Ancient warfare movies

[machinor]

It is my opinion that a good portrait of the life of Alexander would only come if it was made in a trilogy.

I absolutely disagree. I hate this obsession with movie trilogies. Usually that's just totally unnecessary.

As I mentioned before: Take a look at "Alexander The Great" from 1956 with Richard Burton. The battle scenes aren't really that good, but the plot and characters are absolutly fantastic. A true epic. And I think Alexander's life definately does not provide enough plot for a movie trilogy. If you don't fill up time with battle scenes like the one of Gaugamela in "Alexander" (which definetly was great) then there would not be enough to provide a constant level of interest without turning to "Rome"-series-options like introducing lots of sideplots and -characters (do not get me wrong, I liked that a lot about HBO's Rome, but it would be a bit silly to do that in a movie to that extend).

[Jolt]

Heck, if Alexander's life and career can't provide interest for 6 hours, I don't know how the hell did LoTR got such a huge success.

[Ibrahim]

Heck, if Alexander's life and career can't provide interest for 6 hours, I don't know how the hell did LoTR got such a huge success.

think on it man: alexander is just a guy who conquesr the world to most poeple. Poeple hwever find entertainment value in rings. Its kind of sickenening when you think about it, but mann does lean towards shiny and the near, not the "drab" and far (don't get me wrong, Alexander never was drab, but you get my point). The viewer can relate to the quest for power, the romance, and the monsters in the story, since its flat out there for all to see. But most do not see such allegories in history, at least the weasy ones most viewers look for.

alternatively, the Author proposes a deep psychological atachment to rings of any type, real or otherwise (I hate the books and movies for LoTR)

[machinor]

I was quite bored with the LotR-movies. The first one was kind of cool for the most part, but the other two were just "blablabla... I get it, you're all totally important 'n stuff... get to the action, damit!!"
;)

[desert]

10,000 B.C. anyone?

PS: I'm going to pretend you didn't say that, machinor.

[abou]

I was quite bored with the LotR-movies. The first one was kind of cool for the most part, but the other two were just "blablabla... I get it, you're all totally important 'n stuff... get to the action, damit!!"
;)

I would avoid the books then.

[Sarathos]

I will also support KoH, 300, Gladiator as great movies. Arthur, I shall remain neutral as it was a good movie, actor's were great but the storyline, not so much.

I have seen all of Troy, but what I did see did not impress me.

[machinor]

I would avoid the books then.

I actually read the books, because a friend of mine was a huge fan of the books back when the first movie came out. As I mentioned I did like the first one, so I read all three books. Well, let's just say it reminded me why I like the Dune novels more (as the Dune- and LotR-franchises are always hyped to be direct "rivals"... I never got on what basis, but still... I like Dune more... except the new ones, they're terrible).

I quite liked The Silmarillion, though.

[Gleemonex]

10,000 B.C. anyone?

Technically that's a pre-historic warfare movie, but since there is a grand total of two-and-a-half of those ever made (Quest for Fire, The Scorpion King and 10 000 B.C.) that I'm aware of, I think it's okay to discuss it here ;)

Anyhow, 10 000 B.C. was pretty enjoyable, and I enjoyed his trek (which I imagine as going from the Urals to the Nile). They also managed to work some of the modern mysteries of archaeology into the storyline, which I was sure they were going to totally miss. And it wasn't quite as ahistorical as I thought it was going to be. But the end totally ruined it for me.

Spoiler alert!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I thought it was total Hollywood bullsh*t that he clearly and unambiguously "accepted" the compromise with the bad guy, then rescinded after asking about the fates of the slaves. It was a failed attempt at pathos, to me. It would have been just as sophisticated, and much quicker, if he'd just said "I accept... NOT!". It was also trite, anachronistic slavery-bad-democracy-good neo-American Hollywood drivel.

-Glee

[desert]

[Celtic_Punk]

never ever ever speak of 10 000 BC again. ever

[Gleemonex]

Oh get over yourselves. It wasn't that bad, if you set your expectations appropriately low and shut your brain off when the lights dim.

-Glee

[Celtic_Punk]

SSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! never... if we all just ignore it... itll be like the movie never happened.

[Poppis]

(as the Dune- and LotR-franchises are always hyped to be direct "rivals"... I never got on what basis, but still... I like Dune more... except the new ones, they're terrible).

I love them both. I'm a huge Tolkien fan and I have to say that, like many of my friends, I think Silmarillion was amazing, even more so than LotR.

From Herbert I've only read the first Dune "trilogy" and I have to say that it was(and is) the best science-fiction story I've ever read.

[Jolt]

think on it man: alexander is just a guy who conquesr the world to most poeple. Poeple hwever find entertainment value in rings. Its kind of sickenening when you think about it, but mann does lean towards shiny and the near, not the "drab" and far (don't get me wrong, Alexander never was drab, but you get my point). The viewer can relate to the quest for power, the romance, and the monsters in the story, since its flat out there for all to see. But most do not see such allegories in history, at least the weasy ones most viewers look for.

alternatively, the Author proposes a deep psychological atachment to rings of any type, real or otherwise (I hate the books and movies for LoTR)

A trilogy about Alexander would certainly bring much of his history to life, more than to what most people think about him. It isn't just about conquering the world.

It's about fighting a gigantic empire, being constantly in the danger of being completely defeated, having to slowly explore the ancient lands and peoples that Alexander passed through (I was absolutely dazzled by the beauty of their entry into Babylon in Alexander's movie. It is one of those things which shows what he and his men lived through, and I would be equally delighted with his passing through Egypt, with stay in Persepolis, and a view upon the royal treasury of Persepolis, etc.).

Being in touch with his deeds (Like the famous untying of the knot, the almost tragic voyage to Ammonion), and his progressing megalomania, having him to cheer up his soldiers forward, mediate all the conflicts in the army (The fights between Macedonians and Greeks, etc.) and later towards himself (The torrent of protests towards his increasing Iranian influence), sharing the conquest of the lands with his men, trying to bring the conquered people into his fold, his brutality and folly (The burning of Persepolis, the massacres in Bactria and India, his return through the Iranian desert, etc).

A view upon the procession of foreign states from the West (Carthage, the Italian States, Rome, etc.) coming to pay tribute to, then the greatest ruler of the world (A particular scene I'd want to see would be the encounter between the Roman delegation and Alexander. :D). His megalomaniac plans for the future, and finally, a more detailed view on his death. (Not just "drink a huge vase of wine and be sick." version.)

It would make for an awesome trilogy, me thinks.

[Celtic_Punk]

I think a movie exploring what might have happened if he hadn't been assassinated. (logic dictates he was, though he was a massive alcoholic like myself, I and probably the liver of an 80 yearold, his death was too well timed. your welcome to your own opinions... but just know that they are wrong! )

This could include a number of interesting battles and explore a situation most like myself have probably wondered. What would have happened if Alexander went to war with Rome and Carthage? maybe Rome and Carthage would have stuck together to fight such a powerful eastern threat.probably wouldnt be the greatest movie of all time, id still be wicked though. and thought provoking (unless its written in hollywood)

[Dutchhoplite]

A Roman historian actually wrote about this :)

The text of Livy and some discussion about it:

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtop...ernate&start=0

[Maeran]

I think a movie exploring what might have happened if he hadn't been assassinated. (logic dictates he was, though he was a massive alcoholic like myself, I and probably the liver of an 80 yearold, his death was too well timed. your welcome to your own opinions... but just know that they are wrong! )

The man just back from the pub says- Why go into fiction? (actually, Hollywood would say "because we can"). The collapse of Alexander's empire would be a great film if written well. And there are lots of other stories, which might be semi-legendary, but would surely be better than 10000BC (come on, Phorusrachus are from south America. But then so are Llamas, which appear in Troy). The Livy version of Camillus for example, or the Peloponnesian wars (following the fate of Socrates as a scapegoat perhaps).

How about Beowulf? I haven't seen that mentioned. Until he failed to kill Grendel's mother I thought it was great enough to inspire a Sweboz campaign.

[Krauthammer91]

Thought Conan the Barbarian was really good for the year it was made. Not exactly factual but it's a really good fictional battle movie.

[mlc82]

Thought Conan the Barbarian was really good for the year it was made. Not exactly factual but it's a really good fictional battle movie.

I love those Conan movies, I watched them over and over when I was a kid. I doubt there's anything remotely realistic about the fighting techniques in them, but like them for nostalgia's sake.

[Cullhwch]

It's really a shame that the Diadochi are so neglected by the mainstream. Antigonos, Seleucus I, and Ptolemy I could easily have great movies wound around them.

Speaking of historical warfare movies, I feel that KoH, while visually stunning, was incredibly stupid. Balian's humanistic motivation (and the fictionalized Balian himself) really suffered from the author-avatar effect. In KoH, he was a too-noble-for-his-own-good moron, and I'd say that no knight in his era would rather leave the kingdom to rot instead of eliminating an evil jackass rival. Ridley Scott essentially made all the heroes of the movie subscribe to his secular humanstic ideology, even Baldwin III. He never displayed Baldwin's stunning tactical prowess nor his well-known intolerance toward Islam and Judaism. He, the great hero of Christendom, was just a European version of the Magical Negro. Helpful, inspiring, yet ineffectual on his own.

Scott also tried way too hard to demonize Guy de Lusignan, whose biggest crime was military incompetence. History shows that if Saladin could beat you in the field with less than 2x numerical superiority, leading armies was just beyond your ability.

[Tanit]

The original 'The 300 Spartans'.

Best historical movie EVER!! Just ignore the sappy love story. . .

[Gleemonex]

The original 'The 300 Spartans'.

Aha, someone who has seen it! I'm curious about this film, but I'm worried that it might just be more "swords and sandals" fare. How was the historical accuracy?

Has anyone else seen it?

-Glee

[kuzduck]

the last legion made me go through many different emotions, first sadness, then anger, and finally disbelief. the director could not have possibly watched that movie before it was released. even with historical accuracy aside, i thought it had some potential for an interesting storying line, but everything turned out just so damn aweful.

I did enjoy kingdom of heaven as well as troy (helen was fucking aych oh tee!!!) although hollywood action bothers me; (i'd like to be able to learn how to let these things go, they shouldn't upset me so much but...) why carry a shield when 3 seconds into every battle you're just gonna drop it and run ahead slaughtering people with ninja moves and a short sword, and why equip your army and kings with armor when even the most remotely solid thrust is gonna go through it as if it were made out of a baby's skin. i mean the greek kings were apparently evil dudes, but they did most assuredly not make their armor by stiching dead babies together!!!

[SwissBarbar]

maybe out of the skins of the babies they killed at the beginning of 300

[Phalanx300]

The best warfare movies pregunera for me. (in order of favorites)

The Lord of the Rings trilogy, not really historical warfare but I really liked it, it are my favorite movies, can't wait for the 2 hobbit films!

Kingdom of Heaven, really a great movie and it got this medieval feeling about it.

300, it wasn't historical but neither was it ment to be(like any other movie). I really found it entertaining, and it had some great speeches in it. And being a very big fan of Sparta, that also helps me liking it even more.

Troy, not so historical(never knew it wasn't) but I found it entertaining.

The Gladiator, also a really nice entertaining movie.

King Arthur, also not so historical but still a entertaining movie.

The 300 Spartans, a old and a not so historical movie but not that bad to my suprise, I really liked the last stand part when they protected the body of Leonidas.

Alexander, the battle of Gaugamela really made it good, though I didn't like that Alexander=gay part of the movie.

Narnia, only for the battle scenes.

There might be alot more which I can't remember but these are the ones I own.

[satalexton]

Red cliff, not accurate at all, but at least zhang yi mou actually tried to make it believable. I cant wait for the 2nd part early next year.

[Celtic_Punk]

13th warrior anyone seen that? looooooool antonio bendares as a iraqi from Baghdad.

[russia almighty]

The Fall of the Roman Empire.


It's been awhile since I have seen it, but, did it have fully clad kataphraktoi in it?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

.... a really nice entertaining movie.

All those films(Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, Spatacus etc) are good entertaining movies. But that's all.

I can say that there isn't any historically accurate movies made so far! They trick you with some of the battle scenes and that's it. These movies are made to entertain people not to be historically accurate.