Folks, it's entertainment, not a documentary

Rating: 6/10 (17 April 2007)

What buffoon seriously believes "300" represents real history, or real people? It's astounding that there are people so mind-numbingly dense as to feel the need to spout ill-conceived, poorly researched, knee-jerk reactions about how the movie misrepresents Persians.
Understand this, people: Yes, it misrepresents them. Also understand this: It's a movie. It's fantasy. Get over it.
Yeah, the "Persians" in the film come out looking pretty bad, I'll certainly give you that. Consider that the British often appear equally poorly in movies about the U.S. Revolutionary War. And the French come out looking bad in movies about Algerian independence, and so on and so on. I'm certain Americans come out looking pretty horrific in plenty of films. But accept that it just happens, and unless a film purports to be a documentary, it's not worth getting steamed about -- or feeling the need to come up with "reactions".
Indeed, "300" is so laden with the unreal and imaginary that I can't believe people think it represents actual historical Persians. Seriously: who could possibly confuse "300" with actual history? Here's some help for the confused: What army ever fielded legions of horribly disfigured mutants? Or was led by a nine-foot bald colossus who spoke in deafening Surround Sound? Answer: only an imaginary one.
What's wrong with the people who take real offense when the movie is so wholly a comic-book-style fantasy? I will clarify one accurately depicted concept in the movie, however: the Greeks' determination to not live as "slaves" doesn't refer to slavery, as such. Instead, it means they refuse to submit to a foreign power. Thus, the reference to Xerxes' army being comprised of slaves was true, according to the Greeks' point of view: the Persian army was comprised largely of conquered peoples. For example, the Medes were the first foes the Greeks fought at Thermopylae, and were the most recently conquered by the Persians.
One need only read any amount of actual history to know the difference; I suggest the complainers start doing just that. And then relax.
Finally, to the unfortunate buffoon who posits that "Persia started civilization": That's only about as true as the statement "Columbus discovered America." Who do you think the Seleucids were trading with along the Silk Road? Answer: China, which we know enjoyed a rich cultural and scientific heritage beginning thousands of years earlier.
Read a history book, and don't take fantasy so personally.