Any student of history is familiar with the famous battle between the Persians and the Greeks at Thermopylae. It is one of the more fascinating true stories in ancient history. Probably the most engaging book on the subject is actually found in the fiction section, entitled "At the Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield. The book tells the story of the battle in flashback as seen through the eyes of a fictional survivor. It also offers great insight into what is known of the Spartan lifestyle and culture. The reason I'm going on about this book is that it was also to be made into a movie but was halted, as far as I know, in pre-production due to the more rapid development of "300". While "300" has definite artistic value, it's historical value is nullified by its blatant inaccuracies. I simply wish that "The Gates of Fire" had won the footrace into production rather than "300", because it is not likely that a movie studio will spend any money on a project that tells the same story as a movie that has already been released.

I'll not go into describing the events of the movie, because most people already know the story of the famous battle. I will cover what I liked and didn't like about this telling of it. First of all, it is important to note that "300" is not actually based directly on the history of the battle, it is actually based on Frank Miller's nicely done Graphic Novel about the battle. It is also important to note that the graphic novel merely used the true historical events as a foundation upon which to create a story, rather than just a graphic presentation of the historical facts. This is something I had to remind myself again and again while watching "300". One of my concerns, however, is that some less informed people may watch this movie not knowing any better, and accept this version of the story as historically accurate, when it is not.

Here are several points where this movie may mislead people in its presentation of the story:

In the movie, Xerxes is presented as being an evil conqueror intent on enslaving all that stand in his way. He is shown on a litter carried by slaves. His traveling palace is depicted, as my roommate described it, as "Xerxes house of debauchery" where slaves dance and writhe nakedly in an orgy of self indulgence.

In truth, from what I've read, the Persian kings descended from Darius the Great (Xerxes' father) abhorred slavery, and did not tolerate its practice. The Greeks (including the Spartans) did practice slavery. Th Persians were also famous for allowing conquered states to maintain their own leadership and ways of life. This led to conquered lands that saw no reason to revolt, for the most part, and solidified the Persians' control over their subjects. It has been said that many of the Persian empire's conquered lands actually had their quality of life greatly improved, in much the same way as the conquered roman provinces many centuries later. The Xerxes of  "300" resembles the historical figure in name alone.

In the movie, Leonidas sought the advice of an oracle, which was presented as an adolescent girl that was drugged into a trance like state where her visions originated. The girl was controlled by a group of lecherous, and leprous, priests that were constantly provided with new oracles that were selected from among the most attractive young women in the kingdom. The oracle explicitly said that Sparta shouldn't go to war (Because the priests had been bribed by Persia, etc.)

This is entirely made up. There was no inbred leprous group of priests. Not much is known of the oracle, but I know it wasn't as shown in "300". Leonidas, as all Spartans, did place a great deal of faith in the Oracle, and sought out its advice. But what the oracle said in real life was something to the effect of "If Sparta does not go to war, it will fall. If Sparta does go to war, we will mourn a great king". (I'm quoting from memory, don't expect it to be exact). Leonidas took this to mean that he was the great king that would be mourned, and that it was his duty to go to battle with Persia and die, and that his sacrifice would save Sparta.

There are two reasons that these inaccuracies bother me. One is that the real story, in my opinion, is just as interesting, or even more so. Why change it? Why make up stuff when the truth as we know it is interesting enough? Two is that there will be plenty of people who go see this movie who won't know that it is based on a graphic novel rather than the true events who will walk away from the movie believing these inaccuracies to be how things really happened. I can totally understand why Iran is so upset about this movie. Of course, the Iranians can rest assured that any Americans who know little enough history to believe this presentation also won't know that Persia is known today as Iran.

My other beef with the movie is the overly long, and entirely unnecessary sex scenes. They didn't fit with the flow of the movie and seemed to be entirely gratuitous. Also, the scene of the oracle's trance, while stylish, was far too long, seemingly only to give more opportunities for the oracle's nipples to be exposed. And finally, the scene in "Xerxes house of debauchery" was also way too excessively long. We get the idea pretty quick, no need to keep beating it in. Look, I'm no prude when it comes to sexuality and nudity in movies, but here it all seemed so contrived and wholly unneeded, which contrasted with how much screen time it was given. Maybe its a graphic novel thing that I don't understand that it has to be..well...graphic?

Overall, the movie was very stylishly presented. The visual presentation was very enjoyable, the action was very good. The battles were a little on the graphic side for some, but nothing unrealistic (even if it seemed they were focusing on the gore, rather than the big picture sometimes). I'm happy that this film didn't forget the 7000 Greek soldiers that accompanied the "300" to Thermopylae, as many mythic tellings of the tale often do. In closing, I recommend seeing the movie, but not to view it as a "true story".