Sorry Aulus, I cannot bring myself to enjoy gross distortions, and I know what I wanted to say when I said African-American, and no I was not worried about appearing racist, although it does not surprise me that some viewers found "300" racist.

The "Battle of Thermopylae" is a great yarn as you put, and I suppose that my biggest flaw is that I keep hoping that Hollywood film makers will for once try to make a movie that is based on an historical subject without taking artistic licenses, when none are necessary.

Additionally, I was not talking about Greek heroic statues here or shortcuts to convey a story to a modern audience. So, please don't tell me to loosen up and enjoy, what is in my opinion, a terrible movie. That is my opinion of the movie, you don't have to agree with it, and I am not required to agree with yours. This being a forum makes it a place where we can voice differing opinions.

It is true that the film was based on a graphic novel, nonetheless, in my opinion the film makers went overboard. Of course, while we are on the subject, and to get back to "Gladiator vs. Braveheart", if I have to choose between the two, I will have to go with "Gladiator" for a very large number of reasons, but here are a few:

- Russell Crowe just does fit my image of a Roman; Antonio Banderas would have been a better choice.
- Gladiators did not routinely kill each other in the arena; that is not something that happened very often, according to some historians nine out ten gladiators lived to retirement.
- Marcus Aurelius with long hair??? Please, he was a soldier emperor, and in any case if you look at almost any Roman portrait bust, Roman men wore their hair cut short.

"Gladiator" is loosely, key word, based on some historical facts, but when it comes to the reckless use of artistic liberties, "300" beats it hands down, although in fairness, from what I have read of the "Last Legion" it may have some real competition there.