How sad is this?

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

This came out just after the movie 300 and was so obviously designed to cash in on the hype. The only difference is the Spartans are not fighting in leather nappies with painted on abs.As such it falls flat for me. And its mostly just the same old glorified re hash with a little more detail, like why the Persian fleet did not just sail pass Thermopylae and drop men off and surround the Greeks.A lot is generalized and a few key events appear to differ from the original account by Herodotus. It may not appear significant but if you think where people are, what they were doing and what did they know at what time, the story does not stack up.There is more recent, interesting and different analysis out there, just google 300 Spartans the real story.

On the pure theatrical side, Last Stand was great, as the reenactments and soundtrack are very entertaining, but there are better accounts of this battle found elsewhere that, while not as long or as flashy, are far more historically comprehensive.Certain little details, such as the misuse of the word "hoplon" for the Greek hoplite shield and the mispronounciations of various names and words, really ate at me.My guess would be, that because "Last Stand of the 300" was aired the eve of the theatrical release of "300", the History Channel was only trying to ride the coattails of the movie's hype.If you're looking for a depiction that's historically accurate in all respects possible, you'd have better luck elsewhere.

Covered the background, culture, tactics, military equipment and personalities in an interesting an evenhanded way. In particular, the program emphasized the dual land/sea attack of the Persians and the coordination of the Greek infantry and navy needed to defend against the attack. Also the leadup to Thermopylae -- not only Marathon, but the revolt in Asia Minor which the Greeks supported and during which they burned a Persian city. As a result, I think it actually told a better story than the movie "300". I learned a lot and felt compelled to watch until the end.My only wish is that I had seen this program AFTER seeing the movie. Constantly finding discrepancies between the plot and the underlying history was very distracting.

I watched this program the night before I saw "300," and I was glad that I did.I had heard people complaining about "300" not being historically accurate, and while being true, that movie was meant to entertain, not teach history.This program goes into depth about the lives of the Spartans and circumstances surrounding the battle at Thermopylae.As far as documentaries go, it is above average quality and certainly worth seeing of you have or plan to watch "300" or are just interested in this part of history period. The reenactments are good and the scholarly commentary is very informative. I also think that they had the movie in mind when they produced this show, so that the progression overlaps and lets the viewer make a good pre- or post-viewing comparison between Hollywood and history.