 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.51.206.200
In Reply to: The "queen in Sparta?" I'll bet they weren't faithful to the Spartan posted by tinear on March 11, 2007 at 17:26:36:
There is more exposed male flesh in this film than in any bathhouse. Spartan chest armor has been eschewed in favor of fully exposed, massively muscled, hairless torsos. It is incomprehensible that the 300 do not end up being human shish-ke-bobs during the first two days of battle.The reality was that the Spartans wore body armor and the Persians wore none and had poor wicker shields.
I enjoyed the look of the film. But make no mistake, this ain't no "Gladiator."
If I were a cynical liberal, I would regard this film as poorly disguised propaganda for an American war with Iran.
Follow Ups:
The idea of the "beautiful death" may appeal to suicide bombers, who will probably embrace this movie, but it is unlikely to resonate among the American audience in general. I don't think the Spartan lifestyle is going to be hugely popular among the normal movie-going audience.
John EH, HiFi Guy, etc.
News to me for sure..but if we are why are our troops in Iraq?
I was referring to propaganda for a possible future war with Iran.
A generation or so after The Persian War the Spartans discarded all body armor except a small pot helmet; evidently they figured the large shield was sufficient protection and that lightening the soldier's load gave more stamina for the push, also more flexibility in fighting light infantry armed with missle weapons.The other Greeks seem to have followed suit. Then about a generation later armor made a comeback.
hjg
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
