|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.84.161.44
In Reply to: Re: The 300 Spartans posted by Analog Scott on December 31, 2006 at 19:50:34:
Aside from putting the "Greeks" in Roman outfits, it was actually better than most "sand & sandals" epics of that era.
Follow Ups:
The Greeks in the picture were not in Roman outfits.The Spartans were wearing bronze Corinthian helmets, bell cuirasses and greaves--- very Greek, a little old fashioned for the time but the Spartans were conservative and armor was expensive and lasted a long time.
But certainly not Roman. Some early Roman armor copied Greek styles but there was a definate Italic style also. By the time of Marius the Romans were wearing chainmail and bronze "Montefortino" pot helmets. Helmets changed to Gallic styles under Augustus and in the 1st Century the banded iron strip armor we may think of as typically Roman started being used.
I like The 300 Spartans too. I actually think that with it's Greek politics and Herodotus it's over many heads. Xerxes, Demaratus and Hydarnes were very well done and I liked the way the picture showed the Greek use of light troops.
The Greek heavy infantry formations were not as dense and deep as they would really have been but the picture gets the idea across. Note that the Spartans did confound the Persians with feigned retreats as shown in the picture.
I'm certainly no armor expert, but they sure looked a lot like typical biblical movie "Romans" to me.
"I'm certainly no armor expert,"I am, they looked Greek ;-)
Note that in many movies the Romans look terrible. For instance in Spartacus the Roman rankers are shown wearing Greek style "muscle" cuirasses with Imperial Gallic style helmets from a period 100 years later than the movie is set.
Kind'a as if you made a WW I movie with the doughboys wearing Civil War uniforms and modern kevlar "fritz" helmets.
In the HBO series "Rome" the Roman rankers look pretty good with the exception of showing them wearing trousers. The Romans in Spartacus should'a looked like the Romans in "Rome".
The only thing good about it was the historical event itself. The novie was poorly acted, poorly shot, and poorly edited. It made an amazing story seem almost insignificant and boring. The battles were pathetic. The action was lame and the obvious lack of man power made an epic heroic stand look like a playground scirmish. Honestly this movie really sucks big time. You think it was better than most sand and sandels movies of that era? I can only think of two. Ben Hur and Spartacus. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING! better than Ben Hur and Spartacus?
I simply said "most". Ben-Hur and Spartacus were two big-budget exceptions, not "most". Its been a while since I've seen "The 300 Spartans", and I recall it was well-produced for the early 60s, though certainly not lavish. I assess it in that context. Are you still pissed that I dissed the fantasy comic book-based "300" about Thermopylae that's due out this year?
"I simply said "most". Ben-Hur and Spartacus were two big-budget exceptions, not "most"."
OK what other ones were there that would put 300 better than most? So far from that era its distant 3rd out of 3. Dead lat place by a country mile. What other's were there? I don't remember any." Its been a while since I've seen "The 300 Spartans", and I recall it was well-produced for the early 60s, though certainly not lavish."
It's been a few months for me. Memories can be quite romanticised. It was very badly produced for any era as well as badly acted.
" I assess it in that context."
OK but still that put's it against Ben Hur and Sparticus.
" Are you still pissed that I dissed the fantasy comic book-based "300" about Thermopylae that's due out this year?"
No, I didn't even realize you were the same guy. But is this why you dissed a movie you have never seen and a genre as a whole? Is it becuase of some romanticised distant memories of a movie you saw and loved as a kid?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: