300 the Movie - Spartan Training

new2training · February 14, 2007, 3:41pm

I’m not trying to pose as some kind of military historian but I’m legitimately curious to know if any of these actual warriors/soldies from ancient times actually looked jacked?

Sure, some gladiators probably were, but they were living in dorms and training on a daily basis. They were all about the show and entertaining.

I’m guessing their nutrition was extremely poor on extended campaigns.

This coupled with little rest and endless marching probably made them look disease ravaged and emaciated as opposed to looking like body builders.

This obviously has nothing to do with the fact that they were tough as shit no matter what they “looked like”.

From what I’ve read the Army of Northern VA was one of the toughest and well trained Armies in the history of warfare and we actually have pictures to show how horrible their conditions were.

I forget what the average weight was but it was sadly very, very low during the American Civil War.

I’ll bet it was as bad during ancient warfare. Not to mention I think the average size of people in general was much smaller anyway.

Not complaining, body builder/actors make the movie more interesting in some respects, probably not very accurate though.

PGJ · February 14, 2007, 3:42pm

[quote]new2training wrote:
PGJ wrote:
Any historians here to verify the historical accuracy of the movie? I have done some research and it looks pretty accurate. I hope it doesn’t turn into a video game movie. I can’t wait for it to come out. I thought it looked really stupid until I did the research and found out it’s based on an actual battle.

Not that I mind, but the trailers I have seen seem to show a more Science Fiction/Fantasy interpretation.

This is fine by me, I like historically accurate, but GOOD Fantasy type stuff is great too.

i.e. First Conan movie, Lord of the Rings. Problem is, most of them come off as cheese ball and/or fake.

Hopefully this one does not. With today’s special effects, the possibilities are endless, if the story and acting is worth a crap.

Another movie that looks pretty awesome is Pan’s Labyrinth. Anybody else psyched to see it?[/quote]

I agree there is a high potential for a big let-down. Bad acting and cheesie, over-the-top special effects can ruin a movie. I hope it doesn’t get all wrapped up in the love story.

Donut62 · February 14, 2007, 3:43pm

[quote]PGJ wrote:
Any historians here to verify the historical accuracy of the movie? I have done some research and it looks pretty accurate. I hope it doesn’t turn into a video game movie. I can’t wait for it to come out. I thought it looked really stupid until I did the research and found out it’s based on an actual battle. [/quote]

The battle itself did happen and a great novel called Gates of Fire was written about it if you want a good read. The movie, however, is based off of Frank Miller’s graphic novel. The movie takes the angle of how the story would be told by some old Spartans talking around the campfire. Thus, the enemy seems dehumanized and mythical sentiments abound. It’s not supposed to be a History Channel reenactment, just a fucking badass legendary tale.

eric9 · February 14, 2007, 3:50pm

This movie does look great but I am a little disappointed by the fantasy aspect of it also. I read Gates of Fire which is another account of this battle and would have liked to seen a movie based more on this telling. As far as accuracy goes, I know that there were not just three hundred Spartans in this battle, and that they had the aid of others (i think the total was about 1000 men).

Donut62 · February 14, 2007, 4:06pm

Funny ass review:

Neill Cumpston Has Seen 300!!!

Hey, everyone. ?Moriarty? here.

Yes, it really does merit that many exclamation points.

They?re free. Blow me.

Besides… could there ever be any better marriage of film and reviewer? I needed to read this, even if I didn?t know I needed to read it.

Neill Cumpston?s been busy lately, and if his e-mails to me are to be believed, he?s finally reaching the end of his six-year A.A. degree at a community college near his mother?s house. But somehow, he talked his way into an early screening of 300 tonight, and the result is the following review.

He coins a word late in this review that I fully expect to be using for the rest of my life, and I salute his linguistic virtuosity once again.

Nice to have you back, man.

Quote:
I just saw a movie that?ll give your eyes boners, make your balls scream and make you poop DVD copies of THE TRANSPORTER. It?s called 300. I don?t know what the title has to do with the movie, but they could?ve called it KITTENS MAKING CANDLES and it?d still rule.

It?s about these 300 Greek dudes who stomp the sugar-coated shit out of like a million other dudes. I have a feeling that a lot of high school sports coaches are going to show this film to their teams before they play. Also, gay dudes and divorced women are going to use screen captures for computer wallpaper.

The movie takes place about a million years ago, and it?s sort of like a prequel to SIN CITY. Except way less guns and cars but twice as much skull splitting. If you watch this movie and go into a Taco Bell, and say to the cashier, ?I need some extra sauce packets? guess what? You?re getting twenty sauce packets because your face will punch him in the brain.

I can?t spoil the plot because THANK GOD THERE ISN?T ONE. Just ass kicking that kicks ass that, while said ass is getting kicked, is kicking yet more ass that?s hitting someone?s balls with a hammer made of ice but the ice is frozen whiskey.

TWO COOL THINGS ABOUT THE MOVIE AND ONE THING I DIDN?T LIKE:

COOL THING ONE:
HEAVY METAL DURING BATTLE SCENES

Who gives a shit if the music isn?t historically correct? LORD OF THE RINGS could?ve used some Journey. This movie has that chu-CHUNG kind of metal that you hear in your head when your shift supervisor at Wetzel?s Pretzel is telling you that you?ll have to stay for clean up and you wish you had a sock filled with quarters in your hand.

COOL THING TWO:
FOES, MINI-BOSSES AND A BIG BOSS

Basically, the Greek dudes are fighting these Persian dudes, but the director, who must have a dick made of three machine guns, does it all like a video game. The Greeks fight every death metal video from the last ten years. There?s wave after wave of giants, freaks, ninjas, mutants, wizards, and a hunchback who looks like he?s got Rosie O?Donnell on his back.

Would I have been happy if Dom DeLuise from HISTORY OF THE WORLD, PART I had shown up? Maybe, but this movie more than makes up for that glaring oversight.

NOT SO GOOD THING:
DUDE NUDITY (?DUDE-ITY?)

These are Greek times, when there were a lot of naked women around. And there are some naked women in this film, but almost every naked woman scene has a muscular dude giving the screen an ass picnic. Dude-ity is something directors put in their movies so people will think they?re serious, I guess, and not just throwing in naked hotties.

Any directors reading this ? IT?S OKAY TO JUST THROW IN NAKED HOTTIES.

Can?t someone make a movie about naked Amazons and call it PAUSE BUTTON?

My final analysis is 300 the most ass-ruling movie I?ve seen this year, and will probably be the King of 2007 unless someone makes a movie where a pair of sentient boobs fights a werewolf.

MaximusB · February 14, 2007, 4:20pm

This might surpass Gladiator as my all-time favorite movie, and thats a big statement for me as I am full blooded Roman. Kick ass training sequence.

anon31651765 · February 14, 2007, 4:35pm

[quote]new2training wrote:
I’m not trying to pose as some kind of military historian but I’m legitimately curious to know if any of these actual warriors/soldies from ancient times actually looked jacked?

Sure, some gladiators probably were, but they were living in dorms and training on a daily basis. They were all about the show and entertaining.

I’m guessing their nutrition was extremely poor on extended campaigns.

This coupled with little rest and endless marching probably made them look disease ravaged and emaciated as opposed to looking like body builders.

This obviously has nothing to do with the fact that they were tough as shit no matter what they “looked like”.

From what I’ve read the Army of Northern VA was one of the toughest and well trained Armies in the history of warfare and we actually have pictures to show how horrible their conditions were.

I forget what the average weight was but it was sadly very, very low during the American Civil War.

I’ll bet it was as bad during ancient warfare. Not to mention I think the average size of people in general was much smaller anyway.

Not complaining, body builder/actors make the movie more interesting in some respects, probably not very accurate though.
[/quote]

In the times of Braveheart, the average height of an English infnatrymen was 5’0…which is why William Wallace looked like a giant at 6’7.

They didn’t have the nutrition that we have today, and so people ran shorter. I’ve read extensively about the American civil war, and been to many of the battlefields on the east coast…when you see the size of their uniforms, you realize the average soldier was maybe 5’6 or 5’7, and their waist size was maybe a 28" or 29".

This is why Lincoln used to look for people over 6’ tall all the time- there is a famous picture of him, McClellan, and a few other generals, and Lincoln towers, and i mean towers over them, at the height of 6’4"…

new2training · February 14, 2007, 5:03pm

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote

In the times of Braveheart, the average height of an English infnatrymen was 5’0…which is why William Wallace looked like a giant at 6’7.

They didn’t have the nutrition that we have today, and so people ran shorter. I’ve read extensively about the American civil war, and been to many of the battlefields on the east coast…when you see the size of their uniforms, you realize the average soldier was maybe 5’6 or 5’7, and their waist size was maybe a 28" or 29".

This is why Lincoln used to look for people over 6’ tall all the time- there is a famous picture of him, McClellan, and a few other generals, and Lincoln towers, and i mean towers over them, at the height of 6’4"…[/quote]

Irish, Thanks for the info

And if I remember correctly, McClellan was well known for his “robust” size.

new2training · February 14, 2007, 5:15pm

Irish,

I’ve been to a bunch of the battlefields in the N. VA area and it boggles my mind when I visit a place like the Wilderness area or Manasses.

To think how many Americans fought and killed each other is sometimes hard to fathom. All w/i the last 150 years or so. Very sad.

Maybe when forging something strong, blood and sacrifice is inevitable.

Puts a interesting perspective on current conflicts like Iraq. At times I wonder why in the hell the different societies can’t live in peace with one another over there.

I don’t think a lot of people actively think about how violent our own history is (myself included).

To the OP, sorry for the hijack

PGJ · February 14, 2007, 5:58pm

[quote]Donut62 wrote:
PGJ wrote:
Any historians here to verify the historical accuracy of the movie? I have done some research and it looks pretty accurate. I hope it doesn’t turn into a video game movie. I can’t wait for it to come out. I thought it looked really stupid until I did the research and found out it’s based on an actual battle.

The battle itself did happen and a great novel called Gates of Fire was written about it if you want a good read. The movie, however, is based off of Frank Miller’s graphic novel. The movie takes the angle of how the story would be told by some old Spartans talking around the campfire. Thus, the enemy seems dehumanized and mythical sentiments abound. It’s not supposed to be a History Channel reenactment, just a fucking badass legendary tale.

[/quote]

That’s cool. That would be a really interesting angle. Just as long as there aren’t any flying horses, walking trees, or superhuman man-gods who can’t be killed.

caladin · February 14, 2007, 5:59pm

For the record… these men where in great shape. They could hump 20miles a day. In the agoge they would train by running up and down hills with 60lbs of armor on… all day. The elites where all pentathletes of which the 300 that went was made from. These guys where well fed since there where all land owners aka farms. They trained from age 8 - 20 to be ultimate soldiers… Fearless and immune to pain from a psychological standpoint.

They would be the ancient example of SEALS.

One of the things in the movie that wont be true to scale will the phalanx. why Im not sure…

What amazed me was that they could utilize the phalanx attack at full run speed and they would be in perfect step with one another and they could do this while blinded. Which means they would hit you like freight train at full speed with there wall of 8 foot spears. If you feel under there mill as they called it… troops in the 4-6th row would hack and slash you as they rolled over you. Now that must have been terrifying to the enemy!

Qualay · February 14, 2007, 6:01pm

in terms of the historical accuracy part, Spartans did not wear speedos into battle. They woar cuiraisses and leather strap kilts. Obviously there were no rhinoes in the persian army. The battle did occur, but clearly this movie takes much liberty. I’m all for that though…

it looks sick

new2training · February 14, 2007, 6:09pm

This is VERY unsubstantiated but after a quick search I saw several references to Spartan size.

Seems that some arceological digs found armour that would put them at about 5’10" and between 180 and 200lbs.

Regardless of size, they were bad mofo’s

Dedicated · February 14, 2007, 6:25pm

Donut, that review was hilarious. Dude-ity hahaha!

D

Zap_Branigan · February 14, 2007, 6:50pm

I think it looks cheesy as hell. I hope I am wrong. It is one of the greatest stories in world history but it looks like stylized computer generated crap.

Zap_Branigan · February 14, 2007, 6:57pm

[quote]Donut62 wrote:
Funny ass review:

Neill Cumpston Has Seen 300!!!

Hey, everyone. ?Moriarty? here.

Yes, it really does merit that many exclamation points.

They?re free. Blow me.

Besides… could there ever be any better marriage of film and reviewer? I needed to read this, even if I didn?t know I needed to read it.

Neill Cumpston?s been busy lately, and if his e-mails to me are to be believed, he?s finally reaching the end of his six-year A.A. degree at a community college near his mother?s house. But somehow, he talked his way into an early screening of 300 tonight, and the result is the following review.

He coins a word late in this review that I fully expect to be using for the rest of my life, and I salute his linguistic virtuosity once again.

Nice to have you back, man.

Quote:
I just saw a movie that?ll give your eyes boners, make your balls scream and make you poop DVD copies of THE TRANSPORTER. It?s called 300. I don?t know what the title has to do with the movie, but they could?ve called it KITTENS MAKING CANDLES and it?d still rule.

It?s about these 300 Greek dudes who stomp the sugar-coated shit out of like a million other dudes. I have a feeling that a lot of high school sports coaches are going to show this film to their teams before they play. Also, gay dudes and divorced women are going to use screen captures for computer wallpaper.

The movie takes place about a million years ago, and it?s sort of like a prequel to SIN CITY. Except way less guns and cars but twice as much skull splitting. If you watch this movie and go into a Taco Bell, and say to the cashier, ?I need some extra sauce packets? guess what? You?re getting twenty sauce packets because your face will punch him in the brain.

I can?t spoil the plot because THANK GOD THERE ISN?T ONE. Just ass kicking that kicks ass that, while said ass is getting kicked, is kicking yet more ass that?s hitting someone?s balls with a hammer made of ice but the ice is frozen whiskey.

TWO COOL THINGS ABOUT THE MOVIE AND ONE THING I DIDN?T LIKE:

COOL THING ONE:
HEAVY METAL DURING BATTLE SCENES

Who gives a shit if the music isn?t historically correct? LORD OF THE RINGS could?ve used some Journey. This movie has that chu-CHUNG kind of metal that you hear in your head when your shift supervisor at Wetzel?s Pretzel is telling you that you?ll have to stay for clean up and you wish you had a sock filled with quarters in your hand.

COOL THING TWO:
FOES, MINI-BOSSES AND A BIG BOSS

Basically, the Greek dudes are fighting these Persian dudes, but the director, who must have a dick made of three machine guns, does it all like a video game. The Greeks fight every death metal video from the last ten years. There?s wave after wave of giants, freaks, ninjas, mutants, wizards, and a hunchback who looks like he?s got Rosie O?Donnell on his back.

Would I have been happy if Dom DeLuise from HISTORY OF THE WORLD, PART I had shown up? Maybe, but this movie more than makes up for that glaring oversight.

NOT SO GOOD THING:
DUDE NUDITY (?DUDE-ITY?)

These are Greek times, when there were a lot of naked women around. And there are some naked women in this film, but almost every naked woman scene has a muscular dude giving the screen an ass picnic. Dude-ity is something directors put in their movies so people will think they?re serious, I guess, and not just throwing in naked hotties.

Any directors reading this ? IT?S OKAY TO JUST THROW IN NAKED HOTTIES.

Can?t someone make a movie about naked Amazons and call it PAUSE BUTTON?

My final analysis is 300 the most ass-ruling movie I?ve seen this year, and will probably be the King of 2007 unless someone makes a movie where a pair of sentient boobs fights a werewolf.[/quote]

I think I am going to be massively disappointed. I would rather watch a movie based on Gates of Fire than the crap he is describing.

The target audience looks like it is 12 year old boys but in real life it was the older Spartans that already had children that made the stand.

Sounds like they dropped all the important things out of the story to make it look like a video game.

I hope I am wrong.

PGJ · February 14, 2007, 7:01pm

[quote]new2training wrote:
This is VERY unsubstantiated but after a quick search I saw several references to Spartan size.

Seems that some arceological digs found armour that would put them at about 5’10" and between 180 and 200lbs.

Regardless of size, they were bad mofo’s

[/quote]

These guys were groomed from birth to be athletes and warriors. It makes sense that they were unique in their size. At birth, undersized or sickly babies were discarded and left to die. At age 7 they began their military training to include lots of strenuous exercise (even the women exercised regularly). At age 20 they entered the army until they were in their 60’s. I’d say they were a little bigger and tougher than the skinny kids off the farms that fought in the Civil War.

Dedicated · February 14, 2007, 7:13pm

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
Funny ass review:

Neill Cumpston Has Seen 300!!!

Hey, everyone. ?Moriarty? here.

Yes, it really does merit that many exclamation points.

They?re free. Blow me.

Besides… could there ever be any better marriage of film and reviewer? I needed to read this, even if I didn?t know I needed to read it.

Neill Cumpston?s been busy lately, and if his e-mails to me are to be believed, he?s finally reaching the end of his six-year A.A. degree at a community college near his mother?s house. But somehow, he talked his way into an early screening of 300 tonight, and the result is the following review.

He coins a word late in this review that I fully expect to be using for the rest of my life, and I salute his linguistic virtuosity once again.

Nice to have you back, man.

Quote:
I just saw a movie that?ll give your eyes boners, make your balls scream and make you poop DVD copies of THE TRANSPORTER. It?s called 300. I don?t know what the title has to do with the movie, but they could?ve called it KITTENS MAKING CANDLES and it?d still rule.

It?s about these 300 Greek dudes who stomp the sugar-coated shit out of like a million other dudes. I have a feeling that a lot of high school sports coaches are going to show this film to their teams before they play. Also, gay dudes and divorced women are going to use screen captures for computer wallpaper.

The movie takes place about a million years ago, and it?s sort of like a prequel to SIN CITY. Except way less guns and cars but twice as much skull splitting. If you watch this movie and go into a Taco Bell, and say to the cashier, ?I need some extra sauce packets? guess what? You?re getting twenty sauce packets because your face will punch him in the brain.

I can?t spoil the plot because THANK GOD THERE ISN?T ONE. Just ass kicking that kicks ass that, while said ass is getting kicked, is kicking yet more ass that?s hitting someone?s balls with a hammer made of ice but the ice is frozen whiskey.

TWO COOL THINGS ABOUT THE MOVIE AND ONE THING I DIDN?T LIKE:

COOL THING ONE:
HEAVY METAL DURING BATTLE SCENES

Who gives a shit if the music isn?t historically correct? LORD OF THE RINGS could?ve used some Journey. This movie has that chu-CHUNG kind of metal that you hear in your head when your shift supervisor at Wetzel?s Pretzel is telling you that you?ll have to stay for clean up and you wish you had a sock filled with quarters in your hand.

COOL THING TWO:
FOES, MINI-BOSSES AND A BIG BOSS

Basically, the Greek dudes are fighting these Persian dudes, but the director, who must have a dick made of three machine guns, does it all like a video game. The Greeks fight every death metal video from the last ten years. There?s wave after wave of giants, freaks, ninjas, mutants, wizards, and a hunchback who looks like he?s got Rosie O?Donnell on his back.

Would I have been happy if Dom DeLuise from HISTORY OF THE WORLD, PART I had shown up? Maybe, but this movie more than makes up for that glaring oversight.

NOT SO GOOD THING:
DUDE NUDITY (?DUDE-ITY?)

These are Greek times, when there were a lot of naked women around. And there are some naked women in this film, but almost every naked woman scene has a muscular dude giving the screen an ass picnic. Dude-ity is something directors put in their movies so people will think they?re serious, I guess, and not just throwing in naked hotties.

Any directors reading this ? IT?S OKAY TO JUST THROW IN NAKED HOTTIES.

Can?t someone make a movie about naked Amazons and call it PAUSE BUTTON?

My final analysis is 300 the most ass-ruling movie I?ve seen this year, and will probably be the King of 2007 unless someone makes a movie where a pair of sentient boobs fights a werewolf.

I think I am going to be massively disappointed. I would rather watch a movie based on Gates of Fire than the crap he is describing.

The target audience looks like it is 12 year old boys but in real life it was the older Spartans that already had children that made the stand.

Sounds like they dropped all the important things out of the story to make it look like a video game.

I hope I am wrong.[/quote]

The review was meant to be cheesy and funny. I don’t think the movie will be by any means. I too hate a cheesy lame story, but again I don’t think this movie falls anywhere into that category from the trailers and other reviews I have read. Seems like the kind of movie that gets the test flowing to me. However, I could be wrong.

D

BarneyFife · February 14, 2007, 7:16pm