Warner Considers "300" Sequel: Is There Glory to Be Found After Thermopylae?

In 480 BC, 300 Spartans with the aid of some 400 Thebens and 700 or so hoplites from Thespiae stood at the pass of Thermopylae in the hopes of delaying the massive Persian army of Emperor Xerxes. The force failed to provide any significant delay to the march of the Persian army and not long after the defeat of the Spartans the Persian army captured Athens -- the battle at Thermopylae had provided sufficient time for the Athenians to flee their city to bide their time for a better time and place to face Xerxes' army. But the death of the 300 did fuel the fires that enabled the Greeks to defeat Xerxes' army. In dying, the 300 had proven that Spartans were willing to die in defense of Greece and provided a wonderful morale boosting tale for later battles. The death of the 300 made it so that Xerxes would have to face a unified Greece and not individual city states that could be defeated one by one.

In 2007, Warner Brothers and Legendary Pictures released a summer blockbuster film based on a Frank Miller graphic novel adaptation of the sacrifice of the 300 at Thermopylae. The film was a huge financial success and stirred up some political controversy as well.

Now it appears that Warner and Legendary are inching toward putting together a sequel to the successful epic.

But what would such a sequel look like? What story would one adapt as a sequel to 300? Hollywood loves to build on the success of a winner, all businesses do, but what story could serve as a worthy successor to one of the most inspirational battles in recorded history?

One might think that the ultimate defeat of Xerxes' navy and army at the battles of Salamis and Plataea would be a good place to start. I wouldn't agree. Primarily because the narrative framing device of 300 is that of a warrior telling the tale of the sacrifice of the 300 to a mass of troops gathered at Plataea just before they charge against the Persian army. In a way, 300 is already the story of Plataea. So that's not really a good place to start.

How about a representation of the Peloponnesian War where the Spartans "came to the defense" of Boeotia and Corinth? Given that one would have to portray Sparta's subjection of the Messenian Helots and the fact that Sparta, after defeating Athens and preventing Athens from becoming "imperial", is itself defeated by Epiminondas of Boeotia when Sparta attempts to become "imperial" in its own right. The Boeotian's of Thebes are the people who most easily translate into the champions of freedom during the Peloponnesian War. In what may be a legacy of the Peloponnesian war, or at least the Boeotian War that immediately followed it, it is often argued that the 400 Thebans who fought at Thermopylae were hostages taken by Leonidas.

Unless you're willing to paint the heroes of the previous films as the anti-heroes (or even villains) of the second film, it's better to avoid using the Peloponnesian War as a "sequel" to 300. A kick ass movie about Epiminondas would be a real treat, and it would be nice for people to witness the darker side of Sparta's "helot policy," but it doesn't make for a natural sequel.

This really leaves only two choices.


The first choice would be a portrayal of the Greek victory against Darius at Marathon. The battle, and the way that the message of victory was delivered, still echo in modern athletics. We once more have a story about "democracy" vs. "empire," but we would also be watching the story of the Athenians whose participation was minimized in 300. In 300, the Athenian naval victory over the Persians is portrayed merely as a storm brought by Zeus to crush the Persian navy. Barely a mention of Athens is made in 300. Gerard Butler, as Leonidas, tells us perfectly which city state 300 is about when he proclaims, "Madness?! THIS IS SPARTA!" 300 is about Sparta, and highlighting its virtues while overlooking its vices, and not about some "intellectual" city state to the north. Once more we are left with a subject which would make a great film, the Battle of Marathon, but one which doesn't translate well into a sequel to 300.

This leaves us with our second, and probably best, remaining choice. The tale of the 10,000 and their journey home after the death of Cyrus the Younger. During the Peloponnesian War, Darius II sent money and his young son Cyrus to aid the Spartans in their war against Athens. Cyrus used the opportunity to gain allies among the Spartans as he desired the throne that his older brother Artaxerxes II would inherit when their father died. He eventually brought some 11,000 mercenary Greeks -- including a goodly number of Spartans -- to aid him in his attempt to take the throne. He was wise to bring the Greeks as they were able to win a large battle at Cunaxa, but he wasn't lucky and was killed during the battle. This left 10,000 Greeks trapped in enemy territory seeking a way home. The leaders of the 10,000, including Clearchus of Sparta, were slain while trying to negotiate safe passage home. The 10,000 had to fight their way home. The tale of the 10,000 -- while it still has some Peloponnesian war baggage -- is one of the great tales of Ancient Greece.

The story of the 10,000 was also the inspiration for one of the great "cult" films of the late 70's -- The Warriors.

So here's to hoping that 300 is followed by 10,000. The audiences should have a good time with a rip roaring tale, and the critics will have a field day with puns a plenty.

Preparing for 300

When it comes to historical dramas, one often wonders what the thoughts of scholars of a particular subject think about films depicting that subject. When watching a film about the Crusades, one wants to know what medieval scholars think about the film as a whole product.

No one expects historical dramas to be perfectly accurate, but one does expect them to capture the feel of the times and to be compelling stories. There are exceptions to the above statement, especially with regard to biblical films where some people do expect perfect accuracy, but by and large the audience wants to know that a film is entertaining and not a mockery of the era it is representing. Let me give what I think are two good examples. Kingdom of Heaven has many historical inaccuracies, but the more I watch the film, the more I am drawn in by the sense of the film and its imagery. The film genuinely transports me away from the present and into a faux version of the Crusades. Timeline has an almost opposite effect. As much as I enjoyed Crichton's book which provided the foundation for the movie version, I dislike the movie more each time I view it. Sadly, I have seen this film around six times because I have friends who enjoy the movie, and friendship is more important than agreeing whether a film is good or not. For me, Timeline's problem is that the film completely ignores the underlying argument of the book, chiefly that the "Dark Ages" weren't anywhere near as dark as the Renaissance claimed it to be. Every time I see Timeline, I keep asking myself, "Where did the $80 million go?"

Next month sees the opening of Frank Miller's 300 on the big screen. The Battle of Thermopylae has been one of my favorite subjects to read about/watch for a long time. My first exposure to the famous battle was Rudolph Maté's 1962 classic, The 300 Spartans. I saw it at a tender young age when I was cutting my teeth on all kinds of Sword and Sandal films, most of which had some kind of supernatural element. The 300 Spartans was different. The heroes didn't win the day, they died heroically. I have watched the film numerous times since and, while it does seem dated, it inspires me every time. I guess you can't go too wrong as long as you include the "big lines" from Herodotus.



I am excited about Frank Miller's version. The graphic novel was good, though there was significant artistic license. The previews look beautiful and Gerard Butler, who was the best thing about Timeline, looks to be a very good Leonidas. Being excited, I did what I usually do and surfed the internet searching for speculation by scholars familiar with the subject. I was pleasantly surprised to find more than mere speculation. Frank Miller, and film director Zack Snyder, gave classical scholar Victor Davis Hanson a preview screening. Both claim to be big fans of VDH, a fandom which includes me.

In an interview with Rebecca Murray, Zack and Frank were quoted as saying:

Zack Snyder: He’s a frickin genius. He’s a Greek historian and we showed him the movie because I wanted him to write a forward to the Making Of book. I was a little nervous to be honest, because I wasn’t sure how he’d react. And Kurt Johnstad who he and I worked on the screenplay together, he actually also is a huge fan of Victor Davis Hanson. He went up to show him the movie at his house.

Frank Miller: I mean, jumping back to Victor Davis Hanson, it was right in the middle of maybe our first conversation that Zack brought his name up, not realizing that he was citing my favorite non-fiction writer in the whole universe.

When I read these words, my excitement increased. But it was upon reading Victor Davis Hanson's review of 300 that the film went from "must see" to "will murder to see." VDH gives the film a glowing review over at his site (though it should be noted that the graphic novel is being released by Dark Horse and not Black Horse). He states in the summary of his review, "most importantly, 300 preserves the spirit of the Thermopylae story. The Spartans, quoting lines known from Herodotus and themes from the lyric poets, profess unswerving loyalty to a free Greece. They will never kow-tow to the Persians, preferring to die on their feet than live on their knees."

I can't wait.