Bullshit like this statement make half of these complaints baseless...

"the way Persians are depicted as decadent, sexually flamboyant and evil in contrast to the noble Greeks"

Yes, the noble Greeks in the movie who discarded "unfit" babies in the opening scene, beat their children to make them "stronger" and let them play survival of the fittest with each other, a whore-ish Queen that used her body for political purposes, backstabbing amongst their own people, and laughter as they killed person after person...

SO NOBLE!

And really, this should all be deaded here:

300 "is based on a COMIC-BOOK FANTASY VERSION of the battle of Thermopylae in 480 B.C., in which a force of 300 Spartans held off a massive Persian army at a mountain pass in Greece for three days."

Nowhere in any of the marketing of this movie did it have the "based on a true story" or similar slogan. It was a movie filled with mutants, goat heads, lepers, random animals, black people, white people, brownish gold people, sluts, etc

Everyone had their evilness and flaws despite the color of their skin, or nationality, or favorite food. Some got kicked down wells, while others were beheaded, and some were stabbed by their own people. Maybe not all the 300 Spartans were flawed, but they were the protagonist of the story, as told through the eyes of one of the Kings best men - Dilios. The king himself was too cold and understanding to allow Ephialtes to fight with the "mighty" Spartans and this ultimately caused their demise.

Any "empire" makes a good antagonist, or villain, because their goal was to take control of the world. Is that how it happened in history? I don't know, but it works well in Frank Millers graphic novel. I don't believe goat sitar players, giant men with blades for arms, large menacing wolves that glow, and half-mutated hunchbacks were a part of history either. THIS ISN'T A HISTORY LESSON AND IT DOESN'T TRY TO BE.

God, I'm done with this thread.