Who would win in a fight, Maximus of "the Gladiator" or Leonidas of "300"?

My TV and surround sound speakers are no stranger to the epic battle movie. between the long list of animated features, stupid 80's comedies, and FX heavy space or action films that i never grow tired of watching repeatedly, there are a few gem-like epic warrior films that i make my girlfriend watch over, and over, and over again. two that are in heavy circulation these days are "the Gladiator" and "300". and when i mean heavy circulation, i mean like one and then the other, and back again.

So it was after the 100th viewing of "300" that my very cooperative woman friend turns to me and asks a BRILLIANT question. "who would win in a fight, Maximus or Leonidas?".

Now i have been playing that question game since childhood. picking two characters from different stories, or different times, or even different galaxies and pitting them against each other in a hypothetical battle royale. there's really no trivia more fun. you have to weigh varying strengths and weaknesses that would normally never get paired and come up with the logical outcome based on a complete summation of the two . I think of all the possible combos i have ever wrestled with, this one is the most complex and, oddly, the most gargantuan in the aspects that it brings to the table. more so then couplings like Captain Kirk Vs. Han Solo, or Gandalf Vs. Merlin. this one represents the differences between logic and passion, between modern warfare and primitive warfare.

at first glance, here are the contestants.

Maximus:

Leonidas:


So, we can see that both are fairly godlike at fighting a multitude of foes. but that is just on the surface. the differences between these two heroes are actually quite large. in order to give this quandary the proper amount of attention we need to examine each difference.

First off, we have to admit that it's Leonidas who takes the cake for most fearsome appearance. his lack of armor only serves to strike fear into the hearts of men by revealing a rippling six pack and pecs that could power a Hummer SUV up a mountain. his blinding and large white teeth that reveal themselves during his awesome roars, are only slightly upstaging the intensity of his fierce and wise eyes. his flowing cape and tall helmet combine with his fighting style to lend themselves to the posing perfection of the male lion. a perfect fighting machine that rarely even needs to leave the den because his mane alone causes armies of Hyenas to flee at first sight. Of course, against Maximus, a general who has lost everything and now only lives for revenge, Leonidas's fearful appearance would have no affect.

In the actual fighting, i would give Leonidas an advantage both in strength, size, and speed. Maximus isn't huge, several characters in the movie point that out, and he is never bare chested, leaving us to think that he has a small flabber-lanche happening under that legionnaire breastplate. It seems from "300" that Leonidas can kill with his shield alone and then strike a pose something like Ben Stiller's Blue Steel. he can throw a spear about a hundred yards with deadly accuracy and seems to be capable of killing 40-50 men with ninja-like skill and the deadliness of an Israeli Uzi. this ability comes from Spartan culture. Leonidas could only have been perfect since if he weren't he would have been left for dead as a baby. It would be millenia before failed phrases like "no child left behind" were ever uttered. the perfectly formed Spartans are trained from childhood in the art of hand to hand combat. A Roman general could have been a short fat balding guy who would have spent a lot of his time learning military theory, strategy and going to toga party orgies on the weekends. Roman armies where technically more capable because of the military intelligence and the organization of the legions. they had seige engines and other more modern technology at their hands. Spartans were much more rudimentary therefore needing to focus more on individual ability. they did create the Phalanx, but the king was a part of the Phalanx, not somebody who was waiting on the top of a hill looking down over the battle field. in a war of equal armies the romans had technology and strategy in their favor. hand to hand combat changes everything however.

Besides the differences in physical fighting ability between the two, there is the variance in basic beliefs and motivation. these are fundamental in that they are the differences between passion/rage, and shear cold blooded rule-of-thumb discipline. Maximus fights to kill the man who killed his family and he cares about nothing else, not even that hot single mom he used to have a "thing" for. he is the servant of a murdered family he outwardly showed love to, he was a family man first and foremost. Leonidas was a king who operated under one simple idea. to follow Spartan law to the word. if that meant that he, his son, his queen all had to die, then so be it. he never said "i love you" to his queen and he was willing to send his 7 year old boy out into the wild to kill some wolves in the snow.

this is where i give advantage to Maximus. He would break the rules to kill a man. if it meant that he wasn't going to be able to kill his family's murderer at the end of the movie, then he would do what it takes to avoid death. Leonidas would never cheat, or duck behind something to avoid injury just for the sake of being able to fight later. Leonidas is hobbled a bit by his fundamentalism, where Maximus is free to do what it takes to survive.

Then there are small things that we notice in the films. Maximus is ambidextrous. in the clip you see him grab two swords and he is able to swing them equally, not favoring one or the other. in D&D, the mother of all games that analyzes fighting down to the core, to be ambidextrous is to DOUBLE your fighter's ability. so arm balance and striking ability actually favors Maximus.

They both have a knack for killing large wild beasts. but here, i have to favor Leonidas, he kills a CG wolf that makes a werewolf look like a Pomeranian, and he does it half naked, in the snow, as a child. of course he doesn't have a famous Gaulish gladiator named Tyranus swinging an axe at him at the same time, but those tigers in the coliseum attacking Maximus were chained down. so advantage, Leonidas.

In a final attempt at summation, i think i will have to go with Leonidas in the end. just based on the fact that it is one-on-one combat, and he is just one insanely badass mofo. Leonidas would not be able to intimidate Maximus and he would have his hands full with the rage and skill of a pissed off Roman General. But the few advantages Maximus has, like his non-alliegance to any law, wouldn't come in too handy in an caged battle, there's really no room for trickery or to do anything besides throwing a fury of blows. Leonidas would be able to deal with an ambidextrous attack with his awesome shielding skills. I mean, shit, did you see that part where he slices the persian's leg off and before the body hits the ground he strikes the guy again going down. he was just rubbing it in! then he turns and lays a smack down with just his shield. what? the fantasy badass battle of the century would probably be comparable to a fight between the leader of a pack of Hyenas, a smart, organized pack-based animal, and a male lion. if all parties back off and let the two leaders go at it, the lions sheer advantage in physical prowess will give it the final victory. comme ca'.