Showing posts with label Battle of Marathon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Battle of Marathon. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 20, 2025

DUELING MOVIES: The Giant of Marathon (1959) / Jupiter’s Darling (1955)

 

 

               “The Giant of Marathon” is an Italian “sword and sandals” (peplum) film. It was directed by Jacquest Tourneur who was famous for his “stylish and atmospheric” films. He did a lot of B-movie horror films, the best being “Cat People”. He also dabbled in film noir including the classic “Out of the Past”. Some scenes had to be reshot by director Mario Brava because some extras were smoking cigarettes in the background of scenes. The movie was a success at the box office.

               An opening title card tells us Greece is divided between Sparta and Athens. Athens is roiled by “internal conflict and treachery”. Bad timing because Persian Emperor Darius has his sights set on Athens. Luckily, there is a hero available. We meet Phillipides (Steve Reeves) as he dominates at the Olympic games. He returns to Athens and is put in command of the Sacred Guard. He is in charge of the defense of the city. He gets involved in a love triangle. Andromeda (Mylene Demongeol) is betrothed to the treason-minded Theocritus (Sergio Fantoni). He and Andromeda’s father are fans of the ousted tyrant Hippias. They hope to enlist Phillipides in their plot to help Hippias return to power. Theocritus sicks a femme fatale named Charis (Daniela Rocca) to seduce him. She falls in love with him. Who wouldn’t? Now we have a love rectangle. All of this is just killing time to the great battle. The Persians land outside Athens. Phillipides is sent to Sparta on a horse to get their help. (The real Phillipides ran, but Reeves is too muscle-bound to do that).

               Here’s how the famous battle is depicted (the italic stuff is accurate):  The Persians bring their horses ashore on rafts. They bring a giant drum with them. They catapult a skull at the Greek army to indicate it’s battle time. They march forward led by five horsemen, each leading a column. When the Persian cavalry attacks, it is met by arrows. The Greeks have leaf-shaped spear heads and rectangular metal shields. The Persians have odd -shaped metal shields. Miltiades orders his army forward from horse-back. The Persian horses run into the Greek shield wall. They are followed by chariots. The Greeks have set ditches as traps. The surviving chariots run into the shield wall. A chaotic melee results with the Greeks using swords. Phillipides arrives with Spartan reinforcements. Militiades sends in his reserves. Phillipides fights from a horse. He and others roll boulders down on the Persians. The battle ends before the Spartans can fight in it. The Greeks win. (Note how accurate the battle is.)

               In reality, the defeat at Marathon caused Darius to return home, but the movie is not done yet. The Persian fleet sails to Athens so the movie can provide a similarly laughable rendering of the Battle of Salamis. It is actually more hilarious, but I’ll let you decide for yourself. I will warn you that if you thought the naval battle in the Colosseum in Gladiator 2 was ridiculous, it does not hold a candle to this scene. Spoiler alert: the Greeks win this battle too and Phillipides is the main reason. His duel with Theocritus is hilarious.

               Needless to say, you should not get your history from a sword and sandals movie, but even by that subgenres low standards, this movie gets almost everything wrong. And it’s not like there aren’t plenty of books about the Battles of Marathon and Salamis. The historian Herodotus is famous for his love of a good story even if it was questionable, but even he would not have swallowed what this movie is depicting. But Hades, no one would watch this movie to write a term paper on the battles. The movie was meant to be entertaining. It succeeds in that if you are easily entertained or you are a big fan of muscle men. Reeves was a huge star in Europe, mainly because he appealed to women. The guy was an absolute hunk. There is a scene where he and other hulks swim bare-chested in tight loin-clothes. You might want to have some smelling salts nearby if you watch this movie with your wife or girlfriend. And you might want to have some protection for your ribs because Ms. Demongeol is beautiful. The actress was a huge star in France and a sex symbol in the 1950s and 1960s. Her career spanned seven decades and over 100 movies.

The movie is unpredictable because it is so inaccurate. I had no idea what was going to happen in battles that I know a lot about. (I have written a novel about Marathon and am working on one about Salamis. Trust me, this movie is not a source.) If you don’t take the movie seriously, you will get some good laughs. Some of them will come from the subtitles. I watched it on Tubi. The subtitles had a hard time with the names of characters. Andromeda was spelled “Ramadan”, for instance.

               “Jupiter’s Darling” is an American movie that could be described as an historical musical comedy. It was based on Robert Sherwood’s play “The Road to Rome” (1927). MGM made the dubious decision to make the movie as an Esther Williams picture. Williams had been a big star famous for swimming in her movies, but her career was waning at this point. It ended up as one of only two flops she made for the studio. It was not her fault because the concept was flawed from the beginning. The shoot was a difficult one for the actress who was coming off a pregnancy. She punctured an eardrum (for the fifth time) and had to limit her swimming. A body double was used . It could have been worse. She refused to film a scene where she jumps off a cliff on a horse. A stuntman volunteered to do it and broke his back. Her co-star was Howard Keel who was a big star in musicals. He had made several movies with Williams. George Sidney (“Anchors Aweigh”) directed and went over budget so much (painted elephants were very expensive) that the tepid box office resulted in a huge bomb.

               The movie features several historical characters, led by Hannibal (Keel). It is 216 B.C. Hannibal is the barbarian at the gates. Rome appoints a dictator named Fabius Maximus (George Sander). His fiancĂ© is the feisty Amytis (Williams). It does not take long for her to hit the pool. Hunky statues swim with her and cute baby Cupids. Welcome to the first choreographed swimming scene in a war movie. Meanwhile, Hannibal is on the march with his elephants. He sings with his men. Amytis and her slave girl go to spy on him and are captured. Their relationship begins rockily as in every romance movie ever made. We get the clicheish love triangle. Don’t bother guessing who Amytis ends up with. If you can’t wait to find out, don’t go to a history book. This builds up to the climactic assault on Rome. Here is how the movie depicts it (the facts are in italics): Hannibal uses smoking chariots and elephants with battering rams. The defenders use hot oil and fire ball catapults. Fabius hurls a white flag javelin, but Amytis urges him to fight (this after she had told Hannibal about a lose brick in the wall). He offers a huge amount of tribute if Hannibal desists. He doesn’t want the money, he only wants Amytis. She decides to be a patriot and go with him.

               It’s hard to believe that anyone was surprised that this movie failed. When I finished it, I asked myself “what the fuck was that?” Well, at least it is better than “Braveheart” and just as accurate. The movie has its charms. The technicolor is vibrant and the sets are extravagant. Amytis has the best swimming pool in Hollywood. Some of the songs are catchy and the actors are good singers. There are ten songs in the movie. Unfortunately, when the singing ends we are left to suffer from some truly bad acting. It should be said that as an actress, Williams was a good swimmer. The dancing is fine, especially by the elephants. If you want to see elephants wiggle their asses, this is the movie for you. It is surprising that the movie has not developed cult status. It is entertaining in a campy way. And if you know the actual history of Hannibal, it is downright hilarious. In its defense,  the film is up front about its veracity. It leads off with “The history which describes Hannibal’s attack on Romeis very confusing; this story will do nothing to clear it up.” Before you say “no shit”, it is unlikely many people who saw this in a theater knew much about Hannibal. But no one would have thought Hannibal went swimming with an upper-class Roman woman.

               So which one of these campy extravaganzas is better? It depends on whether you are a fan of “sand and sandals” or musical swimming. Both are terrible when it comes to history. I would give the edge to “Giant” because it has Steve Reeves, some dastardly villains, and two hot women. It has two set piece battles that are astounding in their total lack of connection to the actual events. Everything in “Jupiter’s Darling” is ridiculous.

GRADES  =  Giant = C  /  Jupiter’s  =  D


Tuesday, April 22, 2025

BOYS IN BATTLES: Marathon

 

 

            III know this is a movie review blog, but I am going to violate my own rule in this post. I have just published my second book. (My first is the nonfiction military history The Scipios in Spain) It was a labor of love that took years to complete. Once I got that project out of the way and could call myself a historian, it was time for something different that would not take years. I have decided to write a series of young adult novels about boys in famous battles. The series is called Boys in Battles. The main purpose of the series is to teach about the boy’s culture and then put him in the battle to describe what happened in the battle and what the combatants experienced. This first book in the series is about the Battle of Marathon. The main character is a teenage boy who lives in Athens. His best friend is a Persian boy the same age as him. This allowed me to insert Persian culture into the story. I have packed the book with interesting facts about the lives of boys in Athens and in Persia. I firmly believe that although the books are aimed at boys from 8 to 18, they will be entertaining for adults as well. Especially if you like stories of battles.

            The Battle of Marathon was the logical place to start. It is one of the most famous battles in history and many historians believe it is one of the most important. It is possible that if the Persians had won, the future brilliance of Greek civilization would have been stunted. I did a lot of research on the battle and I feel I have accurately portrayed it. One of the great things about historical fiction is it can replace the nonexistent primary sources dealing with average people. We have Herodotus to tell us what happened in the battle, but we have no diaries, memoirs, or any other first-hand accounts of what it was like to fight in the battle. I have used my extensive knowledge of soldiers in battles to imagine what my characters would have gone through.

            I can guarantee you that you will learn more about the Battle of Marathon than you will from watching a movie. Take for example “300: Rise of an Empire”, the sequel to “300”. I am a big fan of “300” and although it was based on a graphic novel, it is surprising good in giving the audience an idea of what happened in the Battle of Thermopylae. For those who were upset with the fantasy elements (e.g. the rhinos), I pointed out that the movie was actually a story being told by a survivor around a campfire. His adding to the story was understandable. The sequel is narrated by Leonidas’ wife Gorgo. Her not being at the Battle of Marathon might explain why the movie is laughably wrong on virtually every aspect of the battle. Where “300” may be only 50% accurate on the Battle of Thermopylae, the sequel is about 5% on Marathon. It is truly a farce. Here is a list of things the movie got wrong.

1.       The Persians were not attacking to end Greek freedom and democracy. It was a raid to punish Athens for intervening in a rebellion by Greek colonists in Asia Minor.

2.       It was not raining.

3.       The Persians were not caught disembarking. They had been on the beach for at least a week.

4.       The Greeks did run to take the Persians by surprise (this is the 5%), but they maintained their phalanx formation as best they could. The Greeks should have been in a ragged shield wall which slammed into the Persians.

5.      Many of the Greeks in the movie had no shields and all had no armor (which is excusable because “300” is famous for that). All of the Greeks had shields and breastplates in the battle.

6.       The Greeks used swords, spears, and axes. In reality, the Greeks’ primary weapon was the spear and they used the sword only if the spear broke. None had axes.

7.       Themistocles was not the leader of the Greeks. Miltiades was. The movie is mainly about the Battle of Salamis, where Themistocles was in command, so Themistocles is promoted for Marathon.

8.       The Persians would have had shields. They had archers and spearmen. The movie is pretty good at portraying the weapons, but the battle included an arrow barrage as the Greeks charged.

9.       There would have been a melee, but first the Greek phalanx shoved the Persians. The movie goes straight to the melee.

10.   No Greek was able to board a Persian ship.

11.    Darius was not even at the battle. The Persian leader was a general named Datis. Themistocles did not hit either with an arrow. It is highly unlikely that Themistocles would have been proficient with a bow. Greek hoplites despised the weapon.

 

If you want to know what actually happened in the Battle of Marathon, read my book .