300: So FRIGGIN COOL!

[RandMcnally]

That had to be one of the coolest movies I have ever seen. I had to keep myself from giggling like a little schoolgirl when he said, "Then we'll just have to fight in the shade."

And it was absolutly gorgeous to watch. If you have a weak stomach I'd suggest against it. A lot of blood and gore (Which reminds me, who the hell brings kids to a movie like that? I mean honestly, have some common sense people).

So yeah, I'm a dork.

[friedo]

I'm glad to hear that so many people like it. It's gotten pretty good reviews as well so far. I'm going to see it sometime this week, I think. I believe it's playing a limited engagement in NY before it goes wide on Friday.

[Crawlspace]

I've been looking foward to this. Nice to hear it got a positive review.

[garygnu]

I won movie tickets in a poker tourney, and the ONLY movie I can think of to use them on is 300/

Curse you.
Curse you hard.

[Siam Sam]

It's supposed to come soon to Bangkok. They've been showing reviews. We're looking forward to it.

[Alessan]

That had to be one of the coolest movies I have ever seen. I had to keep myself from giggling like a little schoolgirl when he said, "Then we'll just have to fight in the shade."

See, that's why the Spartans were so cool. Not only were they the greatest warriors in history, not only did they save a nascent Greek culture from being nipped in the bud, they invented the action movie one-liner. There is a direct leading from "We will fight in the shade*" to "Yippee-ka-yay, motherfucker!", and just for that, Western culture owes them a profound debt.






*An actual ancient historical quote**, as I'm sure you know.





** Which means it was probably invented by an actual ancient historian.

[GuanoLad]

Wow, really? From what I've seen, it looks like bollocks.

I'll see how others react before I make any sort of beeline.

[RandMcnally]

*An actual ancient historical quote**, as I'm sure you know.


Of course I knew that. I did say I was a dork, didn't I? ;)


For me, one of the best part is that it's fun to say, "You know what? They actually were really that insane in real life.

[garygnu]

My only real concern with the movie*: does King Lionidas do anything besides yell really loudly?
(If so, they should have gotten Al Pacino...)


*: I'm trained in scriptwriting and movie-maiking in general, so things tend to be difficult for me to enjoy if not done really well.

[RandMcnally]

My only real concern with the movie*: does King Lionidas do anything besides yell really loudly?



I'd say it's about 60-40. It wasn't annoying though.

[bobkitty]

Can someone tell me why the trailers look so.. strange to me? I admit I haven't done much research into the film, but it appears almost like an entirely-CGI/animated movie.

[friedo]

Can someone tell me why the trailers look so.. strange to me? I admit I haven't done much research into the film, but it appears almost like an entirely-CGI/animated movie.

It was shot entirely on green screen, just like Sin City, and like Sin City its style is based on a Frank Miller comic book.

[Tuckerfan]

W00t! Now, if someone can only do a decent period correct version of The Odyssey!

[DaddyTimesTwo]

bobkitty, it's not entirely CGI, but the actors were filmed in front of a green or blue screen, so all the sets, backgrounds etc are CGI. It's only mostly CGI.

I'm very much looking forward to this one.

[Tangent]

I can't wait to see this. I gobbled up the comic books back when they were first published and I loved the artwork as well as the story. From the trailers, it looks like the movie preserves them both.

[Flip Pancake]

It's got Lena Headey in it.

'nuff for me. Can't wait.

[Loach]

So the Spartans all live happily ever after right?

[Alessan]

So the Spartans all live happily ever after right?
You obviously are not familiar with the work of Frank Miller.

[RandMcnally]

So the Spartans all live happily ever after right?


They do. Towards the end, when it looks like the Spartans are on the verge of defeat, Xerses realizes his folly and retreats back to Persia.

[Loach]

They do. Towards the end, when it looks like the Spartans are on the verge of defeat, Xerses realizes his folly and retreats back to Persia.


Good I like a happy ending.

[Ogre]

Wow. That's ahistorical. The Spartans (and their Thespian reserve, which was about 700 men) were wiped out to the last man. Their sacrifice gave Athens time to deploy their navy, which subsequently destroyed the Persian navy at the battle of Salamis.

Also the "We will fight in the shade" is an actual historical quote (as I see Alessan has pointed out. Fantastic real-life one-liner.

Also of note is Leonidas's famous one-liner. When instructed by Xerxes that the Spartans should lay down their arms, Leonidas famously replied, "Come take them," a line that has been used to greater or lesser effect in action movies since the beginning of the genre (most recently and badly, of course, in The Fellowship of the Ring.

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

Wow. That's ahistorical. The Spartans (and their Thespian reserve, which was about 700 men) were wiped out to the last man. Their sacrifice gave Athens time to deploy their navy, which subsequently destroyed the Persian navy at the battle of Salamis.

I think you were whooshed.

[Ogre]

Apparently so.

[Loach]

Wow. That's ahistorical. The Spartans (and their Thespian reserve, which was about 700 men) were wiped out to the last man. Their sacrifice gave Athens time to deploy their navy, which subsequently destroyed the Persian navy at the battle of Salamis.

Also the "We will fight in the shade" is an actual historical quote (as I see Alessan has pointed out. Fantastic real-life one-liner.

Also of note is Leonidas's famous one-liner. When instructed by Xerxes that the Spartans should lay down their arms, Leonidas famously replied, "Come take them," a line that has been used to greater or lesser effect in action movies since the beginning of the genre (most recently and badly, of course, in The Fellowship of the Ring.


Thats not very happy. Why would they make a movie about that?

[Ogre]

Thats not very happy. Why would they make a movie about that?It's OK. They break out into a cheerful musical number after they rain arrows onto the battlefield until nothing moves.

Oh, and then Mike Brady comes out and gives everyone an Uplifting Moral Lesson.

[Loach]

It's OK. They break out into a cheerful musical number after they rain arrows onto the battlefield until nothing moves.

Oh, and then Mike Brady comes out and gives everyone an Uplifting Moral Lesson.

Thank God. Maybe I'll go see it after all.




Ok I'll stop. :D

[bubastis]

From what I've seen in Trailers, there's a lot of slo-mo in the movie... Not just battle slo-mo, but walking from a to b slo-mo. Does it get grating, or repetitive?

[RandMcnally]

From what I've seen in Trailers, there's a lot of slo-mo in the movie... Not just battle slo-mo, but walking from a to b slo-mo. Does it get grating, or repetitive?


There were a lot of slo-mo, enough for me to mentally comment on it. There were times when you just want them to get on with it. It's not that the slo-mo scenes are very long, it's that they happen fairly often.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Thats not very happy. Why would they make a movie about that?
Because it's awesome.

[wolf in second hand clothing]

"I liked Titanic , but why'd they have to make it so sad?"

I am super excited to see this movie, but very disappointed that none of the IMAX theaters in Iowa are getting it. Happy Feet: the IMAX experience can kiss my ass.

[aclubs]

Because it's awesome.I suppose there's no arguing with that.

[Evil Captor]

Is there anything besides fighting and chest-beating to this movie? Is there any backstory so we can give a flip about who gets killed? It LOOKS fantastic, but if it's just CGI-enhanced equivalent of a wrasslin' match, I think I'll pass.

[Ogre]

Is there anything besides fighting and chest-beating to this movie? Is there any backstory so we can give a flip about who gets killed? It LOOKS fantastic, but if it's just CGI-enhanced equivalent of a wrasslin' match, I think I'll pass.Don't look at it that way. Look at it as if it were a comic book come to life...which is exactly what it is. Aside from the fantasy elements, I understand that Miller's version of Thermopylae is quite accurate.

The actual, real-life event was so extreme that what actually happened would strongly resemble a blown-out-of-proportion Hollywood movie.

[Equipoise]

I've been excited about this for a while. It opens in Chicago on Friday but River East 21 is having a midnight showing Thursday night/Friday morning. We'll be there.

[Grossbottom]

I'd love to see this green screen thing used to do a trilogy of the Punic Wars.

[CJJ*]

The full story of Thermopylae (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae#Epitaph_of_Simonides). Since it happened 2500 years ago, does it really need to be spoilered? :)

[RandMcnally]

In the movie, the Thespians are there, but they retreat on the final day. According to the Wikipedia site, 700 Thespians stayed behind. So there's some artistic license taken.

[Max Torque]

Also of note is Leonidas's famous one-liner. When instructed by Xerxes that the Spartans should lay down their arms, Leonidas famously replied, "Come take them," a line that has been used to greater or lesser effect in action movies since the beginning of the genre (most recently and badly, of course, in The Fellowship of the Ring.
I noticed in a trailer another line that I'd heard previously in a movie: Leonidas says something like, "Before this battle is over, the world will know that few stood against many." Conan said something similar in his prayer to Crom in Conan the Barbarian. "All that matters is that two stood against many."

Great lines echo on through history, I reckon.

[well he's back]

I'm bumping this thread to note that the review for this film, The 300, which appeared in the Village Voice is so hilarious I did not want anyone to miss it:

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0710,lee,75993,20.html

[Siam Sam]

It finally opened today in Bangkok, but only one or two shows late at night. That's the way it often is at first, then after a week or two, it will be shown during regular times. They did that with "The Queen," which just got bumped up into the regular times.

[Fear the Turtle]

Didn't read the thread because I didn't want to chance a spoiler (I always curse under my breath at people who open a thread about something they haven't seen yet, then complain about spoilers - wait til you've seen it to open the thread!) - but wanted to add:

I've been anticipating this since I saw the first trailer. I'm taking off work tomorrow just to see the first matinee! I'm glad it's getting good reviews - I'm sure it'll rock.

[friedo]

I just got tickets to see it at the IMAX theater in Lincoln Center (they made a special IMAX print of the film.) I had to settle for next Tuesday, because every showing this weekend was sold out.

[Tuckerfan]

I'm bumping this thread to note that the review for this film, The 300, which appeared in the Village Voice is so hilarious I did not want anyone to miss it:

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0710,lee,75993,20.html
Lord, methinks the reviewer has some "issues" to put it mildly.

[MovieMogul]

He's certainly not alone. Another review I read somewhere said it was gayer than Brokeback. I suppose I'll see it because it'll be the "talk of the town" but I thought Sin City was a major creative misfire, and I haven't read a single review anywhere saying that this one is better.

[Alessan]

Lord, methinks the reviewer has some "issues" to put it mildly.
A reporter form the Village Voice disliking a movie that literally (and I literally mean literally) glorifies violence? In the sense that the heroes walk around saying, "All this violence - isn't it glorious?" Couldn't happen.

[Anduril]

Also of note is Leonidas's famous one-liner. When instructed by Xerxes that the Spartans should lay down their arms, Leonidas famously replied, "Come take them," a line that has been used to greater or lesser effect in action movies since the beginning of the genre (most recently and badly, of course, in The Fellowship of the Ring.


May balrogs descend on you! What sacrilege!! :D

[Maeglin]

I'm bumping this thread to note that the review for this film, The 300, which appeared in the Village Voice is so hilarious I did not want anyone to miss it:

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0710,lee,75993,20.html

That review is fantastic, thanks.

I am seeing it on Imax tomorrow. I confess, I was hoping for all of the violence with a little more substance and a lot less orientalism, but I will go in with an open mind.

[RandMcnally]

I just bought tickets to see the IMAX presentation of it for Saturday. I'm excited. Anyone see it that way yet?

[Maeglin]

I just bought tickets to see the IMAX presentation of it for Saturday. I'm excited. Anyone see it that way yet?

My imax show is at 4pm today. Almost there...

[Beaucarnea]

It was beautiful and I loved it. Viewing this movie before ball games, military skirmishes, presentations, surgeries, yard work, and making love to your wife would totally enhance the experience.

[Paul in Qatar]

Thespians? I think two girls together is so hot!

[Siam Sam]

Thespians? I think two girls together is so hot!
There are certain bars in Bangkok with interesting nightly shows that I could point you toward. :D

[Guinastasia]

Oh dear god, all week everyone's been calling into the Science Center, asking if we're showing this movie. NO, no matter how many times I say, No, we're not, they never believe us.

So forgive me if I'm a little soured on this.

[levdrakon]

Just got back. Very beautiful movie. Every scene is like a painting.

Gay? Nah. Lots of beefcake though so if that sort of thing turns you off well, don't go then.

My theater was at least half full with young guys, many military. So I guess it can't be that gay. ;)

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I just got back. I thought it was an over-the-top, macho, almost comically exaggerated treatment of the story. I loved it. It's highly idealized, but some of the ideals are worthy. It's a paean to miltary culture and not all of it is bullshit. At the end of the day, it was a real sacrifice with real heroism and a real ability to inspire. Don't go expecting realism (the rhino was just silly). This is impressionistic, not journalistic.

Also, there are boobies to go with the beefcake. It's not just a sausage fest.

[XT]

Just got back from watching it. Though I could tear the movie to shreds from a historic perspective (Greeks didn't fight that way :p )...I thought the movie was great! Very over the top, lots of poetic and creative license...and simply a great movie to get the blood pumping! The audience actually was cheering at the end...and there were lots of spontaneous shouts during the movie (especially when a certain counseler met his just deserts...there were shouts of 'fuck yeah!', and 'eat THAT mo'fo! :p ).

As DtC said, the soldiers outfits (or lack there of ;) ) were definitely there for eye candy (both male and female depending on how one swings), and the entire thing was highly idealized (Greeks DID wear armor after all...among other things).

The fight scenes were well done, if about as far removed from historical accuracy as one could get (I loved the little 3 foot spears they were using and all the martial arts moves these Greeks were using). It would have been hilarious to see a Greek warrior in a phalanx formation actually try and THROW a 9-10 foot spear about 300 yards to kill the Persian king... :)

At any rate, and FWIW, XT highly recommends this one...go forth and enjoy! As others have said though, if you have a weak stomach, or don't like the gory movies, you might want to give this one a pass...

-XT

[Tuckerfan]

Just got back. Very beautiful movie. Every scene is like a painting.

Gay? Nah. Lots of beefcake though so if that sort of thing turns you off well, don't go then.

My theater was at least half full with young guys, many military. So I guess it can't be that gay. ;)
Well, if it is, none of the military guys will ever say a word to you about it. ;)

[GuanoLad]

My theater was at least half full with young guys, many military. So I guess it can't be that gay. ;)
Is this an ironic comment? An audience of young men watching a film with lots of half-naked musclebound shouty sweaty men. Not evidence of being appealing to the gay contingent? I am just confused.

[kimera]

They threw in some homophobic slurs just to be annoying. I didn't like it. I guess I expected too much out of it. The portrayal of the Persians, the trampling of history, the polarization of complex issues, etc. I hope they do a real version of this awesome story.

[kimera]

And here is something else that bothered me. Why were the Persians mostly portrayed as black/dark skinned?

The way Xerxes was portrayed really bothered me.

[Jurph]

My biggest problem with the movie was that they leaned really heavily on the Hot Gates / phalanx exposition, and then ignored it:

"We will fight here, where there numbers will count for nothing!"
"Yes, Thermopylae, where three men stand abreast -- we can stand there in a phalanx and defeat them!"
"A phalanx is how Spartans always win. Side by side, your shield covering your neighbor. We can fight them indefinitely if we stay in a phalanx."
"Yes, brilliant! We'll stand side by side at the hot gates, in a phalanx, which is how we fight, and then their numbers will count for nothing!"
"A phalanx you say? We should find somewhere that the terrain will support a phalanx. Like Thermopylae!"

Five minutes later, the Persians show up, and the Spartans charge willy-nilly out of the gates like Brad Pitt in Troy, and for the next two hours the Spartans fight one-on-one with Persians as the rest of the Persian army hangs back waiting their turn, like a bad kung fu flick. Near the end of the first charge, one of the Spartans in the first row of the phalanx throws his only spear at a charging enemy. So much for the phalanx! They do a scene about halfway through where one of the men "breaks ranks", but you can't really tell until they show a wide shot. A pretty good movie, overall, but very heavy-handed on the macho "Dulce et Decorum Est" stuff.

I saw the movie with a fellow Doper who will probably be along shortly to Pit the parents who brought four-year-olds to the movie. :eek: Those parents deserve to be on nightmare duty for a year.

[Love Rhombus]

Oh, I so agree. There was a group of little tweens that just wouldn't shut up until I suggested that they do so..yeesh. All "Wow, bloody" and "Are they gonna do it?" and even "Aww, poor horses!"

It was a movie about some of the most hardcore badasses there've ever been. Gerald Butler's been a favorite (he was the bomb in Phantom) and here he's excellent, in my eyes. King Leonidias was a fellow you did not screw with. As a friend of mine said "You can't fight crazy." Lots of inspiring parts.

Lots of weirdo freaky people, though. What was THAT all about? Did the Persians like "oddities"?

[Fearless Leader]

I loved it. My husband and I got tickets earlier this week to make sure we could see it last night (opening night here). It's one of the few movies we were equally excited to see, I would go see it again in the theater and it's going to be a definite buy when released to DVD.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

As an interesting aside, the director, Zack Snyder, is doing the movie version of Watchmen. He even snuck a hidden image of Rorschach (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31814) into one of the trailers.

The visual style of 300 makes me optimistic about the Watchmen adapatation.

[ZipperJJ]

I don't usually go see action movies, but this one rocked. The fight scenes were way better than The Matrix.

And who knew it'd be funny? The audience was laughing it up while Leonidas stood over his men eating an apple.

Oh and the hot bodies....mmmmm 2400 perfectly-formed abdominal muscles towering over 300 little leather Speedos. And don't forget the capes! :)

Oh - For those of you wanting a little backstory/human interest - I think they take care of that all right. It's not 100% fighting.

[Incubus]

I loved it. I went with my girlfriend, who, in spite of being disinterested in muscley guys, warfare, or graphic novels, seemed really interested in seeing it :confused:

The very first battle seemed somewhat legitimate (I've never seen a phalanx operate in RL so I'm not sure here) but it seemed a very orgamized procession of Spartans who block, shove, stab, rinse, repeat.

Kimera, could you elaborate on what bothered you about the story? Did you read the graphic novel? The Persians were a huge empire. Sure they could have depicted the battle as being Spartans vs Greeks siding with the Persians, but the point of the story (Ahistorical as this aspect might be) is 'free' men prevailing over the enslaved. The whole emphasis on the persians looking African or Arabic or Mongol(?) (there were a couple of mongol-horde looking guys in there) was to emphasise that Persia was exotic and distant.

They make a lot of contrasts in the movie between Persia and Sparta. Much of the 'Persia' they protray is overeaggerated exoticism- people draped in gold, very sexualized costumes, omg piercings! etc. They are two very different forces not willing to yield to one another. Even the deformed mutant things shown in many scenes reflect this- note that in Sparta babies that are malformed are left for dead, only the strong survive.

Overall, I would say it is a good movie not because it is historically accurate (it wasn't meant to be) but because I feel it is a good dramatization of an ancient story of an amazing battle. What I like about some ancient stories is how larger than life they become- its not totally history, but its not completely fiction, either.

[Maeglin]

I'll dissent. After some reflection, I think it is a creative misfire. As wonderful as the visuals may be, they do not overcome the weakness of the creative vision and the internal illogic of the story.

Violence is treated uncritically and without nuance. The portrayal of the Persians is thoroughly conventional pablum. The writing was so poor that the only decent lines are actually from Herodotus (or Archilochus, re: returning with your shield or on it).

Perhaps the most galling element for me was the constant crowing about freedom and liberty. Unlike the Thespians, whose soldiers were clearly ordinary citizens, the Spartans had the "liberty" to train as full-time warriors since all of the labor was performed by enormous numbers of slaves. It is not clear why Spartan slavery should be preferably to Persian slavery.

The film missed another opportunity to treat the fact that the outcome at Thermopylae was only tangentially relevant to the prosecution of the war as a whole. Addressing the pointlessness and dare I say selfishness of the Spartan sacrifice would have made a much more challenging and interesting film.

Finally, the screed against mysticism at Plataea is equally nonsensical, considering the irrationality of Spartan law and the bizarre (and utterly fictional) treatment of the ephors.

Once all the stupid stuff is shaken out, there really isn't a whole lot of substance left. I expect more out of comic books, and I certainly expect more out movies.

[Queen Bruin]

The Classics major in me found a lot of things wrong with this movie.

The red-blooded woman however found a lot of things right. 8/10.


Leonidas is HOT!

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I'll dissent. After some reflection, I think it is a creative misfire. As wonderful as the visuals may be, they do not overcome the weakness of the creative vision and the internal illogic of the story.

Violence is treated uncritically and without nuance. The portrayal of the Persians is thoroughly conventional pablum. The writing was so poor that the only decent lines are actually from Herodotus (or Archilochus, re: returning with your shield or on it).

Perhaps the most galling element for me was the constant crowing about freedom and liberty. Unlike the Thespians, whose soldiers were clearly ordinary citizens, the Spartans had the "liberty" to train as full-time warriors since all of the labor was performed by enormous numbers of slaves. It is not clear why Spartan slavery should be preferably to Persian slavery.

The film missed another opportunity to treat the fact that the outcome at Thermopylae was only tangentially relevant to the prosecution of the war as a whole. Addressing the pointlessness and dare I say selfishness of the Spartan sacrifice would have made a much more challenging and interesting film.

Finally, the screed against mysticism at Plataea is equally nonsensical, considering the irrationality of Spartan law and the bizarre (and utterly fictional) treatment of the ephors.

Once all the stupid stuff is shaken out, there really isn't a whole lot of substance left. I expect more out of comic books, and I certainly expect more out movies.
I rolled my eyes at the rhetoric about "freemen" as well, and I noted the lack of any mention of the Helots. I also noticed that a number of things were simplified and/or exaggerated, but I think you have to see the movie as a mythologized version of events. It's not supposed to be a rendition of history but of legend. It's a tall-tale, a highly idealized piece of Spartan propaganda. It's not so much what happened in reality, but what got told around fireplaces afterwards. When taken on those terms, it's very entertaining. When compared to history, there are obvious inaccuracies, ludicrous hyperboles, disingenuous rhetoric, caricatured foes, etc. When looked at just as an adventure story on it's own terms, I think it works.

I would like to see a more realistic treatment of Thermopylae, though. Maybe Pressfield's Gates of Fire will get made someday.

[kimera]

The Persians were a huge empire. The whole emphasis on the persians looking African or Arabic or Mongol(?) (there were a couple of mongol-horde looking guys in there) was to emphasise that Persia was exotic and distant...They make a lot of contrasts in the movie between Persia and Sparta. Much of the 'Persia' they protray is overeaggerated exoticism- people draped in gold, very sexualized costumes, omg piercings! etc. They are two very different forces not willing to yield to one another.

I didn't see any Persians among the Persian army. Only one guy looked vaguely Persian (he was Egyptian) and he was in a minor role. What is the point of making the Persians look African/South American if not racial polarity? I think it would have been far more interesting to have shown the Persians as the way they are ("white" looking) in order to emphasize that it was the differences in societies that gave the Greeks the edge rather than any inherent advantage. Persia wasn't that exotic or distance and the closeness of those empires allowed Greece to become what it was. The Persian and Egyptian love for skillfully crafted Greek pottery and sculptures enabled the Greeks to grow into a force to be reckoned with.

I also found the portrayed of the Persians as a bunch of genderqueer transsexuals unnecessary. There are members of Xerxes' court who are listed in the IMBD as simply "transsexual" and the great king himself is nothing more than a prissy little drag queen. Did they make him tall because they were so stupid as to interpret art work of him literally? And if so, why does he look nothing like how he actually looked? The Greeks were portrayed as handsomely heterosexual (with unnecessary side comments about those "weak boy-lover" Athenians). They rightfully cast aside the ugly members of society, after all, look at what the ugly person who wasn't killed at birth did.

This movie takes two complex cultures who both had positives and negatives and turns them into black and white issues, including several that didn't exist in the historical battle. For example, as Maeglin notes, the Spartans had a lot of slaves. They had so many that they were in constant fear of a slave revolts (which only happened in Sparta afaik). There were three classes in Sparta. The Spartans, who were military professionals and were able to vote. Tthe "Perioeci" were freemen who composed the artisans, craftsman, merchants. etc who could not vote. And the Helots, who were descended from the people Sparta had subjugated and were treated as slaves. Bands of young Spartan men roamed around and killed any helot who was thought to just be thinking of revolt. Athenians were far more democratic than the Spartans. The Persians also had a very complex society and to portray them as effeminate monsters in a time when there is already a lot of racial prejudice against them does them a great deal of disservice. In full honesty, I saw this movie with 10 Persian friend and acquaintances so I was probably more aware of racial sensitivity when watching it than the average person.

I assume that most of these annoyances originally happened in the graphic novel. I held off on reading it because I find it difficult to enjoy movies if I have seen the comics first but I intend to go read it now.

I did enjoy the beefcake, but the other aspects annoyed me far too much that I don't intend to see it ever again.

[Carl Corey]

The whole idea of the Spartans championing freedom drew a raised eyebrow from me. But then I considered that for the Greeks "freedom" meant the freedom of their individual city-states, not individuals.

[Cisco]

I posted this in another thread:

What I liked:

The lead actor did a great job. His accent kept creeping in, but the accents were all over the map in this film, so I can't really blame him individually. The battle scenes were clear and unflinching compared to most modern movies. I absolutely despise action scenes that are so fast-paced and fragmented that it's impossible to tell what's going on, and I applaud this movie for not doing that. The aesthetic was great; apart from a few early scenes with some very weird lighting, I did not feel like I was watching a green screen. The fantasy elements were great; giant Xerxes, mutants, etc. These were important to me because they screamed, "We are not trying to make a historical epic! This is stylized fiction!" The historical references: "We will fight in the shade," "come home with your shield or on it," etc.

What I didn't like:

The speeches were my #1 complaint. Been there done that, and it's been annoying for awhile. I'm sick of epic, inspiring pre-battle speeches in movies. From now on they should shout Rape the fuckers! and get on with it. The guy whose son died, making the big display of not having told him he was his favorite: lame and predictable, and added nothing. The plot back home got a little bit too heavy; I could've done without several of the Queen & Trader scenes. The 300's last stand felt rushed: it was like they thought "ok, this is the part of the script where they need to die so, bang, they're dead." The accents were all over the place. The ending was taken right out of Braveheart. The "Remember us!" theme was done in Troy, and I didn't like it in that movie either.

Overall, 7/10. Good but not great.

I have a couple of questions to add, too:

-Was Faramir narrating the whole time? My wife said he was but if so, that was completely lost on me.

-What did Leonidas's comment to Igor right before he threw the spear at Xerxes mean? At first I thought he was revealing that Igor was a double-agent but that obviously turned out not to be the case so it left me confused.

[Love Rhombus]

-Was Faramir narrating the whole time? My wife said he was but if so, that was completely lost on me.

-What did Leonidas's comment to Igor right before he threw the spear at Xerxes mean? At first I thought he was revealing that Igor was a double-agent but that obviously turned out not to be the case so it left me confused.

Since the highest Spartan ideal was to die in glory for Sparta, wishing immortality on a guy who wanted nothing more than to be accepted was telling him "You're nothing like us and a betrayal of everything we are." Basically it was the worst insult he could think of to a Spartan. I felt sorry for the hunchback. Talk about being screwed by society.

It was a story by Frank Miller. He writes* exciting, bloody stuff about scary people. Plot? Kinda along for the ride. I agree that the stuff with the queen was eh, but they had to have something in there. Blame Frank.


*Yes, I'm aware that it was an actual event. It was just Millerized. :)

[Love Rhombus]

And weren't there a LOT of nations in the Persian Empire of Xerxes? Some of them were African, right?

[I Love Me, Vol. I]

If you have a weak stomach I'd suggest against it. A lot of blood and gore (Which reminds me, who the hell brings kids to a movie like that? I mean honestly, have some common sense people).I don't see the problem here. I mean it wasn't sex, right? Just tons of good ol' God-Fearing violence.

Why do you make the baby Jesus cry while he hates America and the terrorists win?

[Farmwoman]

They threw in some homophobic slurs just to be annoying. I didn't like it. I guess I expected too much out of it. The portrayal of the Persians, the trampling of history, the polarization of complex issues, etc. I hope they do a real version of this awesome story.

Well that settles the question of whether or not I'll take my 7 year-old as part of our homeschool experience on the Greek wars. ;)

Perhaps by the time we revisit this time in history (4 more years) the more historically-accurate, version will have been made and he'll be up to handle the realistic gore of war.

[I Love Me, Vol. I]

I think the Mad magazine version should be called--

290: They Choked and Gutter-Balled the Last Roll

[levdrakon]

What I like about some ancient stories is how larger than life they become- its not totally history, but its not completely fiction, either.That's what I took from it. This was a tale about a heroic battle. It's really no different than similarly exaggerated bible stories. I leave it to the History Channel for the "real" textbook versions of things. This was eye candy.

I thought they did a good job of making it clear that for instance magic wasn't real, but would have seemed real to them and to the teller of this story, as he recounted it.

The parts with the queen were kinda meh, but probably had to be there. They set up the ending, but felt a bit forced in. The only time the theater erupted in clapping and cheering was when the queen took care of her tough, take no shit queenly business. It was like the audience needed that scene, to offset all the manly man stuff.

[Love Rhombus]

I don't see the problem here. I mean it wasn't sex, right? Just tons of good ol' God-Fearing violence.

Why do you make the baby Jesus cry while he hates America and the terrorists win?

Actually there were bewbs. I am uncertain if they feared God, however.

[levdrakon]

I found an obsessed fan who did comparisons between scenes from the comic and screen shots from the movie trailers. It's kinda cool. You can view them here. (http://www.solaceincinema.com/2006/10/04/300-comic-to-screen-comparison/)

[What Exit?]

I never saw or heard of the comic. I did know of the famous battle and Xerxes.

I did not enjoy the movie. I disliked the portrayal of the Persians and Xerxes. None of this made sense. I disliked many of the battle scenes. The Spartan weapons could slice through bone and keep slicing? I was suppose to believe this crap? There is suspension of disbelief and then there is over the top BS that trashes a great mostly historic battle beyond hope.

The visuals were good, the plot and acting were very bad. It could have been a great movie.

Jim

[Maeglin]

I rolled my eyes at the rhetoric about "freemen" as well, and I noted the lack of any mention of the Helots. I also noticed that a number of things were simplified and/or exaggerated, but I think you have to see the movie as a mythologized version of events. It's not supposed to be a rendition of history but of legend. It's a tall-tale, a highly idealized piece of Spartan propaganda. It's not so much what happened in reality, but what got told around fireplaces afterwards. When taken on those terms, it's very entertaining. When compared to history, there are obvious inaccuracies, ludicrous hyperboles, disingenuous rhetoric, caricatured foes, etc. When looked at just as an adventure story on it's own terms, I think it works.

I would like to see a more realistic treatment of Thermopylae, though. Maybe Pressfield's Gates of Fire will get made someday.

I take your point. It is difficult for me to enjoy it even viewing it as a straightforward propaganda piece because I just can't sympathize with either side. I might feel differently if I felt that the film intentionally subverted its own message. The movie wanted me to love the heroes so badly that I could not help but be a little repulsed.

I am not really worried about accuracy. It didn't bother me that the Thespians did not *really* retreat, or that the ephors weren't *really* demented priests. What bothered me is that even as an adventure story on its own terms, it lacked substance and was very difficult for me to enjoy.

[Cisco]

I was suppose to believe this crap?
No. It's clearly fantasy. I'm shocked by how many people don't get this.

[What Exit?]

No. It's clearly fantasy. I'm shocked by how many people don't get this.
Sorry, it gets a little fuzzy when the fantasy is directly based on a well known legendary story that did not include Vorpal Swords and Xerxes the effeminate, petulant moron. I guess this was just not for me.

[Talon Karrde]

I take your point. It is difficult for me to enjoy it even viewing it as a straightforward propaganda piece because I just can't sympathize with either side. I might feel differently if I felt that the film intentionally subverted its own message. The movie wanted me to love the heroes so badly that I could not help but be a little repulsed.

I am not really worried about accuracy. It didn't bother me that the Thespians did not *really* retreat, or that the ephors weren't *really* demented priests. What bothered me is that even as an adventure story on its own terms, it lacked substance and was very difficult for me to enjoy.
Sounds kind of like Starship Troopers but without the irony.

[Cisco]

Sounds kind of like Starship Troopers but without the irony.
Let's talk Verhoeven!

[levdrakon]

I thought Xerxes was awesome. He was alarmingly good looking and his voice was hypnotic. Was that the actor's real voice? He should read for audio books.

A quick check on IMDB reveals he's Rodrigo Santoro, the guy who plays Paulo on Lost.

[Rysdad]

I saw it with my son tonight. We liked it--corniness and all. 7/8 out of 10.

I just have to quote a bit from the Village Voice review. This really cracked me up:

"Delicacies of dismemberment aside, 300 is notable for its outrageous sexual confusion. Here stands the Spartan king Leonidas (Gerard Butler) and his 299 buddies in nothing but leather man-panties and oiled torsos, clutching a variety of phalluses they seek to thrust in the bodies of their foes by trapping them in a small, rectum-like mountain passage called the "gates of hell(o!)" Yonder rises the Persian menace, led by the slinky, mascara'd Xerxes. When he's not flaring his nostrils at Leonidas and demanding he kneel down before his, uh, majesty, this flamboyantly pierced crypto-transsexual lounges on chinchilla throw pillows amidst a rump-shaking orgy of disfigured lesbians."

Think my son will catch teh gay now?

[Siam Sam]

I thought Xerxes was awesome. He was alarmingly good looking and his voice was hypnotic. Was that the actor's real voice? He should read for audio books.

A quick check on IMDB reveals he's Rodrigo Santoro, the guy who plays Paulo on Lost.
I know Gerard Butler plays King Leonidas. We haven't seen the movie yet, but when we see him in the trailer, bth of us simply can't see the same actor who starred in "Dear Frankie."

[mhendo]

I don't usually go see action movies, but this one rocked. The fight scenes were way better than The Matrix. Fight scenes better than The Matrix? Wow!!!111

Now, if it's got dialog better than Dirty Dancing, it will have everything!

"Nobody puts Xerxes in a corner."I'm bumping this thread to note that the review for this film, The 300, which appeared in the Village Voice is so hilarious I did not want anyone to miss it:

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0710,lee,75993,20.htmlThat's a pretty funny review. That review, and the comments in this thread (both pro and con) have pretty much confirmed my decision not to bother with this film.

[levdrakon]

Think my son will catch teh gay now?Well I'm sure you're okay with whether your son turns out gay or not. But if I were you, I wouldn't read him reviews written by those bitter jealous old queens at the Village Voice. YMMV. :)

"How come that Gerard gets to wear leather speedos and mascara and get away with it, that bitch! Just wait 'til I review his stupid movie!"

[Tangent]

I saw this last night. I agree with most here--beautiful to look at, but not much substance. About what I expected, having read the comics, so I was not disappointed. I really enjoyed the spectacle of it all. The faithfullness to the look of the comic book is amazing.

Funny comment I heard on the way out: As we were leaving the theater, a woman turned to her husband and said, "I get to pick the next FIVE movies."

[DeadlyAccurate]

Loved it. I knew it was historically inaccurate, even if I didn't know exactly how, but I loved it nonetheless. I agree with whoever above said that this was the story of the battle that Dilios (David Wenham/Faramir) would've told to his troops, with all the magic and heroism and glorious battles and noble self-sacrifice.

When we were driving home, my husband asked, "Did you get your fill of rippled abs?"
Yes. Yes, I did.

[kimera]

And weren't there a LOT of nations in the Persian Empire of Xerxes? Some of them were African, right?

Egyptians look very different from the Africans presented in this movie. Egypt was also a very tiny tip of the Persian empire which was mostly stretched out through the middle east. It seems highly unlikely to me that they would end up with so many Middle and South Africans working for them when they had so many other areas to chose from (http://www.hyperhistory.com/online_n2/images_n2/persia.gif). What's more, in this movie not a single general nor Xerxes was Persian. I don't think they had any Persians in the cast.

Here (http://www.crystalinks.com/darius.jpg) is what Xerxes and most of his generals should have looked like. An interesting article that talks more Frank Miller can be found here (http://www.afterelton.com/movies/2007/3/300.html).

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

I thought Xerxes was awesome. He was alarmingly good looking and his voice was hypnotic. Was that the actor's real voice? He should read for audio books.

A quick check on IMDB reveals he's Rodrigo Santoro, the guy who plays Paulo on Lost.

I spent a good portion of the Xerxes scenes trying to figure out if he was played by Marco Leonardi (http://imdb.com/name/nm0502813/), who was in Like Water for Chocolate and Cinema Paradiso.

I watch Lost but didn't recognize Rodrigo. I'm pretty sure his voice was heavily manipulated, though.

Oh...and I loved the movie. :)

[Equipoise]

Wow! A lot of people really wanted to see 300 this weekend.

'300' becomes 2007's 1st blockbuster (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070311/ap_en_mo/box_office;_ylt=Ai1wmgasrPqC9JKkYaGyQcLqChkF)

The ancient battle of Thermopylae was the stuff of 2007's first certified blockbuster as the bloody action tale "300" debuted with ticket sales of $70 million over its opening weekend, according to studio estimates Sunday.

That's about $233,000 for every one of the legendary 300 Spartan soldiers who fought off a much larger Persian force in the epic battle.
My husband and I liked it a lot. We ended up not being able to go to the midnight show, and we had already made Friday night movie plans, so we went to the Saturday 3:15pm show. We got tickets just in time because it was sold out a few minutes later, in the multiplex's largest theater. There were already lines for the next showings. We were running late and so had to sit way over to the side, so we'll see it again where we can sit in our normal 4 rows back, dead center seats.

I didn't know anything about the battle before going in, but I knew that it was based on fact. I didn't expect the movie to be 100% historically accurate, but it gave us a base to build knowledge from. In fact when we got home we each sat down at our own computer (yes, we have our own computers, we could never share) and looked up information about the battle and spent the next couple of hours reading about it. Thank you to CJJ* for the Wikipedia link on the first page of this thread. That's where I started. If anything, reading about it and some of the offshoot war links made me feel better about our world today. Yes, there are wars going on, but a) not anywhere near what there used to be. People don't take war for granted nowadays, and b) there's a long, (in)glorious history of assholes who waged war just because they're jerks, and few people back then dared to raise a protest. At least nowadays one can protest unjust wars and idiot rulers and (generally) not get our heads whacked off for it.

Gerard Butler! What a great badass he was! I didn't realize until it was over that that guy was the wimpy wuss from Phantom of the Opera! I take back all the negative things I've said about him and focus even more ire on Joel Schumacher and Andrew Lloyd Webber.

300 was beautiful to look at, and awe-inspiring to contemplate what might have really happened there. Again, I don't care about it being historically accurate. I too agree that it was the story told from Faramir's point of view.

One of the tactics used in the movie that I thought was a good idea but not followed through on, was the piling up of bodies. It was done mainly so that the Spartans could push the wall of bodies over onto the Persian warriors, but I don't know why they didn't just leave it like that. Imagine how demoralizing it would have been for the Persians to have to climb up over their dead comrades only to be picked off as they reached the top and tumbled down the other side, making the mound of bodies even bigger. And why that even crossed my mind when I'm a peace-loving pacifist in real life is beyond me.


Here (http://www.crystalinks.com/darius.jpg) is what Xerxes and most of his generals should have looked like.Yeah, but people carved in stone can't emote, and having to see Xerxes only in profile would be distracting.

[Grossbottom]

I loved it for what it was, a fantastical vision of one of the most testosterone-laden moments in Western history. I also think that the imagery we see is the result of Faramir's description of the battle as a pre-battle oration, sort of propaganda-within-sausagefest, and intend to watch it again as a commentary on the promotion of war and the necessity of propaganda as a tool of real politik. I'm looking back and thinking there's more depth to it than the armchair-warrior-jerkfest reviews it's been getting from some of the more sensitive critics.

[Swallowed My Cellphone]

I thought Xerxes was awesome. He was alarmingly good looking and his voice was hypnotic. Was that the actor's real voice? He should read for audio books. You liked his digital voice? I saw 300 on Saturday and almost the entire audience groaned when he spoke and giggled because it sounded so silly. I could hear the eyes of everyone around me rolling so hard their irises were scraping their palates. Rather than coming across as some kind of tyrannical king, he looked more like a bitchy drag queen on a really bad day. (That and the putty from his fake facial piercings was really distracting.)

[Roboto]

"300" is the number of stars that high-school males will give this movie.

And rightfully so . . . it was awesome. I'm seeing it again in the theater.

[anamnesis]

I'd be repeating a lot of the issues people have put forth about the embellishment of historical facts, but it can't be restated enough to those who see these as detractors from the film that it is an impressionistic, stylized, high concept tale of fantasy, not a historical period piece. When storytellers of old would relate tales to people before film, or television, or even radio plays, it likely wasn't uncommon for the tales to be great exaggerations. Animals were great beasts unlike anything people had ever seen, the bad guys were over-the-top caricatures and oddities of an otherworldly nature, and heroes of war could perform godlike feats of strength and agility. This story comes from a time where mythology and history were very nearly birthed from the same loins, as Spartan leaders themselves claimed to be descended from the gods, and perhaps rightfully so. These sorts of details were meant to be embellished for the sake of entertainment, and if you don't realize this then maybe you're not as much of a history buff as you think you are, otherwise you'd be able to forgive its misgivings, eat your popcorn, and just appreciate it for what it is.

All that being said, I liked it. It had problems just like any action film and could have done with less of certain things and more of other things.

- The gratuitous bloodletting was cute, for a few minutes ... it got to be a little silly after awhile because it was one of the lesser quality effects in the film and looked fake in many shots. It started to resemble blood spattering effects from a video game before long and could've been toned down just a little.
- I wanted to see the enormous Persian executioner monster in battle. He wouldn't have made much of a fighter, but he reminded me of one of those abomination zombies from WarCraft 3.
- The parallel subplot about Queen Gorgo and Theron could've been paced better.

Interestingly, I went with a friend of mine, his girlfriend, and her 12 year-old son who's pretty cool and could handle movies like this. They'd all seen Sin City (including the kid) so I assumed everyone knew what to expect. The only thing I expected her to get uncomfortable with was nudity, but even that was very artistically done and not just for gratuity's sake. After all, everyone's essentially half naked in the film to begin with, and uh, an appreciation of the human form (exemplary male examples in particular) is obviously a focus in this movie. And unlike Sin City, there were no immoral values or foul language, and this was a story based on actual history rather than gritty, violent fiction. Regardless, she ended up leaving the theater with her son a little more than halfway through the movie and I asked my buddy if it was the wrong idea to bring them. Turns out it wasn't the revisionist history (which she admits to not knowing anything about in the first place) or the nudity that she took issue with, just the bloodletting. Even I sort of agreed to an extent, but uh, has anyone [or does anyone know of someone who has] walked out of this movie because it was too gory? I'd say as a general rule that if you don't want to see a bloody movie, don't go to a movie where the title is scrawled out in blood.

I asked if she'd walked out of a film like Braveheart as well, and she told me no, but that was because it was based on real events. I decided not to engage in a debate over logic that warped. :rolleyes:

[HubZilla]

You liked his digital voice? I saw 300 on Saturday and almost the entire audience groaned when he spoke and giggled because it sounded so silly. I could hear the eyes of everyone around me rolling so hard their irises were scraping their palates. Rather than coming across as some kind of tyrannical king, he looked more like a bitchy drag queen on a really bad day. (That and the putty from his fake facial piercings was really distracting.)

I thought the guy was Michael Dorn (aka Worf)

[Roboto]

Since the highest Spartan ideal was to die in glory for Sparta, wishing immortality on a guy who wanted nothing more than to be accepted was telling him "You're nothing like us and a betrayal of everything we are." Basically it was the worst insult he could think of to a Spartan. I felt sorry for the hunchback. Talk about being screwed by society.

It was a story by Frank Miller. He writes* exciting, bloody stuff about scary people. Plot? Kinda along for the ride. I agree that the stuff with the queen was eh, but they had to have something in there. Blame Frank.


*Yes, I'm aware that it was an actual event. It was just Millerized. :)

What is it that Leonidas said to Ephialtes again? I saw it, I just can't remember.

[Dunawake]

What is it that Leonidas said to Ephialtes again? I saw it, I just can't remember.

Roughly, "May you live forever."

[Cisco]

I thought the guy was Michael Dorn (aka Worf)
I thought he was the young prince from The Temple of Doom, all grown up. I was sure of it until I got home and looked on IMDb.

[kimera]

These sorts of details were meant to be embellished for the sake of entertainment, and if you don't realize this then maybe you're not as much of a history buff as you think you are, otherwise you'd be able to forgive its misgivings, eat your popcorn, and just appreciate it for what it is.

Oh please, talk about poisoning the well. :rolleyes:

[Roboto]

I can't stop thinking about this movie. I've done nothing at work today except read Wikipedia entires on Sparta. I want to be a Spartan (except for the fact that it would really suck in real life).

[RandMcnally]

I can't stop thinking about this movie. I've done nothing at work today except read Wikipedia entires on Sparta. I want to be a Spartan (except for the fact that it would really suck in real life).



I wanna marry a Spartan woman so that way my son will be part Spartan.


I wish I were kidding.

[levdrakon]

You liked his digital voice? I saw 300 on Saturday and almost the entire audience groaned when he spoke and giggled because it sounded so silly. I could hear the eyes of everyone around me rolling so hard their irises were scraping their palates. Rather than coming across as some kind of tyrannical king, he looked more like a bitchy drag queen on a really bad day. (That and the putty from his fake facial piercings was really distracting.)That's weird, there was no reaction to him in my theater and yeah, I really did like his voice, whatever they did to it.

Xerxes did kinda remind me of the Goa'uld guy in the original Stargate movie though, and I can understand why people think he was sort of... I dunno you can't really say drag queenish. At least I don't think he was. Sort of effeminate maybe, but I saw it as a pompous, royal god-king kinda attitude.

I read on Wikipedia that not much is known about Xerxes later years, but he spent them mostly involved with his harems and eunuchs before getting murdered by his vizier, for whatever that's worth.

[Swallowed My Cellphone]

I thought the guy was Michael Dorn (aka Worf)Michael Dorn has a real voice that sounds big. There was some odd tonal quality to Xerxes's faux "big voice" that reminded me of Jaye Davidson's pitch-shifted voice as Anubis in Stargate.

Rodrigo Santoro is almost 6'3" in real-life (Gerald Butler is 6'2"). If they'd made Xerxes 7'2" - 7'5" (closer to Yao Ming), he would have been an imposing and exotic conqueror. He looked about 10 feet tall and freakish to the point of silly.

I loved most of the movie, even the Cenobite executioner, but Xerxes just made me laugh and not in a good way.
hat's weird, there was no reaction to him in my theater and yeah, I really did like his voice, whatever they did to it.I wonder if there was something amiss with the sound system when we saw it then. The audience didn't seem to mind how he looked, but every time he opened his mouth, there was serious chortling and guffaws.

[Miller]

I had no idea the ancient Greeks used so much Brazilian body wax.

[Cartooniverse]

There is a direct leading from "We will fight in the shade*" to "Yippee-ka-yay, motherfucker!", and just for that, Western culture owes them a profound debt.

[chanelling Darth Vader]
I find your lack of faith disturbing.
[/chanelling Darth Vader]

Yeah. I wanna see this thing too.

Cartooniverse

[Roboto]

Rodrigo Santoro is almost 6'3" in real-life (Gerald Butler is 6'2"). If they'd made Xerxes 7'2" - 7'5" (closer to Yao Ming), he would have been an imposing and exotic conqueror. He looked about 10 feet tall and freakish to the point of silly.

I thought Xerxes was awesome! Voice, 10 ft tall . . . no complaints. The only things that bothered me were certain disgusting creatures that I had to hide my eyes from.

[DeadlyAccurate]

I had no idea the ancient Greeks used so much Brazilian body wax.

Or that they airbrushed their abs.

[MacSpon]

The Greeks were portrayed as handsomely heterosexual (with unnecessary side comments about those "weak boy-lover" Athenians).
When the original comic books were coming out, somebody commented on a letters page about calling the Athenians "boy-lovers." Frank Miller replied, saying that the Spartans were certainly not above hypocrisy.

[lissener]

When the original comic books were coming out, somebody commented on a letters page about calling the Athenians "boy-lovers." Frank Miller replied, saying that the Spartans were certainly not above hypocrisy.Wow, what a disingenuous answer that was (Miller's). At any rate, the context for the average theatergoer was prideful homophobia; only the educated viewer knew it was hypocritical.

I thought it played like a conservative wet dream: all the muscley white dudes in man panties, fighting a horde of every different size and shape--and ethnicity--of creature. Diversity as nightmare. It was like the Spartan version of Falling Down, or Edmond: white "straight" male paranoia of being overrun by people who are not like him. Mostly, though, it reminded me of Small Soldiers, where the "good" guys are all white and square jawed, and the "bad" guys are exotic and foreign, if not downright primitive. The difference being that in Small Soldiers, the "good" guys were the aggressors, and the "bad" guys were pacificists, making it a more obvoius satire of American militarism. 300 reads more like a celebration of it: painting the strong-jawed white guy with the shield and cape as wholly justified in his militarism. It might read like Bush-war apologism, except it was just so dang over the top and silly that I'm not entirely sure it wasn't making fun of such apologism. The man panties make me wonder.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

I have never been a fan of comics, but I am thoroughly enjoying the manifestations of comics/graphics to film in recent years. I don't think one has to be a longtime fan of the 300 comic to enjoy the film. Interpreting comics to film is a whole other artform, imho.

And this film was awesomely good at it. I found the makup in Sin City just didn't sit well with me when scenes of those characters were on-screen, but I totally dug the merging of the live-action and blue screen in the scenes where the actors are not wearing prosthetics. That's not to say that there aren't obvious special effects and cgi, but I feel that they enhance the raw footage, again in an artform that I am enjoying seeing such advances in thought from.

My girlfriend is a composer, and the soundtrack opportunites for comic/graphic film scores are really something she could be quite good at.

[GIGObuster]

Wow, what a disingenuous answer that was (Miller's). At any rate, the context for the average theatergoer was prideful homophobia; only the educated viewer knew it was hypocritical.

I thought it played like a conservative wet dream: all the muscley white dudes in man panties, fighting a horde of every different size and shape--and ethnicity--of creature. Diversity as nightmare. It was like the Spartan version of Falling Down, or Edmond: white "straight" male paranoia of being overrun by people who are not like him. Mostly, though, it reminded me of Small Soldiers, where the "good" guys are all white and square jawed, and the "bad" guys are exotic and foreign, if not downright primitive. The difference being that in Small Soldiers, the "good" guys were the aggressors, and the "bad" guys were pacificists, making it a more obvoius satire of American militarism. 300 reads more like a celebration of it: painting the strong-jawed white guy with the shield and cape as wholly justified in his militarism. It might read like Bush-war apologism, except it was just so dang over the top and silly that I'm not entirely sure it wasn't making fun of such apologism. The man panties make me wonder.
I think though that there were several items that don't quite fit. For example, there was one line where the narrator said (paraphrasing) "that the Persians showed desperation when they suddenly resorted to use and waste their best and most elite forces so early". That sounded to me like a jab directed to what the US did in Iraq.

Not to mention that the larger force that is invading are the bad guys and the followers of Leonidas (that have also a justification to fight because they are defending their people) are fanatics.

And there is also the bit showing lots of dollars gold Persian coins being thrown around to "persuade" powerful locals to follow the Persians.

[Hung Mung]

Regarding the actor who portrayed Xerxes: His name's Rodrigo Santoro (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0763928/) and his voice was remixed. If you want to see the actor as he really is, go borrow or rent a copy of Love Actually (which I think people should see on its own merits anyway) and look for the scenes with Laura Linney's character Sarah. Karl, Santoro's character, is her love match in that movie.

I popped it in to show my fiance and her first reaction was, "I thought that guy was way taller in 300."
:smack:

That was her "blonde moment" for the week.

[lissener]

I didn't say it was an allegory. I only meant that the attitudes and concepts seemed to be the kind that might be more comfortably appreciated by a more conservative audience member, due to this or that parallel with a conservative viewpoint. I'm not even really sure I believe that was the filmmakers' intention; Rorschach tests reveal much, though they started out as random inkblots.

[Hung Mung]

I meant to add:
As for whether or not 300 is a critique of the war in Iraq... I dunno. According to Herodotus, Xerxes did throw his elite guard at the Spartans in his second wave of assault. Besides, the movie is very faithful to the graphic novel which was written a good three years before the WTC attacks and five years before we invaded Iraq. Obviously the timing of the movie's release may be significant, but I'd say it's more because comic books are finally spawning (mostly) decent and profitable films.

[anamnesis]

I found the sight of two birds fighting for a sunflower seed today to be an allegory for the war in Iraq. I wonder how many threads get by on this forum without some twit comparing the subject of discussion to the war in Iraq. You can compare any war in history with any other war in history: one side is always the aggressor, one side is always the defender, and neither side ever believes they are wrong. But what do I know, I'm probably just adding more poison to the well. Clearly any film about war, released during an actual war, must ipso facto be an allegory for that war.

Now that's logic any Greek would be proud of!

[Cisco]

comic books are finally spawning (mostly) decent . . . films.
Let's not get extreme. I'm a huge comic book nerd and a huge film nerd, and the two don't often blend well. Did you see Fantastic Four? <shivers>

[Tuckerfan]

I'd be repeating a lot of the issues people have put forth about the embellishment of historical facts, but it can't be restated enough to those who see these as detractors from the film that it is an impressionistic, stylized, high concept tale of fantasy, not a historical period piece. When storytellers of old would relate tales to people before film, or television, or even radio plays, it likely wasn't uncommon for the tales to be great exaggerations. Animals were great beasts unlike anything people had ever seen, the bad guys were over-the-top caricatures and oddities of an otherworldly nature, and heroes of war could perform godlike feats of strength and agility. This story comes from a time where mythology and history were very nearly birthed from the same loins, as Spartan leaders themselves claimed to be descended from the gods, and perhaps rightfully so. These sorts of details were meant to be embellished for the sake of entertainment, and if you don't realize this then maybe you're not as much of a history buff as you think you are, otherwise you'd be able to forgive its misgivings, eat your popcorn, and just appreciate it for what it is.Ding! Ding! Ding! Many of the movie critics on NPR who complained about this movie missed this entirely. They all said, "I liked Sin City, but this wasn't Sin City." No, duh. Sin City was a hyperreal pulp/film noir movie. 300 is a hyperreal Grecian adventure tale. I don't think that a hyperreal pulp/film noir version of 300 would work all that well.

I got to see the film in a very packed IMAX theater (definately see it in IMAX theater if you can). My biggest complaint with the film, other than the orcale didn't get enough screen time, she was hawt, is that the battle scenes lacked the intensity of Gladiator.

[lissener]

Any work of art can resonate (or not) on many different levels, in many different contexts. Finding resonance in present day context--especially considering the artists created the work in the same context--doesn't make anyone a twit, anamnesis. (BTW, namecalling in this forum is a bannable offense.)

[Cisco]

Any work of art can resonate (or not) on many different levels, in many different contexts. Finding resonance in present day context--especially considering the artists created the work in the same context--doesn't make anyone a twit, anamnesis. (BTW, namecalling in this forum is a bannable offense.)
:dubious: You cannot be banned for referring to no one in particular as "some twit" in any forum.

[lissener]

:dubious: You cannot be banned for referring to no one in particular as "some twit" in any forum.
In the first place, I was banned for pretty much that exact type of oblique reference. In the second place, anamnesis was pretty clearly replying to my post. Seeing he was relatively new, I thought it prudent to let him know that referring--no matter how obliquely--to the holder of an opinion you disagree with as "some twit," is not considered CS-friendly language.

In the third place, hijack over.

[Cisco]

In the first place, I was banned for pretty much that exact type of oblique reference.I find that hard to believe. Was it an isolated incident or did you establish a continued - perhaps, how you say, jerky - pattern of doing so?
In the second place, anamnesis was pretty clearly replying to my post. Seeing he was relatively new, I thought it prudent to let him know that referring--no matter how obliquely--to the holder of an opinion you disagree with as "some twit," is not considered CS-friendly language.
I didn't realize s/he was replying to you directly, but the fact stands that it was a very general comment. "I wonder how many threads get by on this forum without some twit comparing the subject of discussion to the war in Iraq" - I don't understand how you can read that as a direct insult.

[Ludovic]

Ding! Ding! Ding! Many of the movie critics on NPR who complained about this movie missed this entirely. They all said, "I liked Sin City, but this wasn't Sin City." No, duh.Oddly enough, the parts I didn't like about 300 were the parts that were most like Sin City: the relentless, almost forced omnipresent cynical evil. Which totally works in a noir, but not in an historical epic film. A little bit of it establishes mood and moral vagueness, which isn't always bad, but it had so much of it that it distracted me from the action.

[Merijeek]

I found the sight of two birds fighting for a sunflower seed today to be an allegory for the war in Iraq. I wonder how many threads get by on this forum without some twit comparing the subject of discussion to the war in Iraq. You can compare any war in history with any other war in history: one side is always the aggressor, one side is always the defender, and neither side ever believes they are wrong. But what do I know, I'm probably just adding more poison to the well. Clearly any film about war, released during an actual war, must ipso facto be an allegory for that war.

Now that's logic any Greek would be proud of!

THANK you.

I thought it was pretty telling that old hack Matt Drudge had an article that said the movie was either a "sly approval of Dubya" or a "thinly veiled attack on Dubya".

WTF? If it can be interpreted either way, I think ink blots are a damned good comparison.

-Joe

[XT]

I have to admit that attempting to see some connection to the war in Iraq in this movie is, to be kind, a bit of a stretch...

:p

-XT

[Miller]

Wow, what a disingenuous answer that was (Miller's). At any rate, the context for the average theatergoer was prideful homophobia; only the educated viewer knew it was hypocritical.

I'm not entirely comfortable with the way a line of dialogue disparaging pederasty is being so widely conflated with homophobia. I'm generally against the idea of buggering young boys myself, and I'm pretty sure I'm not a homophobe. I suspect we're both on the same page in that respect.

As for how obvious the hypocrisy of that statement would be to the average viewer, consider that it was delivered maybe twenty minutes after a montage of a Spartan twelve year old being flogged to "make a man out of him," and I think they general hypocrisy of Leonidas' position was self-evident.

[tiger lily]

Since I'm coming to this party late, I'm only going to address this comment:

Or that they airbrushed their abs.
FWIW, IMDb trivia says that all the principal actors underwent a heavy-duty training regimen before shooting began, so that they could all looked ripped. Gerald Butler talks about his own training here (http://www.filmstew.com/showArticle.aspx?ContentID=15299) a bit.

Carry on.

[Cuckoorex]

The following review is a mishmash of notes on the movie, courtesy of a friend of mine (Mr Jelly); I pretty much agree with everything he's saying, though I personally enjoyed the movie despite the obvious flaws:

More posturing than an Anime film festival, more nipples than a baby bottle factory, more cheesy dialogue than the collected works of Stephen Sommers, more cheesy monsters than a Gwar concert, more overuse of slo-motion than a John Woo highlight reel, and the most attrocious and patronizing voice over narrative EVER, puts this movie at the top of my list for Mr Jelly's most hated of 2007.

Yes, it features 30 minutes of impressive, illogical warfare, that at times is visually poetic and moving. Yes it features many cgi cuts, amputations, and decapitations, and water-color blood splattering effects meant to mimic the graphic novel. It had at least 3 very funny scenes that I laughed at because I was meant to - those were great!

But here is what it is devoid of:

- Color
300s cold washed out palate is tiresome and ugly - regardless of the few incredibly artisitc and striking shots that we are graced with (these few moments made the rest of the film even more unbearable).

- Characterization.
I could have cared less if any of these characters lived or died - I couldnt tell you anyones name except xerxes and leonidas - I know one guy had a kid and that everyone but leonidas liked to headbang and fight to progressive metal music.

-Emotional impact.
The begining was strong - i did feel engaged - then the battle started, the mutated world of Persia showed up, and I started laughing out loud at scenes that were supposed to be serious. I laughed at the delivery and writing of several lines, and by the end I couldnt take it any more with the empty lines about honor and bravery. It felt like a hollow propaganda movie that terrorists might watch before they go off to commit a suicide bombing in the name of "honor" and defeating "mysticism" and integration into the rest of the world.

-Restraint.
GOOD GOD, Faramir, please shut the FUCK UP! Every single time the movie started to connect with me - fucking Faramir starts narrating over the top of these visuals that were self-explanatory. We know that narration is a no-no even when it gives us MORE information than we can get from the visual sequence, but WTF ZACK SNYDER are you doing having a man tell me what I am already seeing?

"He hears his mean breathing" (men are breathing) "He drops his shield" (he drops his sheild) "The men were celebrating their victory because the day was won" (the stars are coming out and the men are celebrating). etc etc etc. Show dont tell, motherfucker.

-Regular speed film.
This is the worst and the best part of the film all mixed into one. LOVED it during much of the 30 minutes of fighting in the film. HATED during the hour and half of non-fighting. It makes sense that to me that battle scenes are slowed down - that the chaos and brutality is impactful through slow-motion. And it does actually work - as it did some of the time where it was overused in the Passion of the Christ. But when you overdo the slo-mo - as with any joke - if it goes too long - it loses its power. Slo-motion is a powerful visual tool precisley because it is NOT how we see the world - and its the contrastive facet of slo-mo against the rest of film being regular speed, that gives it its power. Why is the queen walking through a cooridor need to be slowed down - she looks and sees her son - this moment makes sense - there is a visual connection between mother and son - she walks through a room - all slo-mo - there is no reason for it that i can find, and at every turn the impact that it does make is undone by its overuse.

Such a strange with so many strange choices. I went in with low expectations - but the strong beginning of the film really captivated me - then something happened - i dont know what - but i think it was a tonal change. The film is very serious and somewhat grounded in reality in the first 35 minutes - then it just goes crazy. All the plans Leonidas lays out at the begining seem like they are dropped - he talks of logic but their fighting on screen, while it starts in the narrow moutain path (nicely mirroring the wolf scene) - it just gets dropped - the men move out into the open battle field leaving their strategery and movie logic behind. Then monsters start showing up, and Xerxes with the funniest voice and the biggest manhands ever shows up and SERIOUSLY SHIT YOU NOT - thought about how awesome this film would be if Mystery Science Theater got its hands on it. The obvious strange sexual reference of Xerxes standing behind Leonidas with his hands on him and saying "I can give you more" isnt whats so funny - its just everything - the enemy is a 12 year olds fantasy, the fantasy of someone who has seen too many Marylin Manson music videos. I wanted to love this film, I wanted movie magic. Instead all I got was the Cheeseburger Juliet gives to Jack on Lost: Surprising and enticing at first, tastey, funny, then totally improbable, ridiculous, and dissapointing.

And maybe my ovaries were in overdrive, but ALL i felt for the Spartans was pity. They arent heroes - they dont protect the innocent - they BEAT and brutalize their children - they INDOCTRINATE their children - kill them if they are weak, beat them until they are strong, and call it FREEDOM. As part of western society we are always too quick to judge and criticise other cultures for not being our own - we define things as not normal - but i like the way Abnormal Psychology is defined. Abnormality is defined as any behavior that causes harm or violence to befall the individual or others by the individual. THIS IS SPARTA! to quote Leonidas - its an abomination of necromongers who worship death, violence to others, and most of all violence to their own.

Great heroes protect the innocent - the spartans endanger all of Greece. Watching a heroic battle means you connect with the heroe's fight to save something - I didnt laugh when the Cave Troll fights the Fellowship of the ring (I laughed out loud when Leonidas fights the Persian giant-Troll) - it was wonderfull to see the hobbit team work together to survive - to reach a larger goal - to make it to the next challenge - Strider is a HERO - sacrificing his life for a greater dream- Leonidas is a warmongerer who prizes his idiology of death over the salvation of his peoples life. The spartans are the least free people ive ever seen - forced to fight - and mentally enslaved to see and seek only death.

The only true motivation the film gives us is the village burned to the ground in the beginnging and the child who says they came like wolves. But this would have never happened had Leonidas' pride not brought Persia down upon him over "earth and water". I suppose thats like saying WW2 would never have happened if Hitler didnt invade Poland - but I for one would never want to watch a movie about Hitler being a hero for the motherland in his last stand against the allies as they invaded Berchtesgaden and Hitler's mountain-top hideaway. That movie would suck.

The above logic is as broken as the Spartans war strategies on film, so maybe an even better analogy would be - Bush/Xerxes threatens to invade Iraq. Saddam/Leonidas and his army go to their deaths before allowing the force of US/Persia to take over their land peacefully. Maybe in 100s of years they will make a movie like 300 where Saddam is portrayed as a great hero. hopefully its not all in slow motion.

[anu-la1979]

Aside from the eyecandy and a few good one-liners I thought it was pretty boring. I also rolled my eyes at the fact that Xerxes was apparently a latter-day RuPaul in wayyyyyy too much M.A.C. frosted bronze lipstick. I could smell Studio Fix on him through the green screen.

I'm surprised because I really like Sin City but I was flatout bored and it seemed like most of the theatre was texting, which made the whole situation even worse.

Visuals...I liked and didn't like them. I didn't realise this was originally a comic book but the first thing I said was "oh, it's sooo comic-booky in the way they filmed and coloured it". The biggest problem I had was the colour palette. It really just hurt my eyes the way it was so washed out. If they wanted to go for something more like Sin City they should have done that instead of all those greys and muted colours.

[Equipoise]

The following review is a mishmash of notes on the movie, courtesy of a friend of mine (Mr Jelly); I pretty much agree with everything he's saying, though I personally enjoyed the movie despite the obvious flaws:
Your friend sounds like a real bitch. Don't like the film, whatever, but to proudly proclaim that you laughed out loud through the whole thing? Considering that most all of the shows have been sell-outs, she must have been really fucking annoying to the poor people who had to sit next to and near her. I would have gone to get an usher to get her thrown out.

[Cuckoorex]

Your friend sounds like a real bitch. Don't like the film, whatever, but to proudly proclaim that you laughed out loud through the whole thing? Considering that most all of the shows have been sell-outs, she must have been really fucking annoying to the poor people who had to sit next to and near her. I would have gone to get an usher to get her thrown out.

He. The mention of his "ovaries" was meant as a joke. He does whine a lot, it's true. Usually he waits until the movie's over though. I'm surprised he was laughing out loud.

[Equipoise]

He. The mention of his "ovaries" was meant as a joke. He does whine a lot, it's true. Usually he waits until the movie's over though. I'm surprised he was laughing out loud.Ah, ok, then he's a whiny bitch. At least anamnesis's friend's bitchy girlfriend had the decency to leave the theater (with her 12 year old son who was probably enjoying it, poor kid). Like her, didn't your friend know ANYTHING about this movie before going, or was Norbit sold out?

[Cisco]

I could have cared less if any of these characters lived or died - I couldnt tell you anyones name except xerxes and leonidasI was bothered by this too. I thought that it was going to be gut-wrenching when the Spartans started dying but then it happened and I didn't feel anything at all.

[Cisco]

Considering that most all of the shows have been sell-outs, she must have been really fucking annoying to the poor people who had to sit next to and near her. I would have gone to get an usher to get her thrown out.
I saw it on opening day in a big city and there were less than 20 other people in the theatre. I can almost guarantee that if I had seen it in my small town back home my wife and I would've been the only ones there. My group of friends and I were the only ones in the theatre when we saw The Fellowship of the Ring on opening weekend.

Just saying, just because it's selling out doesn't mean it's selling out everywhere.

[Equipoise]

I saw it on opening day in a big city and there were less than 20 other people in the theatre. I can almost guarantee that if I had seen it in my small town back home my wife and I would've been the only ones there. My group of friends and I were the only ones in the theatre when we saw The Fellowship of the Ring on opening weekend.

Just saying, just because it's selling out doesn't mean it's selling out everywhere.Whatever, I saw it the day after opening during an afternoon show and it was sold out. Our experiences don't matter though. The movie made 70 million dollars in 3 days. Obviously a lot of people went to see it.

He's still a bitch.

[Cuckoorex]

Whatever, I saw it the day after opening during an afternoon show and it was sold out. Our experiences don't matter though. The movie made 70 million dollars in 3 days. Obviously a lot of people went to see it.

He's still a bitch.

And he's still my friend, so shut the hell up unless you know him personally. He may whine about movies but he's one the most generous and forthright people I've ever known.

[DeadlyAccurate]

FWIW, IMDb trivia says that all the principal actors underwent a heavy-duty training regimen before shooting began, so that they could all looked ripped. Gerald Butler talks about his own training here (http://www.filmstew.com/showArticle.aspx?ContentID=15299) a bit.

Carry on.

No doubt, but it's pretty common in Hollywood these days to highlight muscle definition (they even do it for actors hitting the red carpet) to make it stand out more. In some of the shots, the abs stood out just a bit too much to look completely natural. It's no more odd than the body makeup, eyeliner, or aforementioned body waxing, though, just an amusing observation.

[well he's back]

No, Equipoise, the fellow you mentioned may be bitchy, but all he did was disagree with you on this movie. No reason to call names.
(I've also had to stifle my laughing during movies that others around me were taking seriously - "Memoirs of a Geisha" comes to mind.)

I can't comment on the movie - I found the comic - oops - graphic novel too boring to finish. I know it's not a movie for me.

[Miller]

Great heroes protect the innocent - the spartans endanger all of Greece. Watching a heroic battle means you connect with the heroe's fight to save something - I didnt laugh when the Cave Troll fights the Fellowship of the ring (I laughed out loud when Leonidas fights the Persian giant-Troll) - it was wonderfull to see the hobbit team work together to survive - to reach a larger goal - to make it to the next challenge - Strider is a HERO - sacrificing his life for a greater dream- Leonidas is a warmongerer who prizes his idiology of death over the salvation of his peoples life. The spartans are the least free people ive ever seen - forced to fight - and mentally enslaved to see and seek only death.

The only true motivation the film gives us is the village burned to the ground in the beginnging and the child who says they came like wolves. But this would have never happened had Leonidas' pride not brought Persia down upon him over "earth and water". I suppose thats like saying WW2 would never have happened if Hitler didnt invade Poland - but I for one would never want to watch a movie about Hitler being a hero for the motherland in his last stand against the allies as they invaded Berchtesgaden and Hitler's mountain-top hideaway. That movie would suck.

I don't really see a reasonable way to pin the invasion of Greece on the Spartans. The Persians were going to invade no matter what. When the messenger shows up in the beginning of the film, Leonidas points out that Athens has already refused to surrender and intends to fight. What was offered to Leonidas (repeatedly) was the opportunity to join the Persians willingly and act as their spearhead in the subjugation of the Grecian penninsula. Leonidas may be a warmonger, but he neither initiated nor provoked the Persian invasion. The only influence he had over that decision was wether he was going to abet it, or resist it.

[anamnesis]

Hey Equipoise, I don't think you've said bitch enough yet.

[Equipoise]

And he's still my friend, so shut the hell up unless you know him personally. He may whine about movies but he's one the most generous and forthright people I've ever known.Well if you didn't want him coming off sounding like a bitch, you shouldn't have copied and pasted his bitchy review into this thread. Let him post his own bitchings. Besides, being generous and "forthright" doesn't preclude one from being a whiny bitch.

[Cisco]

Hey Equipoise,
You could also call him by his real name, Zack Snyder. :p

[Equipoise]

No, Equipoise, the fellow you mentioned may be bitchy, but all he did was disagree with you on this movie. No reason to call names. All I did was call him bitchy, which you just did too, and I don't care if he likes or dislikes the movie, that's his business, but he crowed about laughing out loud all throughout the movie. I don't care if it's 300 or Titanic or The Godfather, if it's obviously a serious movie, and you find what's on-screen laughable, leave. This is not your fucking living room.

(I've also had to stifle my laughing during movies that others around me were taking seriously - "Memoirs of a Geisha" comes to mind.)
Yes, but did you laugh out loud and then proudly tell others that you disrupted the movie for the people around you?

I can't comment on the movie - I found the comic - oops - graphic novel too boring to finish. I know it's not a movie for me.See, good for you! Sincerely. You know it's not for you so you're staying away. That's fantastic and I salute you for that.

[Equipoise]

You could also call him by his real name, Zack Snyder. :pIt's true, I've been leading a double life. Don't tell my husband.

[dropzone]

I have to admit that attempting to see some connection to the war in Iraq in this movie is, to be kind, a bit of a stretch...

:p

-XTYeah! I mean, Persia was Iran, not Iraq! :D

[Cuckoorex]

All I did was call him bitchy

Saying he was being bitchy was one thing, and he would readily agree with you that he can be whiny and bitchy but you outright called him a bitch. I wasn't there in the theater with him, so I don't know exactly how much or how loudly he laughed. I don't think he's "crowing" about laughing as a way to show off, he's indicating just how bad he thought the movie was; for him to actually laugh out loud at supposedly serious parts of the movie means that (in his opinion) the movie was REALLY missing the mark.

The reason he is so critical of the movie is because he actually has a great deal of passion for movies; he has more great films in his DVD collection than most people will ever see; he converted his basement into a home theater costing several thousand dollars; he watches at least one movie per night. When he goes to see a film and finds that it is done poorly according to his opinion, he feels insulted.

Ah, so if he has a home theater in his basement that kicks so much ass, why didn't he wait for the DVD so he wouldn't be laughing and potentially ruining the experience for others? Simple; he didn't expect to find some of the scenes to be so ludicrous.

And some of the scenes really were ludicrous. 50-foot battle elephants and giant ogres and evil Persian orcs and battle rhinos and 10-foot tall Rupaul Xerxes and "Freedom isn't really free" (yeah, it costs a hefty fuckin' fee) and the Immortals sounding like Darth Vader...? I nearly laughed at all of those scenes as well.

Look, I hate it when people talk and laugh at inappropriate times in the movie theaters, too. Usually I end up waiting a long time to see movies so there is less of a crowd or else wait for the DVD because of that. When I saw 300 there was a guy sitting two rows behind me that was determined to show off to his girlfriend how much he knew about the graphic novel AND the real historical battle. Pissed me off. So i feel your pain, I really do. But don't make it personal.

[Equipoise]

Saying he was being bitchy was one thing, and he would readily agree with you that he can be whiny and bitchy but you outright called him a bitch. He was the one who talked about having ovaries, so that was the word that came to mind. But anyway, what is a bitch other than a female dog? It's just a word that's lost its meaning as a true insult. I mean, I didn't call him a goat-felching fuckwit, did I?

I wasn't there in the theater with him, so I don't know exactly how much or how loudly he laughed. I don't think he's "crowing" about laughing as a way to show off, he's indicating just how bad he thought the movie was; for him to actually laugh out loud at supposedly serious parts of the movie means that (in his opinion) the movie was REALLY missing the mark.Lots of movies miss their marks with people in the audience while it's hitting its mark with other people in the audience. The people who are enjoying it do not appreciate those who aren't getting into it proclaiming their ire/wrath/scorn/derision out loud.

Your friend sounds like the kind of person that people who have home theaters and never go out to the movies complain about as why they never go out to the movies.


The reason he is so critical of the movie is because he actually has a great deal of passion for movies; he has more great films in his DVD collection than most people will ever see; he converted his basement into a home theater costing several thousand dollars; he watches at least one movie per night. When he goes to see a film and finds that it is done poorly according to his opinion, he feels insulted. So freakin' what? It's his opinion and others don't share it. Some do, some don't. If he was insulted, fine, but he should keep his opinion to himself while he's in the theater. If he didn't actually continually laugh out loud and was just using that as a metaphor of how he felt about the movie, he's still a sillywit (there, that better?) because he didn't care that people would take him literally and get on his case about it. Not about his opinion of the movie, but about disrupting other moviegoers.

And anyway, his love of movies holds no weight. I too love movies and I liked it. We have a home theater too, and over 1500 DVDs, but we still go out to the theater a lot. I saw 13 movies in the theater last week. 300 wasn't even in my Top 5 of those, but I did enjoy it and would not have appreciated a disruption.


Ah, so if he has a home theater in his basement that kicks so much ass, why didn't he wait for the DVD so he wouldn't be laughing and potentially ruining the experience for others? Simple; he didn't expect to find some of the scenes to be so ludicrous.

And some of the scenes really were ludicrous. 50-foot battle elephants and giant ogres and evil Persian orcs and battle rhinos and 10-foot tall Rupaul Xerxes and "Freedom isn't really free" (yeah, it costs a hefty fuckin' fee) and the Immortals sounding like Darth Vader...? I nearly laughed at all of those scenes as well. Sheesh, it was based on a COMIC BOOK! What in the world did he/you expect? Of course there were going to be a lot of over-the-top things about it and it wasn't going to be 100% historically accurate. God, go watch the Discovery Channel or something.


Look, I hate it when people talk and laugh at inappropriate times in the movie theaters, too. Usually I end up waiting a long time to see movies so there is less of a crowd or else wait for the DVD because of that. When I saw 300 there was a guy sitting two rows behind me that was determined to show off to his girlfriend how much he knew about the graphic novel AND the real historical battle. Pissed me off. So i feel your pain, I really do. But don't make it personal. It's not so personal. Read it as if it were written by someone you don't know. I just had the same reaction reading about the guy two rows behind you.

[DigitalC]

Finally went and saw this today. Loved it, great action flick. I gotta say the LOTR stuff did bug me a bit though, there was no need for giant elephants, or giants for that matter, and the inmortals looked just like freaking orcs when their mask was taken off... all that was missing was the giant flaming vagina.

[C K Dexter Haven]

::: Moderator Interjects ::: This thread has wandered way too close to personal insults, to hijacks, and to discussions that are inappropriate for Cafe Society.

On personal insults: they are not permitted in this forum. There is a fine line, of course:
Note the difference between an insult directed against a person and an insult against a large group.
ACCEPTABLE: "Anyone who likes the music of Enema is soulless and lacks taste in music."
NOT ACCEPTABLE: "You like Enema's music? Then you're soulless and have no taste in music."If a general statement ["Only a twit would think..."] comes first, it might be acceptable. But when one poster has just said that he/she thinks something, and another poster says only a twit would think that, then we're into the personal insult category. So: Enough of this. You can have different opinions and different tastes without the other person being a twit.

On hijack: The question of proper behavior in a theatre belongs in a different thread. It could be in Cafe Society topic as an abstract concept.

On discussion that belongs elsewhere: The question of some specific person's behavior in a theatre (like, let's say for example, someone's boyfriend's behavior) belongs in MPSIMS or the Pit. Not here.

This thread is for discussion of the movie. Back to topic, please.

[DigitalC]

One question: Leonidas second in command was played by the same guy who played Achilles second in command in Troy wasn't it?

[Maeglin]

For what it's worth, Cuckoororex, I think your friend's review well articulates the stunning illogic that ultimately ruins the entire film. He doesn't sound like a bitch at all.

[anamnesis]

Yay, it's safe to come back and talk about the movie! Looks like Iranians are all upset about it now too. (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1598886,00.html) Apparently it's a vast right-wing conspiracy against the descendents of Persia. How else can you explain it making $70 million in three days whereas Alexander was a flop? I mean, those two movies were like, totally alike.

I wonder if [hope that] Equipoise can resist the urge to start foaming at the mouth and calling them bitches as well.

[XT]

Yeah! I mean, Persia was Iran, not Iraq!

Zactly. :p I think the Iranians STILL call their elite formation the Immortals in fact...while our Iraqi buddies called their's the Republican Guard (ironic name there...).

-XT

[DeadlyAccurate]

I think someone should tell the Iranians that the vast majority of Americans probably have no idea that Persia = Iran.

[Equipoise]

Yay, it's safe to come back and talk about the movie! Looks like Iranians are all upset about it now too. (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1598886,00.html) Apparently it's a vast right-wing conspiracy against the descendents of Persia. How else can you explain it making $70 million in three days whereas Alexander was a flop? I mean, those two movies were like, totally alike.

I wonder if [hope that] Equipoise can resist the urge to start foaming at the mouth and calling them bitches as well. You're trying to get me in trouble with C K Dexter Haven, aren't you?

As long as the Iranians didn't talk in the theater, I have no concerns about them disliking the movie. It doesn't matter to me one bit what anyone thinks of the movie.

Here are the movies I saw last week, and their rankings:

1. The Lives of Others
2. Amazing Grace
3. Black Snake Moan
4. Zodiac
5. Breach
6. The Host
7. 300
8. Bridge To Terabithia
9. Starter For 10
10. Grey Matters
11. The Astronaut Farmer
12. The Last Mimzy

I liked all those. And then there was...

13. Ghost Rider

If 300 were higher I might feel like defending the movie, but it's not and I don't, and I don't particularly appreciate people disregarding what I complained about and trying to make it about the movie itself.

[Equipoise]

(of course, I realize that what I complained about in the first place didn't belong in this thread, so I do sincerely apologise for the hijack)

[VarlosZ]

And maybe my ovaries were in overdrive, but ALL i felt for the Spartans was pity. They arent heroes - they dont protect the innocent - they BEAT and brutalize their children - they INDOCTRINATE their children - kill them if they are weak, beat them until they are strong, and call it FREEDOM. As part of western society we are always too quick to judge and criticise other cultures for not being our own - we define things as not normal - but i like the way Abnormal Psychology is defined. Abnormality is defined as any behavior that causes harm or violence to befall the individual or others by the individual. THIS IS SPARTA! to quote Leonidas - its an abomination of necromongers who worship death, violence to others, and most of all violence to their own.

Great heroes protect the innocent - the spartans endanger all of Greece. Watching a heroic battle means you connect with the heroe's fight to save something - I didnt laugh when the Cave Troll fights the Fellowship of the ring (I laughed out loud when Leonidas fights the Persian giant-Troll) - it was wonderfull to see the hobbit team work together to survive - to reach a larger goal - to make it to the next challenge - Strider is a HERO - sacrificing his life for a greater dream- Leonidas is a warmongerer who prizes his idiology of death over the salvation of his peoples life. The spartans are the least free people ive ever seen - forced to fight - and mentally enslaved to see and seek only death.

This isn't the first time I've seen something like this in a review of 300. Kyle Smith of the NY Post didn't review the film so much as he reviewed Ancient Greece (he gave it 2 Stars; I guess he's more of a Holy Roman Empire kinda guy).

Anyway, it bugs me.

[What Exit?]

You're trying to get me in trouble with C K Dexter Haven, aren't you?

As long as the Iranians didn't talk in the theater, I have no concerns about them disliking the movie. It doesn't matter to me one bit what anyone thinks of the movie.

Here are the movies I saw last week, and their rankings:

1. The Lives of Others
2. Amazing Grace
3. Black Snake Moan
4. Zodiac
5. Breach
6. The Host
7. 300
8. Bridge To Terabithia
9. Starter For 10
10. Grey Matters
11. The Astronaut Farmer
12. The Last Mimzy

I liked all those. And then there was...

13. Ghost Rider

If 300 were higher I might feel like defending the movie, but it's not and I don't, and I don't particularly appreciate people disregarding what I complained about and trying to make it about the movie itself.
:eek: You saw 13 films last week?

[Equipoise]

Yeah, my husband travels a lot for his work so when he's in town we try to see as many movies as possible. Last week was a good week (not counting Ghost Rider, which we saw as a "$5 Tuesday" movie) because a lot of good movies had just opened, and we caught up on some that had been out but we hadn't seen yet. He got home Sunday night, Monday night we saw The Lives of Others and Zodiac, Tuesday we saw Terabithia, Astronaut Farmer and Ghost Rider, Wednesday we saw Amazing Grace, Black Snake Moan and Breach, Thursday we stayed home, Friday we saw Grey Matters and Starter For 10, Saturday we saw The Host, 300 and The Last Mimsy, and he left again on Sunday. We never ever go out to see just one movie, it's like it's not worth leaving the house unless we're going to see at least two.

More on-topic, 300 is up to 85 million dollars as of Tuesday (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/).

[well he's back]

Hey Equipoise - Way Off Topic - I'd be interested in your thoughts on "Black Snake Moan" and "Last Mimsy". Thanks

[Helen's Eidolon]

You know, I wasn't expecting to like it, but I did.

Sure, there were plenty of things I could nitpick. There are a few things that deserve serious nitpicking. But in general, if you see the movie as a stylization/fantasy of the Spartan perspective on Thermopylae, it works pretty well.

[audreyayn]

It committed that greatest of sins, which I never forgive any movie for: it was boring. It was overdramatic, perhaps because I didn't have any reason to care about these guys and it was always obvious what was about to happen. Oh no, the guy's kid who was telegraphed to die from his introduction has been telegraphed to die right now. Wait for it ... wait for it ... okay, at least that was funny.

I'm really surprised after all the good things I heard about it. At least 5 people walked out of the theater and never came back, and one guy answered his phone and later started texting.

Two reactions in the entire film: a laugh for Xerxes hitting on Leonidus (from the texting guy) and a general "yeah" for the Queen stabbing what's-his-face.

And I hate to compare it to Sin City, but: Sin City was hilariously overdramatic. This was just overblown.

[JRDelirious]

This isn't the first time I've seen something like this in a review of 300. Kyle Smith of the NY Post didn't review the film so much as he reviewed Ancient Greece (he gave it 2 Stars; I guess he's more of a Holy Roman Empire kinda guy).

Anyway, it bugs me.

And in any case, in the Real World, the worth of the suicide mission by Leonidas' 300 fanatical maniacs (plus 700 Thespians, plus assorted auxiliaries and their respective servants and porters... how come nobody ever mentions them?) was that it bought time for the Athenians and their allies to set up a proper decisive battle and really save Greece, and Western Civ by extension.

As others have pointed out, the comic book is supposed to evoke what the Spartan storytellers and bards would be singing to the next generation: a totally mythologized version of events. And the film is a staging of the comic book -- it's about composition and scene and visuals and iconic representations and mythos. It is not a critical analysis of Classical Greece.

[mack]

When storytellers of old would relate tales to people before film, or television, or even radio plays, it likely wasn't uncommon for the tales to be great exaggerations.
I have an old friend whose depictions of events and people are so wildly divergent from reality that if he told the Thermopylae story it probably wouldn't be too far off from what 300 was.

If they have a Best Trailer award somewhere, 300 should get it. I can't remember the last time I saw a trailer and said "I HAVE to see this movie."

So, I saw it. I liked it, although I got annoyed at the "I'm gonna die" wheatfield, wife, and ethereal vocal that seemed lifted straight out of Gladiator. And I wondered why Leonidas whould want a Persian emissary and his entourage rotting in his well or whatever that was they threw them down. Although it was hacking limbs off gory it wasn't intestines and brains spilling out gory.

[Tuckerfan]

You know, I wasn't expecting to like it, but I did.

Sure, there were plenty of things I could nitpick. There are a few things that deserve serious nitpicking. But in general, if you see the movie as a stylization/fantasy of the Spartan perspective on Thermopylae, it works pretty well.And who knows, maybe this'll inspire someone to, wait for it, open a history book and read! :eek: :eek: :eek: ;)

[BobLibDem]

The Good: Gerard Butler doesn't sing. The editing is pretty tight- no extraneous plot lines and you never felt it dragged on. The Queen is kind of hot.

The Bad: Xerxes in his Jack Sparrow makeup. Some illogical and unrealistic scenes, including:

1) There's this huge pit in the middle of town with apparently hundreds of feet to fall to a certain death. Shouldn't they have built a fence around it?

2) Swords going neatly through arms and necks with one swift blow.

3) They made a big deal about this narrow passage being the ideal defensive ground to neutralize the numeric advantage of the Persians. Then when the Persians show up, they come out of their defensive positions. Maybe it would be harder to shoot action in a narrow corridor, but if you aren't going to have them fight there, don't make them stress its importance.

4) The Persians show up with a gazillion troops, yet they can't send a few hundred scouts around to find the way to the Spartan rear? Only with the help of the turncoat hunchback can they find the secret path.

5) I don't believe that it is possible to literally darken the sky with arrows. Such a cloud of arrows as rained down on the Spartans would I believe take many more arrows than an army could launch.

In my audience, several people clapped when the queen stabbed her traiterous rapist. I hate that- the fricking performers aren't there to hear you so why applaud?

[VarlosZ]

3) They made a big deal about this narrow passage being the ideal defensive ground to neutralize the numeric advantage of the Persians. Then when the Persians show up, they come out of their defensive positions. Maybe it would be harder to shoot action in a narrow corridor, but if you aren't going to have them fight there, don't make them stress its importance.
Actually, I think the what's wrong with that isn't so much where they fight as it is how they fight. Even when they moved out of the tiny mountain pass and onto the shore-road area, they're still fighting along a very narrow front.

The problem is that the strength of the Spartan infantry (and the reason they were historically able to hold out as long as they did) was their phalanx formation and tactics, which made them virtually immune to the kind of frontal assault that the Persians could offer. I can see why the film took dramatic license -- box of Spartans standing stationary behind a shield wall, poking the bad guys with spears, does not make for thrilling battle scenes. That said, if the Greeks had actually broken ranks like they do in the film, the Persian numerical advantage would've ended the battle in a matter of hours.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Historically, the Spartans actually did come out and fight in front of the wall. They also used some feinting maneuvers in which they briefly broke ranks in order to sucker the Persians in a little deeper against the phalanx.

[XT]

1) There's this huge pit in the middle of town with apparently hundreds of feet to fall to a certain death. Shouldn't they have built a fence around it?

Survival of the fittest my friend. Those ancient Greeks prolly felt that any kids stupid or clumsy enough to fall in a honking great pit was too stupid or clumsy for the ranks! OoooRah!

2) Swords going neatly through arms and necks with one swift blow.

And bronze swords at that! Were those ancient Greeks something or what?!? :p

3) They made a big deal about this narrow passage being the ideal defensive ground to neutralize the numeric advantage of the Persians. Then when the Persians show up, they come out of their defensive positions. Maybe it would be harder to shoot action in a narrow corridor, but if you aren't going to have them fight there, don't make them stress its importance.

Phalanx? We don't need no stinking Phalanx!! (My guess is it would be more difficult to film...and probably a lot more boring...a phalanx in actual historical action. Most people wouldn't know what they were looking at, as it would seem to just be a bunch of mopes pushing against each other and occationally getting stabbed).

4) The Persians show up with a gazillion troops, yet they can't send a few hundred scouts around to find the way to the Spartan rear? Only with the help of the turncoat hunchback can they find the secret path.

:p The irony of course is, if I'm remembering my history correctly, this is actually what happened. The Greeks were eventually betrayed and someone led a Persian force around behind the Greeks to cut them off.

5) I don't believe that it is possible to literally darken the sky with arrows. Such a cloud of arrows as rained down on the Spartans would I believe take many more arrows than an army could launch.

Well, admittedly the shade wouldn't last very long but....

:p


I still would have liked to see someone actually try and throw a Greek Phalanx pike something like 100 yards...hell, I'd love to see someone try and throw one at all. I actually went to one of those re-enactments once that had Macedonian Phalanx (longer spear, sure, but similar)...and there is no way in hell somone could throw one further than a few yards (nor would anyone in their right mind WANT to throw away their primary weapon).

-XT

[Diogenes the Cynic]

The Persians show up with a gazillion troops, yet they can't send a few hundred scouts around to find the way to the Spartan rear? Only with the help of the turncoat hunchback can they find the secret path.
This part actually happened (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephialtes_of_Trachis). Ephialtes is portrayed as a caricature but he was a real person and the caricature isn't so far removed from how he became remembered in the story. He became something of an archetypal traitor in Greek history.
Ephialtes has been considered the archetypical traitor to the Greek cause--although other Greeks also helped Xerxes, from fear or hope of reward. His name has become an epithet for traitors; more commonly in Modern Greek than in English, used in the same manner as the American-English terms "Quisling" and "Benedict Arnold." His name both in Ancient and in Modern Greek literally means "nightmare."

[Argent Towers]

I can't believe I'm the first to ask what the deal was with the armless woman in Xerxes' harem. That was the most memorable image in the whole movie, for me. Not a single post on the IMDB forum asks about it, either (not that I'd even compare that forum with this one.)

Was the idea that Xerxes was turned on by amputees? Or was it implied that she had had her arms chopped off as punishment for something?

[BobLibDem]

This part actually happened (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephialtes_of_Trachis). Ephialtes is portrayed as a caricature but he was a real person and the caricature isn't so far removed from how he became remembered in the story. He became something of an archetypal traitor in Greek history.

Cancel that objection to the film and transfer it to Xerxes. I'm kind of amazed that they would have needed help to find the way with so many troops.

[XT]

Cancel that objection to the film and transfer it to Xerxes. I'm kind of amazed that they would have needed help to find the way with so many troops.

They didn't know the terrain...and were a bit worried about what the Greeks in front of them were doing (the Spartans really were kicking ass and taking names...just not like in the movie). Ever tried to find a single mountain pass in unfamiliar mountainous terrain? I have...its a bitch, even if you KNOW there is one, and even if you have lots of scouts. I'd give the Persians a pass on this one...after all, they DID eventually manage to flank the Spartans, even if they needed a bit of help to find the goat trail.

-XT

[Miller]

3) They made a big deal about this narrow passage being the ideal defensive ground to neutralize the numeric advantage of the Persians. Then when the Persians show up, they come out of their defensive positions. Maybe it would be harder to shoot action in a narrow corridor, but if you aren't going to have them fight there, don't make them stress its importance.

My take on this was that the Spartans would hold their phalanx position in the gorge to break the first charge, then move out to mop up the shattered enemy troops. After the very first fight scene, they start cutting straight to the mopping up part because it's more visually interesting.

[Ghanima]

In light of the discussions here, I just want to share a little cartoon that I think nicely sums up the historical epic as a genre:

Now Showing (http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF209-Now_Showing.jpg#197)

[levdrakon]

I can't believe I'm the first to ask what the deal was with the armless woman in Xerxes' harem. That was the most memorable image in the whole movie, for me. Not a single post on the IMDB forum asks about it, either (not that I'd even compare that forum with this one.)

Was the idea that Xerxes was turned on by amputees? Or was it implied that she had had her arms chopped off as punishment for something?I thought the point of that scene was simply that Xerxes convinced Ephialtes that he doesn't reject people because they're physically imperfect, and he promised him all the girls he could dream of if he betrayed the Spartans. I don't remember an amputee, but I remember at least one harem girl with a deformed face, and I figure that was to convince Ephy the girls wouldn't run screaming from his gross deformity.

Remember, the story is exaggerated, so Ephy probably wasn't quite so grossly deformed himself, and who knows what people actually looked like back at the harem.

[Aioua]

I thought the point of that scene was simply that Xerxes convinced Ephialtes that he doesn't reject people because they're physically imperfect, and he promised him all the girls he could dream of if he betrayed the Spartans. I don't remember an amputee, but I remember at least one harem girl with a deformed face, and I figure that was to convince Ephy the girls wouldn't run screaming from his gross deformity.

Remember, the story is exaggerated, so Ephy probably wasn't quite so grossly deformed himself, and who knows what people actually looked like back at the harem.

On that note, did anyone hear what the third thing Ephy asked for? The first two were like money or women or something dumb, and then he hesitates and whispers something, and the Xerxes says "done" and Ephy grins. End scene.

What did he want :confused:

[Bryan Ekers]

I find it's like Sky Captain in that it's too stylish for its own good. And my girlfriend's a big The Last Samurai fan and found 300 to be virtually identical.

[Miller]

On that note, did anyone hear what the third thing Ephy asked for? The first two were like money or women or something dumb, and then he hesitates and whispers something, and the Xerxes says "done" and Ephy grins. End scene.

What did he want :confused:

A uniform.

[Aioua]

A uniform.

Gah! I'd hate to be the guy to tailor that...

[teemingONE]

Yeah, the movie was awesome.

I really don't understand how people go to watch a MOVIE and then get upset when it's unrealistic.

I guess reality TV wouldn't be as popular without them, though.

[What Exit?]

Yeah, the movie was awesome.

I really don't understand how people go to watch a MOVIE and then get upset when it's unrealistic.

I guess reality TV wouldn't be as popular without them, though.
Wrong, I hate Reality TV. I just thought the movie was too lame. Glad you enjoyed it however. You know we were just expressing out opinions.

[RikWriter]

I just saw the movie today and I loved it. I have a degree in history and know the actual story of Thermopylae, but the ahistorical parts of the movie didn't bother me in the least. Neither did the fantasy elements as I saw from the beginning that this was NOT a straight history, it was a MYTH being told by the only survivor of the 300 trying to exhort his troops. It was how someone who lived in the Classical Period would have described strange beasts and strange men, and damn the details.
For those who felt they had no connection to the characters and didn't care if they lived or died, I certainly did feel it and did care. De gustibus, as they say.

[anamnesis]

Ha, even a history major is championing the same message I was. I don't think it was the best film ever, but the fact that it wasn't historically accurate was far from the reason why. Anyone who harps on a film on that basis should probably find a new hobby besides watching movies.

[Jackknifed Juggernaut]

I just saw it last night. Good movie. Nothing special. I'd give it a 7 out of 10. The fact that the movie was unrealistic didn't bother me. But what bothered me was the unrealistic strategy. For example, when the Persians sent the shower of arrows, the Spartans covered themselves with their shields. What prevented the Persians from doing that again? It seemed too Road Runner-ish. Maybe they could have sent some soldiers to pre-occupy the Spartans, and then send the arrows.

Also, why the heck did the Queen allow herself to be raped? Did she really believe that this would help matters? Why did Leonidis pay the mutants to consult with the Oracle? If he was so much about reason, he shouldn't have bothered. And what was the deal with the Council? Did they not know that an enemy was approaching? They wouldn't alllow their king to get a proper army organized? Were they just going to let the Persians march right in and take over? These are supposed to be Spartans?

[Miller]

Why did Leonidis pay the mutants to consult with the Oracle? If he was so much about reason, he shouldn't have bothered.

Leonidas didn't care, but the leaders of the other Greek cities did. Without the blessings of the priests, they wouldn't march to war. Leonidas himself was legally prevented from taking the entire Spartan army into the field because of the priest's dictates, and had to settle for a "bodyguard" of three hundred men.

[Wildfire**MM]

Persians vs. Greeks

where is the political agenda? :smack:

[RikWriter]

Persians vs. Greeks

where is the political agenda? :smack:

Dunno, I personally didn't see one.

[What Exit?]

Ha, even a history major is championing the same message I was. I don't think it was the best film ever, but the fact that it wasn't historically accurate was far from the reason why. Anyone who harps on a film on that basis should probably find a new hobby besides watching movies.
You know what, I have not seen people who came into this thread to comment why they did not like the movie condemning those who did, so why are you acting like a teenager because some movie goers did not enjoy the movie that you did?

Want some more disagreements to make you feel superior. I think Matrix was a piece of crap. I know I am in a minority on this. Spiderman, pure garbage, all of them, same with X-men and League of Extraordinary Gentleman. Yet I really enjoyed Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. I thought Narnia was great. I even enjoyed Rocketman years ago. So it is not Highbrow vs. Lowbrow. It is simply some movies work for you and some work for me and we have different taste.

However, if you wish to go on thinking you won the internets, please carry on.

Jim

[XT]

where is the political agenda?

Good question...could you point one out? I am not seeing how Persians vs Greeks based on a graphics novel thats been out for years has a political agenda. Now, if it were Greeks vs TURKS...well, you might have something then...

-XT

[anamnesis]

Wait. Wuh? I finally won the internets? I wonder why I've been trying so hard when it was this simple! All I had to do was rile up What Exit, which isn't hard to do considering his interpretation of what someone wrote in this thread seems to have no correlation to what was actually implied. What I actually did say was that anyone who nitpicks this film on the grounds that it delegitimizes the history of the actual event is an idiot, and probably shouldn't watch movies if they're finding faults where they aren't meant to be found. The movie had its flaws, but I don't think historical accuracy is one of them because its not striving to make an attempt at it. It's like criticizing an apple for not being an orange, but maybe if you read what I said instead of taking me to task over what your favorite flicks are, you'd have noticed that.

[Jackknifed Juggernaut]

One more question (in addition to my others): What happened after the 300 were killed? In the movie, it took about a year for Sparta to put together a full army led by the guy who lost his eye. During that year, did the Persians control all of Sparta?

[Pork Rind]

One more question (in addition to my others): What happened after the 300 were killed? In the movie, it took about a year for Sparta to put together a full army led by the guy who lost his eye. During that year, did the Persians control all of Sparta?

The Persians didn't make it to Sparta. The Athenian navy beat the hell out of the Persians at Salamis. Xerxes retreated back home, leaving only a portion of his army under the command of a subordinate. That Persian army was defeated by the Greeks at Plataea about six months later.

[CaerieD]

Leonidas didn't care, but the leaders of the other Greek cities did. Without the blessings of the priests, they wouldn't march to war. Leonidas himself was legally prevented from taking the entire Spartan army into the field because of the priest's dictates, and had to settle for a "bodyguard" of three hundred men.

And this was my biggest problem with the whole movie. I loved it, loved the fantasy elements, didn't much mind most of the ahistorical stuff, but this? Argh. It drove me insane. Historically, the Oracle told Leonidas that either Sparta would fall or he would and he knowingly sacrificed himself to give the other Greek city-states and the rest of Sparta a chance. It wasn't some random machismo, or actually thinking that 300 men could fight off the Persians indefinitely.

The real story behind the Oracle and Leonidas's choice was just so much cooler. The breaking the law aspect of it bugged so much, especially considering that the monument to the men who fell at that battle speaks so eloquently of the fact that they remain there still, upholding Spartan law.

So, I rewrite that part of the movie in my mind and then I'm happy and can enjoy the awesomeness. :D

[devilsknew]

Not to nitpick too much, but when Leonidas ordered his troops to "Eat a hearty Breakfast, because tonight we dine in Hell!" or something similar- that is probably an inexact quote, but the whole idea and ennui of Hell as delivered here doesn't translate well and just reassured the Americana Warlording slant to this production, nothing like a damning to date this movie as entirely Chritianmericancentric.

Leonidas would have inferred the underworld of Hades (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hades) where all Greek dead went, not a burning Hell ruled by an anachronistic Lucifer and Christian Dualism.

[Shirley Ujest]

I so want to see a Homoerotic Musical War Film with a happy ending!

[Miller]

Not to nitpick too much, but when Leonidas ordered his troops to "Eat a hearty Breakfast, because tonight we dine in Hell!" or something similar- that is probably an inexact quote, but the whole idea and ennui of Hell as delivered here doesn't translate well and just reassured the Americana Warlording slant to this production, nothing like a damning to date this movie as entirely Chritianmericancentric.

Leonidas would have inferred the underworld of Hades (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hades) where all Greek dead went, not a burning Hell ruled by an anachronistic Lucifer and Christian Dualism.

What?

[Shirley Ujest]

Total N00b question:

Is this (http://www.amazon.com/300-Frank-Miller/dp/1569714029) the entire compliation of the 300 comic book series or what?

[Miller]

Total N00b question:

Is this (http://www.amazon.com/300-Frank-Miller/dp/1569714029) the entire compliation of the 300 comic book series or what?

Yep. 300 wasn't a comic series, it was a graphic novel: it's original publication was as a single, hard-bound book like the one in your link.

[Tuckerfan]

I so want to see a Homoerotic Musical War Film with a happy ending!
The only way that would work is if it was done by Roger De Bris. (Waits to see if anyone gets the reference.)

[Enright3]

"I liked Titanic , but why'd they have to make it so sad?"

Happy Feet: the IMAX experience can kiss my ass.

pardon the hijack while i add on: AMEN To That!!!. The move should be called "Crappy Feet".

[Siam Sam]

We saw "300" today. This is one thing that frustrates me about Thailand. All the breasts were pixellated out. But this was at one of the local art-house cinemas, and there was a preview for a Dutch film that's coming soon; the breasts in that preview were not pixellated out. And then there's a recent series of local movies about one of the more famous kings here, 16th century, and I heard from someone who watched them that they showed the girls at court bare-breasted, which apparently was the style at the time. Seems to have been okay for that film, which garnered a lot of publicity and which the Thais are virtually required to go see and like, but it's not okay not for this one.

Then there's the irony of the live lesbian shows, where I can sit about a foot away from a buck-naked lesbian couple, a pair of Vanessa Mae look-alikes, having the steamiest sex imaginable on a well-lit stage. I guess you could argue that movies are more for the general public, but come on!

In the old days, they used to smear Vaseline on the "naughty bits" in the movies. This at least had some entertainment value, because it caused the breast and crotch areas on these women to glow like some sort of weird nuclear accident. The advent of digital movies has made censorship easier, because pixellating is a lot less fuss. Starting about 10 years ago, there were one or two venues that managed to show this sort of thing uncensored, but not always; I heard the sex scene in "Monster's Ball" was horribly butchered even at one of the cinemas that would show such scenes uncut if anyone did. The art-house place we went to today is normally good about showing films uncensored, but I guess it's mostly for small ones from miscellaneous countries that sneak in under the radar.

[Cartooniverse]

Mmmmmmmmm.....pixillated breasts............

[BlackKnight]

I saw "300" today. I'd give it maybe 5 or 6 out of 10. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything particularly special either. I would probably have been far more entertained by either
(1) A documentary about the battle, or about Sparta in general
(2) "300" as done by MST3K. I had to bite the insides of my cheeks to stop from laughing at parts of the movie that probably weren't supposed to be funny. (Example: When the young man's head gets cut clean off, but his body is still standing for a second, I just imagined another Spartan yelling, "MEDIC!" as if there was still hope. For some reason that cracked me up. The beheading was just so over-the-top.)

[Siam Sam]

Yes, agree. The wife and I both thought Frank Miller's "Sin City" was a better movie. (They didn't pixellate the breasts in that one here, BTW. We watched it once in Hawaii and once here, we liked it so much. Almost the same, but we did notice that the scene in which the parole officer is walking nude through her place with a gun, only to find it's only Marv, was shortened, but it's that way on the DVD, too, so we figure the studio did it for some reason.)

We also watched "Venus" last week in the same cinema as "300," and nothing was pixellated out then. Go figure.

[Gukumatz]

Fantastic movie. An orgy in movie esthetics, for me - and faithful to Miller's creative parameters, to boot.

However, I did burst out into in involuntary laughter when Xerxes put his hands on Leonidas' shoulders. Oh, the innuendo! The dialogue - "It's not my whips which they fear . . ." and the look on Leonidas' face = gold! Immature, but yes, amusing.

[singular1]

The only way that would work is if it was done by Roger De Bris. (Waits to see if anyone gets the reference.)


:D :D :D :cool:

[Siam Sam]

:D :D :D :cool:
I got it, too. But I won't spoil the surprise. :D

[WordMan]

I really enjoyed the movie. I don't sweat the COMPLETE departure from reality - I knew where it was going and chose to enjoy the fantasy feel that had a little claim to "hey - part's of this really happened" buried deep within it.

Oh - and was it just me, or did anyone think that Xerxes was very similar to the super-villain called Him on the PowerPuff Girls? :)

[RogueRacer]

I feel the need to tell everyone that I saw the movie this weekend... in Sparta.

(Wisconsin that is. It was just a short drive and seemed so appropriate since I grew up there.)

[Tuckerfan]

I really enjoyed the movie. I don't sweat the COMPLETE departure from reality - I knew where it was going and chose to enjoy the fantasy feel that had a little claim to "hey - part's of this really happened" buried deep within it.

Oh - and was it just me, or did anyone think that Xerxes was very similar to the super-villain called Him on the PowerPuff Girls? :)
Nah, not enough mascara, and he wasn't wearing fishnet stockings.

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

Saw it tonight, loved it. It made me want to get back to the gym, though. I wonder what the Spartans' diet and exercise plan consisted of.

"This is blasphemy! This is madness!"

"This is CROSS-TRAINING!"

[anamnesis]

Big Bad Voodoo Lou: I know, seriously, this movie has inspired me to tone my upper body to new levels this summer. If I had nothing else to do all day, I'd spend it doing what Gerard Butler and the rest of the cast did all day in preparation for the role (http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/mf/frame?theme=minfo&lid=wmv-56-p.1412231-163794,wmv-100-p.1412232-163794,wmv-300-p.1412233-163794,wmv-700-p.1412234-163794,wmv-28-p.1412231-163794&id=1809262865&f=1809262865&mspid=1809263616&type=m&a=0,15) ...

Of course, it would cost a small fortune for that kind of personal training, but it's fantastic in that it doesn't target any one particular area of the body, so the body never manages to adapt to it. That video gives me goosebumps. I wish I could find a gym that specialized in this sort of basic training taken to an extreme. I like how they say they put them through a lot of muscular and metabolic stress, even to the point where they're vomiting, and that the workout is just as hard or harder than you thought it would be. You have to want it, and that makes me admire what the actors went through for the roles. I like how the one guy says "if you're not nervous before you train, then think about it, because it might not be hard enough". That's inspiration to me. I've already gained five pounds of muscle in the last month doing some of the upper body stuff these guys did, and I'm not even taking protein supplements!

Maybe I should've joined the marines. Or the Spartan army. :)

[Gozu]

I read the comic when the first trailer first came out and blew my mind. The comic really felt like it was MADE to be adapted into a movie. Good comic too.

The movie fell flat for me, I was quite disappointed. Maybe I shouldn't have read the comic.

[brendon_small]

Mrs. Small and I saw it at a place in Florida when we were on our honeymoon. It was great. I haven't read this whole thread yet (ok, I only read the first page). I would gladly buy the movie on DVD and plan on it as soon as possible. I also looked at the graphic novel the other day. Pretty interesting stuff. I heard stories before I saw it about how it was a huge homo-erotic bit of random war. I never saw that in it...maybe I'm a little odd...

I would definitely reccomend this movie to any person I know...

Brendon

[Tangent]

Yep. 300 wasn't a comic series, it was a graphic novel: it's original publication was as a single, hard-bound book like the one in your link.

Actually, 300 was first published as a miniseries in 5 monthly issues. The collected volume was put out a year or two later.

[Cartooniverse]

I saw it a few days ago with my 15 year old daughter. I'm less than impressed.

1. The girl on girl scene to bribe the deformed man was a bit much. One woman, 69'd over the other as she dangled her naked breast into the face of the prone woman, as two other women sucked tongues? Ehh.. a bit much to sit and watch with one's daughter. Also, completely gratuitous- like an awful lot of the film.

Ditto the scene where our dear Queen uses her body to sway the body politic, only to have that surrender thrown back against her by the man who had just sexually abused her. Unnecessary in harshness and rape-like cruelty, but then again, the film WAS geared solely to the mindset of a 14 year old boy.

Ironic that the Spartan lifestyle was portrayed with such lavish splendor and attention to detail. True Spartans would have lived a more.....uh.... SPARTAN LIFESTYLE !! However, that wouldn't have made for a very sexy film, now would it? :)

I am a big fan of history. Real history. The real history part of this tale is sobering and admirable and more than heroic enough. It got tarted up to the point that it wasn't much of a story.

As for slo-mo spattering blood, I understand that this is a cinematic graphical novel. I really do. Honestly. I get that. However..............

[Insert Political Statement Here]
For all of the boys watching the film who are excited beyond words by watching this rather over-worked special effect, I do wonder how stunned they will be when they're drafted in 3 years and sent to Iraq and find out just how incredibly quickly lethal violence is delivered in real life. The blood spatters in an instant and is dried to a dark crimson goo in the blistering heat of day, the dead lay there nobly torn to shreds and the screams of the wounded don't end when the shot cuts.
[ / Insert Political Statement Here]

Cartooniverse ( who adored Sin City, btw )

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

I saw it a few days ago with my 15 year old daughter. I'm less than impressed.

1. The girl on girl scene to bribe the deformed man was a bit much. One woman, 69'd over the other as she dangled her naked breast into the face of the prone woman, as two other women sucked tongues? Ehh.. a bit much to sit and watch with one's daughter. Also, completely gratuitous- like an awful lot of the film.

Ditto the scene where our dear Queen uses her body to sway the body politic, only to have that surrender thrown back against her by the man who had just sexually abused her. Unnecessary in harshness and rape-like cruelty, but then again, the film WAS geared solely to the mindset of a 14 year old boy.
Well, the film IS rated R. I never would have brought a 15-year-old girl to it, but that's just me.

[Cartooniverse]

R means a lot of things, and I suppose some of those things made for a difficult viewing experience. Such is life.

[Miller]

R means a lot of things...

I thought it pretty much always meant, "Content inappropriate for audiences under 18 without the accompaniment of a parent or guardian."

Also, what was lavish about the Spartan lifestyle? They wore simple clothes, their homes were mostly unadorned except for functional items, and the only jewelry I saw was the wolf's tooth Leonidas wore. Hell, they couldn't even afford to buy a breastplate for their king! I thought they did a pretty good job contrasting the simplicity of Sparta with the wild excess of the Persians.

[Insert Political Statement Here]
For all of the boys watching the film who are excited beyond words by watching this rather over-worked special effect, I do wonder how stunned they will be when they're drafted in 3 years and sent to Iraq and find out just how incredibly quickly lethal violence is delivered in real life. The blood spatters in an instant and is dried to a dark crimson goo in the blistering heat of day, the dead lay there nobly torn to shreds and the screams of the wounded don't end when the shot cuts.
[ / Insert Political Statement Here]

In what way is this observation applicable to this film in particular, and not any other violent Hollywood Summer movie, Sin City included?

[Cartooniverse]

In what way is this observation applicable to this film in particular, and not any other violent Hollywood Summer movie, Sin City included?

It was repeated ad nauseum to a degree not even seen in Sin City. Or so it seemed to me.

[Siam Sam]

Even if they don't censor anything in a film, an R-rated fim will be advertised as PG here, so as not to worry parents about sending their childen to it. Really.