It's not my writing, although from the little I've seen and read of the battle of Thermopylae, I wholeheartedly agree with Publius (I just can't claim the post as mine - I could have written it - but, with my typing skills, it wouldn't have been up until tomorrow). Once again, the Dana referred to is Slate's Dana Stevens of "I just loooooved 'Music and Lyrics'" fame:

I won't see "300" since I'm sure it's silly in some way, as are most contemporary films about anything historical, and likely built filled with gory close-ups of blood and guts. As foolish as the movie may be, though, Dana still stands out as a living example of why folks today desperately need to learn some history and movie-makers and reviewers alike should avoid attempts to impose modern assumptions and sensibilities on historical happenings.

Dana laments that "300" is not redeemed in her eyes by some "nod" to anti-war sentiment, but any such sentiment attributed to Leonidas, Xerxes or any of their warriors would be preposterous. The Greek city-state hoplites (mainly elite and "middle-class" men of who served their states as a a sort of ready militia who could provide their own arms and trained throughout their adult lives for the frequent warfare among the Greeks and against their outside enemies) led by Leonidas were dedicated, fierce and bound by honor and duty as citizens to fight to the death, if need be, and could also be utterly ruthless. Similarly, Xerxes soldiers -- more likely to have been "professionals" in his service -- were warlike, cruel and devoted to their leaders. Any expressions of unease about the task of fighting they faced -- or appearance of fear or lack of resolution -- would have been simply ahistorical nonsense grated onto a script to deliver a message aimed at making the Danas in the audience less queasy about watching all the blood.

Dana finds the scene where Leonidas throws Xerxes messenger down a well particularly off-putting, but according to the historian Herodotus, Xerxes sent messengers to all the Greek city-states when he began his invasion demanding submission (by giving him "earth and water"). Most of the smaller states indicated a willingness to submit but Athens and Sparta both threw the messengers down wells to their deaths. While Herodotus may have been repeating a mythical metaphor about the wells, it would have been common place in 480 B.C. to kill such messengers if your answer was no (Xerxes would have had such messengers crucified -- tough job being an ancient messenger).

Dana also seems to have more than squeamishness about the nature of ancient Greco-Persian combat, in which case he/she ought to become better informed. Basically, the idea was that two armies through themselves in a violent clash together with the front ranks thrusting with spears and swords while the farther back ranks pushed to throw the whole crowd in the direction of their advance. While this kind of warfare was actually a lot less deadly than modern planes, tanks, machine guns, etc., it was definitely a very bloody business for about a hour at most until everyone got too tired to keep up the exertion (see John Keegan books on this subject). It would have been typical for the front ranks to leave behind heaps of dead or badly wounded so that those following up from behind would have to step over or stand on them to keep up the fight. It may not be a movie for everyone, but if you're going to make a movie about Thermopylae, it's hard to see how one could avoid depicting this kind of fighting.

Dana is also especially put out by the racial or ethnic distinctions the movie apparently makes between Greeks and Xerxes army. Perhaps this is overdone, since Xerxes host included many "Persians" from the huge territory containing modern Iran, Iraq and Turkey, many of whom would have been indistinguishable from the Greeks, It also included many Greek mercenaries and allies form the Greek cities around the Aegean and Asia Minor. But it also drew men from the farther corners of the Persian empire whose complexions doubtless were of a range of hues darker than the Greeks. So is it not right to portray the armies as they probably were?

continued...

..that morale-wise, the self-sacrifice by no less than the King of Sparta was what drove the rest of the Greeks (in later battles) and seriously demoralized the Persians (having lost a significant amount of troops to the Spartans paltry 300 soldiers).

War is basically an exercise in morale. And no, this has no bearing on our present conflict, in which, at this point, neither side has morale...