It's grossly historically inaccurate. It's like if you wrote a story where the Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
Seriously, anon. Even the historical sources sucking Spartan wiener and praising them over the Athenians noted that a slave in Sparta was more a slave than anywhere else in all of Greece, and 90% of the population of Sparta was slaves.
How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again
Not once does the comic say they are. It’s also an intentionally biased telling of the story from the Spartan perspective. It’s almost like you don’t know how to read anything more complex than a shopping list (not to say this is even all that complex) because you’re some seething, semi-moronic poo in the loo.
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
It's intentionally biased in favor of the Spartans, in order to make the story a Cold War metaphor, you mong. Sparta = America, Persia = Soviet Union "Evil Empire". Everyone sane knows that the Spartans were monstrous buttholes and the Persians were actually pretty chill (if extremely backstabby in their political arenas).
Did you miss the entire part about how they pluck their own children, force them to beat each other bloody and train for war? At no point in the comic do they act as if they’re “champions of freedom”. They’re openly and clearly just champions of themselves and don’t want to bow to a foreign threat, whether other Greek or anywhere else. It’s also clear that leonidas opposes their own Spartan traditions give his reaction to the ephors and the Oracle.
Beyond this it isn’t a historical text, it’s a comic loosely based on a historical event. And his still has them lose in the end.
>t's like if you wrote a story where the Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
So it would be historically accurate?
Since when do they give a FRICK about historical accuracy?
Seriously, anon. Even the historical sources sucking Spartan wiener and praising them over the Athenians noted that a slave in Sparta was more a slave than anywhere else in all of Greece, and 90% of the population of Sparta was slaves.
How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
What? Did you even read the same book I did?
>Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
This is true assuming Call of Duty is accurate with black soldiers fighting on the front lines for the Allies in every single theater
last week we had someone ask why there's no fictional depictions of American history that go over the top the way Japan does with samurai, and this is exactly why. Fricking dorks in the anglosphere who want to flex history trivia they know
Anti Persian racism allegedly. I don't mind it but Persians really were offended by it.
>Fricking dorks in the anglosphere who want to flex history trivia they know
But the Japanese also like to make historically accurate media along side historical fantasy.
Check out the Mel Gibson movie The Patriot, or the book Blood Meridian.
It's grossly historically inaccurate. It's like if you wrote a story where the Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
The Nazis were fighting an international coalition of globohomosexual though. The books they burned in Berlin were transgender research and pro-pedophilia books from the Berlin Institute of Sex, and they only rose to power in the first placeas a response to the globohomosexual LGBTQ+ Weimar Republic..
>Check out the Mel Gibson movie The Patriot,
When that movie came out, you know what happened? A shit ton of people criticizing it for historical inaccuracy and for it being biased history.
Of course they would, but it's not the main point of criticism and they have enough in the vein of wild historical divergences that they understand when something isn't meant to be 1:1 accurate. It's more likely just a point of comparison- discussing how the real history influenced and was exaggerated for the fiction but understanding why it would be.
With historical inaccuracies in American work, it largely becomes the main point of critisism.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Nobody gives a flying frick when you do generic historical period fiction. It becomes the focus of criticism only when you specifically choose to tie yourself to actual people and events and blatantly alter them while presenting them to be historically accurate. Which is what American fiction likes to do a hell of a lot more and there’s way more survived records about that shit.
Nobody is ever complaining about Clint Eastwood’s western for their accuracy the way they do about Mel Gibson’s Braveheart or the Patriot that want to be taken super serious historical epics depicting major events of history.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
I may just run in more idiotic circles than you, but I see people do that shit ALL THE FRICKING TIME. It's much more a proxy for whatever they feel politically than historical accuracy though.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>the way they do about Mel Gibson’s Braveheart or the Patriot that want to be taken super serious historical epics depicting major events of history.
which again, brings me back to my original point that history nerds would nitpick every bit
And no, The Patriot(or Braveheart, or Apocolypto) were never intended to be 100% accurate history, Gibson is on record saying he took many liberties for the sake of entertainment.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Mel’s projects were never intended to be historically accurate
That never comes off as clear intent when you watch his movies. And that’s the problem. His tone and approach is always too serious and don’t diverge in ways that make it clear it’s just dumb entertainment, so naturally people expect there to be proper accuracy.
Nobody expects Guy Richie doing King Arthur to be anywhere near historically accurate because his style makes it clear it’s never intended to be. Same way the Last Legion gets a pass. Meanwhile someone like Ridley Scott is expected to be because that’s traditionally more his style. And I say that as someone who agrees with Ridley in not giving a frick about his Napoleon being inaccurate. If you want to make fiction about history, the more it is about read characters and events more scrutiny you will receive, especially when there are so many records available.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Then that's the problem of the viewer taking them at face value and not doing their own research. There should be room for heavily stylized historical takes should be allowed along with fictionalized ones that are played more straight..
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Do your own research!!
Yeah, nobody is going to do homework over a random movie. Maybe you should do what Japan does and do generic period fiction instead of hyper focus on real events and famous characters and then get upset when people point out the inaccuracies. Nobody is going to be particularly upset over a fictionalised stand-in a la Shogun outside of history nerds while people will take issue when you completely misrepresent large parts of reap events. Unless you do something as egregious as the Patriot where the British as mustache twirling cartoon villains to a point it comes off as super weird anti-British propaganda that’s entirely out of place in modern times.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Yeah, nobody is going to do homework over a random movie.
That's their own fault, then.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
You do not research the historical accuracy of every movie you watch, Mr. Internet Tough guy. Go get your dopamine hits from argueing somewhere else, loser.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
The point is I don't assume a movie that has to be restrained to 1 and half-3 hours and meet the approval of executives, test audiences, etc. is going to be 100% historically accurate.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
You have to assume some parts are accurate or semi-accurate. And if you don't come into there already knowing history about whatever highly specific subject this is you are just going to guess.
Although since "Hitler & Nazi bad" is the most prominent and enforced historical absurdity I'd say the standards are pretty rock bottom.
>Blood Meridian
fThat's getting made into a movie. I hear it's the most violent book ever written, made people sick back in the 90s. I've listened to some of the audiobook, it's beautifully brutal.
The type of people who seethe about it not being “historically accurate” seem to always be the types that don’t mind that Hamilton is made as a rap musical with black people playing white people.
Hamilton is a musical reinterpretation of events, not a serious retelling of history. 300 meanwhile wants you to take it 110% seriously and never makes a clear distinction that it’s telling a very biased version of events.
>300 meanwhile wants you to take it 110% seriously
So you’ve never read it? Or do you actually think human beings look like mutants as Ephialtes did? There’s various supernatural and fantastical elements. At no point would anyone but a moron think it’s a mainly historically accurate representation
This is like seething about The Patriot or The Gladiator
>300 meanwhile wants you to take it 110% seriously
So you’ve never read it? Or do you actually think human beings look like mutants as Ephialtes did? There’s various supernatural and fantastical elements. At no point would anyone but a moron think it’s a mainly historically accurate representation
This is like seething about The Patriot or The Gladiator
It’s a heavily stylised comic. That doesn’t make it any less serious. Or justify Miller’s poor attempt to depict Spartans as thinking they were above fricking boys unlike their enemies
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Spartans as thinking they were above fricking boys unlike their enemies
See:
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again
Not once does the comic say they are. It’s also an intentionally biased telling of the story from the Spartan perspective. It’s almost like you don’t know how to read anything more complex than a shopping list (not to say this is even all that complex) because you’re some seething, semi-moronic poo in the loo.
But this time actually read it.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
It was poorly written, historically inaccurate, remembered for its art showcase
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>poorly written
Why cause it hurt your fee fees?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
You didn’t actually read the posts did you? Because you haven’t genuinely replied to them either time I told you to go back and try again.
I know what you're getting at, but stage plays almost never get the same criticism because stylistic interpretation is expected. Shakespeare's plays were based off history and the liberties are long accepted.
Yasuke is a reap historical person that Japan has made plenty of media about yet racist weebs can’t help but to seethe at the idea of black person in Japan having their own Wikipedia article.
He was a real historical person....that was pretty much just a footnote in the Unification of Japan.
The English wikipedia page is loaded with garbage. Compare it with the Japanese wikipedia page that has pretty much every primary source mentioning him in history linked.
It has nothing to do with American politics. People just don’t find westerners interesting anymore outside of isolated exceptions.
The left's contempt for parts of the wild west is very blatant.
It's grossly historically inaccurate. It's like if you wrote a story where the Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
>It's grossly historically inaccurate.
That's not their reasons however
If you already know the answer why did you kill a topic?
What is this hideous vertical cover? It’s a landscape dimension oversized book.
Brown hands typed this post.
Seriously, anon. Even the historical sources sucking Spartan wiener and praising them over the Athenians noted that a slave in Sparta was more a slave than anywhere else in all of Greece, and 90% of the population of Sparta was slaves.
How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again
Not once does the comic say they are. It’s also an intentionally biased telling of the story from the Spartan perspective. It’s almost like you don’t know how to read anything more complex than a shopping list (not to say this is even all that complex) because you’re some seething, semi-moronic poo in the loo.
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
It's intentionally biased in favor of the Spartans, in order to make the story a Cold War metaphor, you mong. Sparta = America, Persia = Soviet Union "Evil Empire". Everyone sane knows that the Spartans were monstrous buttholes and the Persians were actually pretty chill (if extremely backstabby in their political arenas).
>freedom again?
Freedom from shitskin invasions
Did you miss the entire part about how they pluck their own children, force them to beat each other bloody and train for war? At no point in the comic do they act as if they’re “champions of freedom”. They’re openly and clearly just champions of themselves and don’t want to bow to a foreign threat, whether other Greek or anywhere else. It’s also clear that leonidas opposes their own Spartan traditions give his reaction to the ephors and the Oracle.
Beyond this it isn’t a historical text, it’s a comic loosely based on a historical event. And his still has them lose in the end.
>t's like if you wrote a story where the Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
So it would be historically accurate?
Xenephon, the guy who wrote this history 300 is based on was grossly inaccurate himself.
Since when do they give a FRICK about historical accuracy?
>How am I supposed to believe that Sparta were these huge champions of freedom again?
What? Did you even read the same book I did?
He didn't read the book, he only saw the Scott Snyder movie
go on
tell me how it's inaccurate
>Nazis fighting in the Battle of the Bulge were fighting diversity, inclusion, and other LGBTQ+++ talking points.
This is true assuming Call of Duty is accurate with black soldiers fighting on the front lines for the Allies in every single theater
why do you come here to tell us how pissed you are about people on other sites?
I bet it's like, 5 reviews too
morons like these remind me to never write anything based on real life history
last week we had someone ask why there's no fictional depictions of American history that go over the top the way Japan does with samurai, and this is exactly why. Fricking dorks in the anglosphere who want to flex history trivia they know
I mean, you do have westerns, but american politics makes it so tricky to do you might as well just make a western set in a fantasy or sci-fi world.
Or you know, people stopped caring about westerns forty, fifty years ago.
People still like the elements. Mando was popular. Rango isn't the biggest animated movie but it is remembered fondly.
It has nothing to do with American politics. People just don’t find westerners interesting anymore outside of isolated exceptions.
America is just too young for proper legends
that has nothing to do with it, Japan has fictionalized history stories about stuff from the 20th century.
The japanese don't have the historical self loathing culture we have in the west.
Anti Persian racism allegedly. I don't mind it but Persians really were offended by it.
>Fricking dorks in the anglosphere who want to flex history trivia they know
But the Japanese also like to make historically accurate media along side historical fantasy.
Check out the Mel Gibson movie The Patriot, or the book Blood Meridian.
The Nazis were fighting an international coalition of globohomosexual though. The books they burned in Berlin were transgender research and pro-pedophilia books from the Berlin Institute of Sex, and they only rose to power in the first placeas a response to the globohomosexual LGBTQ+ Weimar Republic..
>Check out the Mel Gibson movie The Patriot,
When that movie came out, you know what happened? A shit ton of people criticizing it for historical inaccuracy and for it being biased history.
Do you think in Japan nobody ever talks about historical inaccuracies in their own media?
Of course they would, but it's not the main point of criticism and they have enough in the vein of wild historical divergences that they understand when something isn't meant to be 1:1 accurate. It's more likely just a point of comparison- discussing how the real history influenced and was exaggerated for the fiction but understanding why it would be.
With historical inaccuracies in American work, it largely becomes the main point of critisism.
Nobody gives a flying frick when you do generic historical period fiction. It becomes the focus of criticism only when you specifically choose to tie yourself to actual people and events and blatantly alter them while presenting them to be historically accurate. Which is what American fiction likes to do a hell of a lot more and there’s way more survived records about that shit.
Nobody is ever complaining about Clint Eastwood’s western for their accuracy the way they do about Mel Gibson’s Braveheart or the Patriot that want to be taken super serious historical epics depicting major events of history.
I may just run in more idiotic circles than you, but I see people do that shit ALL THE FRICKING TIME. It's much more a proxy for whatever they feel politically than historical accuracy though.
>the way they do about Mel Gibson’s Braveheart or the Patriot that want to be taken super serious historical epics depicting major events of history.
which again, brings me back to my original point that history nerds would nitpick every bit
And no, The Patriot(or Braveheart, or Apocolypto) were never intended to be 100% accurate history, Gibson is on record saying he took many liberties for the sake of entertainment.
>Mel’s projects were never intended to be historically accurate
That never comes off as clear intent when you watch his movies. And that’s the problem. His tone and approach is always too serious and don’t diverge in ways that make it clear it’s just dumb entertainment, so naturally people expect there to be proper accuracy.
Nobody expects Guy Richie doing King Arthur to be anywhere near historically accurate because his style makes it clear it’s never intended to be. Same way the Last Legion gets a pass. Meanwhile someone like Ridley Scott is expected to be because that’s traditionally more his style. And I say that as someone who agrees with Ridley in not giving a frick about his Napoleon being inaccurate. If you want to make fiction about history, the more it is about read characters and events more scrutiny you will receive, especially when there are so many records available.
Then that's the problem of the viewer taking them at face value and not doing their own research. There should be room for heavily stylized historical takes should be allowed along with fictionalized ones that are played more straight..
>Do your own research!!
Yeah, nobody is going to do homework over a random movie. Maybe you should do what Japan does and do generic period fiction instead of hyper focus on real events and famous characters and then get upset when people point out the inaccuracies. Nobody is going to be particularly upset over a fictionalised stand-in a la Shogun outside of history nerds while people will take issue when you completely misrepresent large parts of reap events. Unless you do something as egregious as the Patriot where the British as mustache twirling cartoon villains to a point it comes off as super weird anti-British propaganda that’s entirely out of place in modern times.
>Yeah, nobody is going to do homework over a random movie.
That's their own fault, then.
You do not research the historical accuracy of every movie you watch, Mr. Internet Tough guy. Go get your dopamine hits from argueing somewhere else, loser.
The point is I don't assume a movie that has to be restrained to 1 and half-3 hours and meet the approval of executives, test audiences, etc. is going to be 100% historically accurate.
You have to assume some parts are accurate or semi-accurate. And if you don't come into there already knowing history about whatever highly specific subject this is you are just going to guess.
Although since "Hitler & Nazi bad" is the most prominent and enforced historical absurdity I'd say the standards are pretty rock bottom.
>Blood Meridian
fThat's getting made into a movie. I hear it's the most violent book ever written, made people sick back in the 90s. I've listened to some of the audiobook, it's beautifully brutal.
Tall tales aside, lets let Japan do it.
Vid related. It's president Andrew Jackson, a playable character in Samurai Showdown.
>lets let Japan do it.
Let's not. Shit's awful.
The type of people who seethe about it not being “historically accurate” seem to always be the types that don’t mind that Hamilton is made as a rap musical with black people playing white people.
Just strikes me as hypocritical.
Hamilton is a musical reinterpretation of events, not a serious retelling of history. 300 meanwhile wants you to take it 110% seriously and never makes a clear distinction that it’s telling a very biased version of events.
How autistic are you that the last part didn't register? It couldn't have been any more obvious.
>300 meanwhile wants you to take it 110% seriously
So you’ve never read it? Or do you actually think human beings look like mutants as Ephialtes did? There’s various supernatural and fantastical elements. At no point would anyone but a moron think it’s a mainly historically accurate representation
This is like seething about The Patriot or The Gladiator
What part of 300 represents itself as not serious?
See:
But actually read this time.
It’s a heavily stylised comic. That doesn’t make it any less serious. Or justify Miller’s poor attempt to depict Spartans as thinking they were above fricking boys unlike their enemies
>Spartans as thinking they were above fricking boys unlike their enemies
See:
But this time actually read it.
It was poorly written, historically inaccurate, remembered for its art showcase
>poorly written
Why cause it hurt your fee fees?
You didn’t actually read the posts did you? Because you haven’t genuinely replied to them either time I told you to go back and try again.
I know what you're getting at, but stage plays almost never get the same criticism because stylistic interpretation is expected. Shakespeare's plays were based off history and the liberties are long accepted.
Yasuke.
The fan fic has gotten so bad that the English wikipedia page is complete trash.
Yasuke is a reap historical person that Japan has made plenty of media about yet racist weebs can’t help but to seethe at the idea of black person in Japan having their own Wikipedia article.
He was a real historical person....that was pretty much just a footnote in the Unification of Japan.
The English wikipedia page is loaded with garbage. Compare it with the Japanese wikipedia page that has pretty much every primary source mentioning him in history linked.
The left's contempt for parts of the wild west is very blatant.
You can smell the seething from a mile away
What were you expecting from this thread?
I didn't see the movie. I'll take your word for it.
Too masculine.
Call the soibois who can make a good onions material...
reading mediocre things 'to stick it to the libs' makes you a colossal homosexual
> t. Seething soiboy
I love it and I have Persian friends
It's alright. Not his best, but still worth reading.