300

[Mr.Slippery]

Originally Posted by Hakan

hahahaha

okay

In terms of a small amount of men taking on hundred and thousands more, then yes it is exactly what happened. The immortals and such all existed. Of course the giant troll freak and such didn’t actually happen. But 300 (though with the thespians it was more) against 100 000s was true.

[Magnum PEI]

I saw it last night, and was dissapointed. Alexander is a better movie than this blue-screen historical fantasy. I didn't know there was snow and pine trees in Southern Greece, or that all Persians were black. But seriously, what was the budget for body make-up? I don't think I've ever seen so many airbrushed abs.

[Hakan]

Originally Posted by Mr.Slippery

In terms of a small amount of men taking on hundred and thousands more, then yes it is exactly what happened. The immortals and such all existed. Of course the giant troll freak and such didn’t actually happen. But 300 (though with the thespians it was more) against 100 000s was true.

Yes we all know that stories of this grandeur never get exaggerated. The point is that it was a very large force against a very small force. But 300 men versus a million?

Nope.

[Phanuthier]

Haken, thank you very much for coming in and making sure we're all grounded at the realism of this movie.

[Hakan]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Haken, thank you very much for coming in and making sure we're all grounded at the realism of this movie.

Well when you have some people saying that this is exactly how it happened it kind of begs for someone to do so.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Well when you have some people saying that this is exactly how it happened it kind of begs for someone to do so.

I guess you like being that someone then

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

i don't see how you can say it's not realistic when that's exactly what happened in the real battle of thermopylae

Really? There was dinosaur-style rhinocerouses and Persian lamb-people that like smokin the ganja? Interesting. Dont get me wrong, I liked that part of the movie. But I somehow doubt thats exactly how it went down.

[MassFlames]

And then Leonaidas was actually left handed so that is also NOT REAL.

This whole movie is bull and also Xerxes was not nine feet tall

(what a stupidass argument)

[AC]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Yes we all know that stories of this grandeur never get exaggerated. The point is that it was a very large force against a very small force. But 300 men versus a million?

Nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae

There's no exact agreed upon number.

Herodotus of Halicarnassus, who wrote the first history of this war, gave the size of Xerxes's army as follows:
Total 2,641,610

Modern estimations tend to consider the figures given in ancient texts as miscalculations or exaggerations on the part of the victors. It is assumed that if Herodotus' 300,000 estimate at Mycalae were to be accepted, then the land army at Thermopylae could not have surpassed 500,000, and the total Persian presence in Greece would be estimated at 1,000,000.

So yes, a strong school of thought estimates that the Persian force was well in the millions. That's not to say they the 300 Spartans literally fought them.

[Muta]

I saw the movie today, and I thought it was fine for a Frank Miller flick.

Some of you might be too critical. Keep in mind lots of scenes was taken from a comic book, loosely based on the actual battle of Thermopylae (sp?) itself.

[llama64]

Frank Miller, the story writer, and the director are on record stating that this movie is NOT historically accurate. It was written to make the store even more dramatic.

However, the story is based partly in "fact", as the account is recited in the histories of Herodotus.

You can read a surprisingly good summation of of the Battle of Thermopylae here.

300 vs, 1 million... no. But it seems it was about 1000 vs 2.5 million (300 hundred being actual Spartans).

[Hakan]

I am not disputing the size of the Persian army. It was the largest empire on the world at that time fully capable of raising an army that big.

But yes, 300 Spartans against a million? Just no.

The point of the story of Themoplyae is that a small force can defeat a big force using terrain, training and good tactics. Not that 300 Spartans defeated an army of a million. That's just ludicrous. Remember, the victors write history so the Spartans would have had well enough opportunity to fudge those numbers a bit.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Not that 300 Spartans defeated an army of a million. That's just ludicrous. Remember, the victors write history so the Spartans would have had well enough opportunity to fudge those numbers a bit.

Have you even seen the movie?

Not to give away the ending, but, they didn't defeat them.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Hakan

The point of the story of Themoplyae is that a small force can defeat a big force using terrain, training and good tactics. Not that 300 Spartans defeated an army of a million. That's just ludicrous. Remember, the victors write history so the Spartans would have had well enough opportunity to fudge those numbers a bit.

Based on how you're arguing it seems to suggest you haven't seen the movie, which seems strange given your involvement in the discussion.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Remember, the victors write history so the Spartans would have had well enough opportunity to fudge those numbers a bit.

Historically, the persians weren't conquered. They came as conquerers bent on enslaving greece. The greeks (including the spartans) fought back and defended their homeland. That's all they did. Since persian history does not contradict what happened, historians can safely assume the numbers were roughly correct.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by AnthonyCook

Based on how you're arguing it seems to suggest you haven't seen the movie, which seems strange given your involvement in the discussion.

Maybe he didn't understand the movie.

[Hakan]

I've read the comic which implies that they only reason they lost was because of a double cross. Otherwise they could have sat there annihilating the Persian army until there was none left.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by Hakan

I've read the comic which implies that they only reason they lost was because of a double cross. Otherwise they could have sat there annihilating the Persian army until there was none left.

I normally hate qouting Wikipedia since a lot of information is misleading, but this part seems to align with a few books I read about the battle of Thermopylae, since it does directly comes from Rupert Matthews - The Battle of Thermopylae: A Campaign in Context (one of the books I read), who is a credible source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae

Failure of the frontal assault

Xerxes sent in the Medes who had been only recently conquered by the Persians perhaps, as Diodorus Siculus suggested,[15] because he wanted them to bear the brunt of the fighting.
The Medes soon found themselves in a frontal assault. The Greeks had camped on either side of the rebuilt Phocian wall. That the wall was guarded shows that the Greeks were using it to establish a reference line for the battle, but they fought in front of it.
Details of the tactics are somewhat scant. The Greeks probably deployed in a phalanx, a wall of overlapping shields and layered spearpoints, spanning the entire width of the pass. Herodotus says that the units for each state were kept together. The Persians, armed with arrows and short spears, could not break through the long spears of the Greek phalanx, nor were their lightly armoured men a match for the superior armour, weaponry, and discipline of the Greek hoplites.
Yet there are some indications the Greeks did not fight entirely in close formation. They made use of the feint to draw the Medes in, pretending to retreat in disorder only to turn suddenly and attack the pursuing Medes. In this way they killed so many Medes that Xerxes is said to have started up off the seat from which he was watching the battle three times. According to Ctesias, the first wave numbered 10,000 soldiers and were commanded by Artapanus.
The king eventually withdrew the Medes. Having taken the measure of the enemy, he threw the best troops he had into a second assault: the Immortals, an elite corps of 10,000 men. On his side, Leonidas had arranged a system of relays between the hoplites of the various cities so as to constantly have fresh troops on the front line. In the heat of the battle, however, the units did not get a chance to rotate. Being able to approach the Greek line only in such numbers as the space allowed, the Immortals fared no better than the Medes. Xerxes had to withdraw them as well. The first day of battle probably ended there.
On the second day, the assault failed again. The account of the slain gives some indication why: the wall of bodies must have broken up the Persian line and detracted from their morale. Climbing over the bodies, they could see that they had stepped into a killing machine but the officers behind prevented them from withdrawing. Xerxes at last stopped the assault and withdrew to his camp, totally perplexed. He now knew that a head-on confrontation against Spartan-led troops in a narrow place was the wrong approach.

The defenders were deadly right down the middle. So it is true, the only way was to find a new route.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by Hakan

I've read the comic which implies that they only reason they lost was because of a double cross. Otherwise they could have sat there annihilating the Persian army until there was none left.

Thats more or less what the movie implies, yes.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

Really? There was dinosaur-style rhinocerouses and Persian lamb-people that like smokin the ganja? Interesting. Dont get me wrong, I liked that part of the movie. But I somehow doubt thats exactly how it went down.

i was referring to the overall story on the actual battle, not the extra details thrown in to make it more of a fantastical movie