What time period do you think deserves a 300 style movie?

But the English were more benevolent than mediaeval Scots

Yes but the Persians were filthy easterners.

Hey, hey, hey...so are Greeks

no they're white

Teutoberg Forrest

...

Battle of Berlin

Brasidas.
The End of the Sicilian Expedition.
Battle of Hampton Roads.

>you will never see Varus fighting Arminius on top of a giant flaming ball of peat and branches as it rolls its way down the steep hills of Teutoburg

The portrayal of the two cultures is practically backward. Spartans kept large populations of serfs and reveled in their brutal, oppressive traditions. The Persians on the other hand came from a tradition of acceptance and tolerance of foreign cultures, creeds, and races and were renowned for their benevolence as overlords.

Also it makes it seem like Xerxes is just being this dick invading and subjugating Greece to satisfy his ego, when the whole conflicte was started by various Greek city-states (mainly Athens). Xerxes was only continuing plans his father had set in motion to humiliate Athens and subjugate the Greeks as punishment for their transgressions against the Empire. 300 tries to make it seem like some last stand for freedom against tyranny, and setting aside how backward that was as described above, there wasn't really any ideology at stake in the conflict. Darius wanted Athens burned to the ground in punishment, but Xerxes was probably less incensed about the whole thing and would just be satisfied turning the Greek city states into tributaries of his empire.

>being a tributary to the persian empire

into the pit it goes

THIS IS SPARTA

History is told by the victor, friendo

t. Dimitri Pappadopolous

The Zulu under Tshaka,best case scenario some wicked savannah fights,worst case they make Tshaka the good guy.Mfecane to British/Dutch occupation would be cool

im surprised this hasnt been done given tha we are in the we wuz kangs era.

War of the roses or 30 years war perhaps

>Spartans kept large populations of serfs and reveled in their brutal, oppressive traditions.'
>implying there was anything wrong with this

>The Persians on the other hand came from a tradition of acceptance and tolerance of foreign cultures, creeds, and races and were renowned for their benevolence as overlords.

Which is probably why they crumbled and were defeated so easily.

>anyone investing in actual black African history
Better to throw a token negro in Medieval England, than to have an all black kingdom portrayed. To answer op, I'd like to see the sacking of Dahomey, and maybe a last stand between the French and the Amazons. I'd enjoy seeing the French disolving hesitancy to shoot women, and eventually bringing out the machine guns.

The Fall of Constantinople

>Invading you for your own good.

This is the most bottom barrel historical revisionism possible. Persia took slaves during the 1st war under Darius and Xerxes crushed the Egyptian revolt before invading Greece. 300 is bullshit for making the Spartans look like proto-Murica, but the Persians were not good people, either. The difference is that Sparta was defending itself while Xerxes was being a dick who couldn't take no for an answer.

Strength isn't a virtue if you only use it oppress others.

"Oppression" is bullshit. Hierarchy is inevitable and necessary.

>>>Invading you for your own good.
Where did I say that? I said outright that it was a punitive war intended to subjugate Greece in retribution for their transgressions against Persia. Athens and a couple other City States backed Ionian rebels and attacked Persia prior to Persian invasions. Darius was furious and wanted to level Athens to dust for what they did. Xerxes inherited that grudge and did his best to follow through with Darius's plans, but the Greeks were too skilled and too tenacious to overcome.

And I never claimed the Persians were idyllic rulers, only that they were tolerant and renowned for benevolence, both of which are true. Comparatively, the Persians were far better masters than the Spartans. By modern standards, they would be dickbags, but that's true of pretty much every ancient ruler.

cool post, you have anything to back that up besides "duh well it happened in the past" despite the fact you probably live in a democratic country and would hate real hierarchy because you would be the 99%

>despite the fact you probably live in a democratic country and would hate real hierarchy because you would be the 99%

>implying i support hierarchy based off material wealth.

Spartans were actually pretty pathetic, hated to actually fight battles, and it wasn't long before they became a shadow of their former selves.

It was told from a propagandist point of view, it's so obviously slanted it's impossible to take at face value.

Also full of fucking fantasy mutants and monsters.

Yes, which empire was the mould on which later eastern empires were based, including the seleukids and which city remained a backward hellhole that got defeated by athenians chucking spears and thebans making a long line?

Strength is definitely a virtue when the alternative is for someone else to oppress you

None of that slow motion shit and I'd be happy. I'd freaking love to see a War of The Roses adaptation.

So it should be based off inherent "betterness" like the nobles of the past..... right..... and you only want these better people to be materially richer...... right....

No. Better people should have more power.

Shitty people, should not have power.

Material wealth will naturally follow, not lead.

Or you could make the worse people richer and stop them from spending it by telling them that that's what makes them better.

The Charge of the Light Brigade

It was overtop but it was being true to the comic it was based on.
Being a work of fiction they basically followed history only loosely.
It's an okay movie to eat popcorn if you like that kind of stuff.
It wasn't bad but it wasn't for me.

>the whole conflict was started by various Greek city-states (mainly Athens)

So just because the Persian Empire was benevolent compared to The Assyrian and Athenians Empires, the Greeks were in the wrong when they aided their kinsmen in their revolt against Persia?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rorke's_Drift
fucking brits desu
that shit was way more crazy than what we did

The combat of the thirty. Warring English and French knights come together in combat when a duel between two men becomes a controlled contest between 30 on each side. They are deep in Homeric struggle while the noble ladies whose honor they are fighting for watch on from the sidelines. The movie would showcase all the virtues of chivalry with the perfect backdrop of the continuing devastation of the hundred years war going on in the periphery to highlight the otherworldly nature of that virtue.

>comfy and safe living space
>chimp out for no reason
Yes.

The Emu War.

>lose the freedom and political that Greeks before you have enjoyed for hundreds of years
>expect a rational response

>should

>>>/tumblr/

It will follow if thats what you support, or perhaps maybe no one should have the power. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So the solution is socialism, to prevent bad people from having money or power

Already happened, watch the movie Zulu.

This fight didn't change shit. A few days after the combat des trente, the winners got ambushed and killed

I guess in the end it doesn't even matter...