Incredible Movie Plots That Are Based On Real Life 300
The Movie
King Leonidas (Gerard Butler) takes exception to the Persian Emperor's demands that the city states of Greece become his tributaries. While the rest of Greece sits about eating stuffed vine leaves and fondling their juniors, he and 300 of his best men march off to hold the huge Persian army and its various monsters at bay.
A bust of King Leonidas
The Amazing True Story!
It's true that, one day in 480BC, Persian Emperor Xerxes decided to conquer Greece. So he gathered an army of between 2.5 million (contemporary figure from Herodotus) and 250,000 (modern estimate) men and got down to business. That's the thing about being an Emperor - you get large numbers of people at your beck and call because, really, who's going to argue with the semi-divine ruler of the world? The merry bunch bridged the Hellespont and marched unimpeded towards the city states of Greece. Just one problem: 300 fanatical, super-trained Spartan warriors. Oh, and the other 4,000 - 6,000 men standing right behind those 300.
The Spartans, better trained, conditioned, equipped and armoured than their opponents, and holding a superior tactical position at the narrow pass of Thermopylae, held their ground against overwhelming odds (even assuming modern estimates on Xerxes' army are correct) for three days. At the end of that time, a local of the Thermopylae area called Ephialtes betrayed his country and showed the Persians a goat path that allowed them to flank the Spartans and surround and massacre them. Like, bummer. No wonder the Greeks still use the word "ephialtes" to mean "nightmare" or "traitor" or "total and utter dick".
The Differences
First and foremost, a large part of the Spartans' success was down to the fact that they wore armour, not just leather panties. Second, at that time and despite Butler's Leonidas' claims, it was the Spartans rather than the Athenians who engaged in habitual pederasty or "boy-loving". Third, at that time the Spartans were slave owners (their "helot" servants) while the Persian Empire didn't really have slaves, again despite Leonidas' hectoring about freedom. That said, there's a convincing argument that the sacrifice of the 300 saved the Greek civilisation, and the ideals of democracy and philosophy that it contained, and went a long way to creating modern Europe. Oh, and the Persians didn't have giant men with tusks for arms. Sorry.
Have Your Say
Have you seen any other movies that you later learned were based on true stories? Register or login now to have your say.
Your Comments
1
Aye.
Posted on Saturday December 5, 2009, 02:06 by captainamazing
It's about time someone mentioned it was the Spartans who were reknowned boy-lovers, not the Persians. And fighting in your keks? What's that about?? Read More
2
ahem!
Posted on Monday November 9, 2009, 18:13 by mdogg81
L: Kefka of Clubs
While there are hundreds more inaccurate things you could say about 300, something always ignored about the Battle of Thermopylae is the arguably more important naval battle going on at the same time at Artemisium at the same time, led by the Athenian general Themistocles. While it wasn't a victory, exactly, it did damage the Persian fleet enough that Salamis (where the war was really won) was a much easier victory for the Greek armies. Also, as Herodotus claims there were 2,500,000 soldiers, cutting off their supply train (their navy) was a much more important tactic than killing a few soldiers or holding them up for a bit.
Sorry for the rant, but I really feel Sparta gets far too much credit for winning the Persian Wars. Remember when you guys were too busy to fight at Marathon, eh? Who had to do the heavy lifting there?!
sp;
That're very interesting, however it would make for a godawful, dull piece of entertainment journalism, which is why Read More
4
RE: AYE!
Posted on Monday November 9, 2009, 10:21 by Helen OHara
NZ, I didn't forget it, but I was looking for incidences where the real story was more interesting than the movie, and in that one I felt they were about on a par.
Kefka, there's no doubt that Artemisium was important, or Salamis, but neither has quite as great a cool factor as Thermopylae.
Read More
5
AYE!
Posted on Saturday November 7, 2009, 09:39 by nz_louise
you forgot heavenly creatures!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Read More
6
300
Posted on Friday November 6, 2009, 15:16 by Kefka of Clubs
While there are hundreds more inaccurate things you could say about 300, something always ignored about the Battle of Thermopylae is the arguably more important naval battle going on at the same time at Artemisium at the same time, led by the Athenian general Themistocles. While it wasn't a victory, exactly, it did damage the Persian fleet enough that Salamis (where the war was really won) was a much easier victory for the Greek armies. Also, as Herodotus claims there were 2,500,000 soldiers, cutting off their supply train (their navy) was a much more important tactic than killing a few soldiers or holding them up for a bit.
Sorry for the rant, but I really feel Sparta gets far too much credit for winning the Persian Wars. Remember when you guys were too busy to fight at Marathon, eh? Who had to do the heavy lifting there?! Read More
7
Dead Ringers
Posted on Friday November 6, 2009, 12:21 by sonofjor-el
Where's Dead Ringers?! I don't think any writer could have come up with identical twin Gynaecologists, manipulating their patients. Class. Read More
Follow us on Twitter | 
Follow us on Facebook | RSS | Empire iPad Edition
