aspects of movie and its effect on the viewers. The movie had consider the aspects of the Persian King, and his warriors as heartless evil men. Complete lies, the Persian king was not bald headed with rings all over him. He had no overweight beasts with choppy arms, nor did he have beasts or unexplained lifeforms working for him. The Spartans basically got their rear handed to them and made it sound as if the Spartans are the freedom fighters and undefeated, yet they got defeated horribly. However the 300 Spartans and 700 Thespians did deliver strong blows.

I suppose if you want to look so deeply into a movie based on a graphic novel by Frank Miller, then yes it could have some psychological effect on you. Then again if you wanted to look deeply into the da vinci code you could be psychologically effected too. The movie is rated "R" because only adults who can watch a movie and take it for what it is, a movie, can or should go see it. To your point about them not wearing rings, and not being heartless evil men, right and neither was hitler, they beheaded King Leonidas's dead body and cruicified it after they finally killed him, no they werent savage they were just peaceful conquerers. Also to your point about the spartans getting their rear handed to them, yes 300 of them did after 3 days of fighting over a million (I have to give them a standing ovation for that) and they were freedom fighters. Oh and by the way in case you didnt know your history the Greeks eventually did deliver an embarrassing defeat to Persia's army, and Xerxes ended up running like a coward back to his own land.
 
The reason 300 Spartans and their allies were able to hold off that massive Persian army for so long is due to armor and length of spear. The Spartans wore bronze armor and held bronze shields and spears. The Persians armor was much weaker and their spears were much shorter. It would be safe to assume that each Spartan probably took quite a few with him before he died.

As for the way in which the Persian king was portrayed, that is indeed purely dramatic licence intended give him the role of the traditional comic book villain.
they beheaded King Leonidas's dead body and cruicified it after they finally killed him, no they werent savage they were just peaceful conquerers.

***Correction, you are correct, after the Spartans had fallen the Persians did behead his body and crucified the corpse. Should have had my coffee first.
 
Last edited:
***Correction, you are correct, after the Spartans had fallen the Persians did behead his body and crucified the corpse. Should have had my coffee first.

If they were really out to inspire hatred towards Iranians they would have probably shown this and then shown the Persians defeat, but I dont believe that was the intention of the film. The intention of the film was to make money by showing some great historic war scenes overly dramatized, and they did a good job of it, I was happy when I left the theater. Not only that but the movie was almost a cross between reality and science fiction, which is why Xerxes looked the way he did and why there were overweight beasts, etc.
 
If they were really out to inspire hatred towards Iranians they would have probably shown this and then shown the Persians defeat, but I dont believe that was the intention of the film. The intention of the film was to make money by showing some great historic war scenes overly dramatized, and they did a good job of it, I was happy when I left the theater. Not only that but the movie was almost a cross between reality and science fiction, which is why Xerxes looked the way he did and why there were overweight beasts, etc.

Exactly. The movie was meant to be a cross between a work of art, from a male perspective obviously, and a dramatization of a comic book account of a fairly heroic historical reality. Back in the 1960's there was a movie called The 300 Spartans, which told the same story. There is just something about the underdog getting in his licks before being defeated.
 
You should look more towards your beloved Western Empires, from Rome to colonial Britain. Then you'll know what barbaric really means.
True! Barbaric is what the enemy is. In fact there has been a lot of barbarism from every group.
 
eh a question.was Xerxes the First dark-skinned?

I don't think anyone knows for sure, he was probably olive skinned.

xerxes-1.jpg
 
Yeah 300 is a US plot just like the DaVinci code is true.
And the tomb of Jesus documentary is true and is rocking the very foundations of the Christian world. I can feel the rocking now.

They are fictional movies.

You would have to be a complete imbecile to take a fictional movie seriously.

You are aware of what the world fictional means now don't you? It means not real. It is not real okay. It is like watching Alien. The girl that got impregnated with that monster didn't die, because she wasn't real. She was being played by an actor on a fictional movie.

What I'd say is that the Iranians should watch the movie and see it as a joke.
 
They are fictional movies.

You would have to be a complete imbecile to take a fictional movie seriously.

You are aware of what the world fictional means now don't you? It means not real. It is not real okay. It is like watching Alien. The girl that got impregnated with that monster didn't die, because she wasn't real. She was being played by an actor on a fictional movie.

What I'd say is that the Iranians should watch the movie and see it as a joke.

My appologies on double-posting. I meant to say word, not world in the post above.
 
They are fictional movies.

You would have to be a complete imbecile to take a fictional movie seriously.

You are aware of what the world fictional means now don't you? It means not real. It is not real okay. It is like watching Alien. The girl that got impregnated with that monster didn't die, because she wasn't real. She was being played by an actor on a fictional movie.

What I'd say is that the Iranians should watch the movie and see it as a joke.

Greetings. I have heard of fiction and I know what it means. I was being sarcastic. I think you most likely know what that means. Peace.
 
300 is based on a **** comic. Instead of wearing linin or bronze armor these dudes have a cape. Most people arnt even aware Persia is Iran :P

Did they at least pull of a sweet phalanx in the movie? (long lines of guys with lots of armor and big spears).
 
300 is based on a **** comic. Instead of wearing linin or bronze armor these dudes have a cape. Most people arnt even aware Persia is Iran :P

Did they at least pull of a sweet phalanx in the movie? (long lines of guys with lots of armor and big spears).

Quite a large phalanx actually...:)
 
I would love to see something on persia's conquest by Islamic Arab armies.

Like the Battle of al-Qādisiyyah

Date circa 636 CE
Location al-Qādisiyyah, Iraq
Result Decisive Muslim Arab victory

Combatants
Muslim Arabs <> Sassanid Empire of Iran
Commanders
Sa`d ibn Abī <> Waqqās Rostam Farrokhzād
Strength
30,000 About<> 120,000+
Casualties
5,000 <> 25,000+
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top