Ummm......I DIDNT even think about this when watching 300. They still could have had slo mo, monsters, but why do this?

In slo mo aswell so you get a good DOSE of manipulation...admiring the beauty of the manly physiques.

its not the skin colour i find interesting about this. Its the beard gone, the jewelry. the clothing, the fact persia was depicted as the slave owners when Sparta were teh slave owners. A complete distortion of reality, even though its only a fun silly movie....ok...but why make Xerxes aesthetic look like that? A mad max Sub Saharan African barbarian that has no beard, no clothes, a Bondage and discipline outfit like Mad max villains. Feminine. They could have still created a 300 movie with creatures and violence and monsters. But its such a complete distortion, its almost beyond sacrilege. Is it creative licence? or deliberate subliminal manipulation? Like Yasuke the African samurai in Assassins Creed Shadows. When they could have made yasuke a sword carrier and made an interesting story out of him carrying a sword in service for his master, without making him a real African Samurai.

You couldnt create a more opposite visual of these 2 entities. Its BEYOND creative licence. its such a dichotomy depiction of a historical character. Its PRE Islam....so if they were trying to depict Iranians as gay, black, debauched, sick, evil, Demonic, this particular period has NOTHING to do with Muslims, if that was the goal. This is 1000 YEARS before Islam existed. You couldnt create a more opposite character of something in reality than these 2 images. It transcends mockery. Its a complete distortion. Whats also interesting, is it was completely unnecessary. You could have had monsters, demons, narcissistic Persian leader. The same exact narrative story and NOT depict Xerxes visually this way. they CHOSE to make him look this way....why?