Last Stand of the 300 (2007 TV Movie) User Reviews

The battle was great, the documentary boring.

[siderite · 6/10 · 22 May 2007]

I really despise documentaries that repeat over and over again the same information, then the break for publicity, then summarizing the information repeated before. The actors in the reenactment were very well chosen, the historians charismatic, the graphics OK, but the information could have been gathered in a few pages. Therefore I rate this movie below average.

But the battle was pretty amazing. There wasn't only a heroic component, but also a naval battle, a great Greek strategist (Themistocles), the burning of Athens and another naval battle.

As an easy documentary, it's OK, but the repetition of information makes it annoying.

Sensational documentary about Persian and Greece history and focusing on the battle of Thermopylae

[ma-cortes · 8/10 · 17 April 2009]

This is a magnificent documentary produced by BBC in similar style to ¨Anibal¨, here is again splendidly brought to life the heroic events about the battle of Thermopylae. The deeds (480 B. C) are correctly re-enacted by a plethora of actors and extras , adding background made by 3D computer generator. Every little detail has been given so much attention, as costume, environment and production desig n. This historic tale completes to enlarge the story by extending the deeds developing in the picture titled ¨300¨ (2006) by Zack Snyder, starred by Gerard Butler as Leonidas, and ¨The 300 Spartans¨(1962) by Rudolph Mate with Richard Egan and Ralph Richardson as Themistocles , both movies limit the story to the battle . As ¨The last stand¨ adds the history about kings Persians : Ciro the Great and Jonican riots ; king Dario and battle of Marathon, including the famous race carried out by Filipides until Athens , the fire of Athens ordered by Xerxes and his imperial body guard of 10.000 immortals, etc... These events aren't exposed in ¨300¨ by Zack Snyder that restricts its filming on the preparation and battle of Thermopylae , the only way to arrive to Athens. The impact of the battle was impressive and the Hellens lost their fear for the Persian conqueror and organized their defense and allowing the Greek city states to create an army to retain the Persians .

Thanks this documentary movie we learn a lot of knowledges. As how king Leonidas led a small army called Falange formed by 300 Spartans named Hoplitas and wielding the shield Heplon , plus 700 Thespians, while the soldiers Phocios sent by Leonidas to protect their flanks flee . They hold off an invading Persian army formed by thousands of soldiers, the great historian Heredotus , possibly exaggerating, wrote that they were 1.700.000, commanded by king Xerxes. We also know of how the Athenian leader Themistocles managed as a great leader by formally placing the Athenas polis under supreme command of Sparta and navigating along strait at Artemisum gets defeat Persian navy . Themistocles commanded a large navy formed by ships called Trirremes which vanquished the Persian warships in the battles of Salamian, Platea and Mycala. This phenomenal documentary-movie will appeal to history and epic events buffs.

Nice program to give "300" its historical perspective

[return_to_cinder · 10/10 · 11 March 2007]

I watched this program the night before I saw "300," and I was glad that I did.

I had heard people complaining about "300" not being historically accurate, and while being true, that movie was meant to entertain, not teach history.

This program goes into depth about the lives of the Spartans and circumstances surrounding the battle at Thermopylae.

As far as documentaries go, it is above average quality and certainly worth seeing of you have or plan to watch "300" or are just interested in this part of history period. The reenactments are good and the scholarly commentary is very informative. I also think that they had the movie in mind when they produced this show, so that the progression overlaps and lets the viewer make a good pre- or post-viewing comparison between Hollywood and history.

Excellent Historical Documentary

[jackneefus · 10/10 · 24 March 2007]

Covered the background, culture, tactics, military equipment and personalities in an interesting an evenhanded way. In particular, the program emphasized the dual land/sea attack of the Persians and the coordination of the Greek infantry and navy needed to defend against the attack. Also the leadup to Thermopylae -- not only Marathon, but the revolt in Asia Minor which the Greeks supported and during which they burned a Persian city.

As a result, I think it actually told a better story than the movie "300". I learned a lot and felt compelled to watch until the end.

My only wish is that I had seen this program AFTER seeing the movie. Constantly finding discrepancies between the plot and the underlying history was very distracting.

Not perfect, but it's better then some newer depictions

[jwfritz · 10/10 · 21 June 2022]

Among the most interesting aspects are the childhood backgrounds of two key players: Leonides and Xerxes. They could almost have been rivals or best friends if they grew up together. It's an epic irony of fate that both had very harsh, challenging, and dangerous upbringings. Xerxes in a sense sounds like a Spartan or that he might have been equally at home in either nation and Leonides likewise could have been equally at home as a Persian noble given the almost eerie way both were taught and raised. The next comparison is the immortals versus the Homoioi Spartoi. The immortals were silent ghost like entities who would instill fear in enemies by the dehumanized armor and attire that's designed to cover up the face and all signs of individuality to make them more imposing and easier to create the myth of their immortal nature. The homoioi were loud, hairy, heavily armored and their faces were only covered during battles when they put their helmets on. Homoioi taunted enemies while the ghost walking Persian elites marched as if moving silently on water. Both outfit depictions are pretty cool in their own right.

The show mentioned lightly armored Persian grunts which is true and technically most of the Greeks were likely also lightly armored and armed skirmishers and missile troops. I can only loosely confirm about 1700 were equipped as the heavily armed hoplites so the rest may well have been light troops. The Homoioi were the most elite among the most elite warriors of the day, the Spartans so even comparing to the very elite immortals might still not be relatively equal. Partly I say this because immortals were immediately replaced upon death and ALWAYS had 10,000 members but they were likely replaced by standouts from the regular troops. They wouldn't or at least they all wouldn't have had the intense training of standard Spartans nor the dedication and time spent focusing on combat and war. Plus as good as their armor was, it was still fairly light compared to lamellar or cuirasses.

This doesn't take away their own unique distinctness and cool factors though either. It's mostly because tge cultures and mindsets are different. Even non military focused Greeks spent a great deal of time on combat with other city states or on athletic competitions. Their environment was smaller with more variety of terrain where Persian were mostly adapted to speed, support of their cavalry, and light armor because vast stretches of the empire were open flat and hot or humid terrain. This is at least hinted at in the documentary but more detailed information is easily accessible. Themistocles is cast almost looking like a myrmidon, who were sometimes depicted were cool black armor too.

The 'second' Thermopylae battle at sea is an interesting little known add on fact. Some seemed to think it was imbalanced bias against Persians, but I don't see it. In point of fact, if anything the Spartans and Greeks are cast in a harsher light with mentioning of constant internal city state warfare; harsh nearly inhuman training of Spartan children; and euthanasia of imperfect babies.

Lackluster

[spartanwarrior23 · 3/10 · 6 May 2008]

On the pure theatrical side, Last Stand was great, as the reenactments and soundtrack are very entertaining, but there are better accounts of this battle found elsewhere that, while not as long or as flashy, are far more historically comprehensive.

Certain little details, such as the misuse of the word "hoplon" for the Greek hoplite shield and the mispronounciations of various names and words, really ate at me.

My guess would be, that because "Last Stand of the 300" was aired the eve of the theatrical release of "300", the History Channel was only trying to ride the coattails of the movie's hype.

If you're looking for a depiction that's historically accurate in all respects possible, you'd have better luck elsewhere.

Designed to cash in

[smithldooi · 3/10 · 14 September 2016]

This came out just after the movie 300 and was so obviously designed to cash in on the hype. The only difference is the Spartans are not fighting in leather nappies with painted on abs.

As such it falls flat for me. And its mostly just the same old glorified re hash with a little more detail, like why the Persian fleet did not just sail pass Thermopylae and drop men off and surround the Greeks.

A lot is generalized and a few key events appear to differ from the original account by Herodotus. It may not appear significant but if you think where people are, what they were doing and what did they know at what time, the story does not stack up.

There is more recent, interesting and different analysis out there, just google 300 Spartans the real story.

Not good

[dostdaranmirasfarhangi · 1/10 · 12 February 2022]

We see many historical scenes in this film. And we expect to see and hear an impartial and accurate narrative. But unfortunately, this film not only completely violates the historical texts, but also mocks and humiliates the persian race. This is very unfortunate.