300 — Reviews thread
03-10-07, 12:38 AM
#26
Retired
Originally Posted by Ranger
I have not seen 300 or read its comics, but I have seen the cell and am really puzzled about why you thought that movie would be anything like 300.
I think he just means a movie that was great to look at, but sucked in every other facet (and then noting that even the visuals didn't live up to expectation)
My friend and I both thought of the Cell when discussing it after catching it for just that reason. Unlike the poster above, we though the visuals were great, but the rest of the movie was kind of "meh".
Terrible acting and dialog, little plot. But it looks great and the battle scenes are pretty kickass so it was worth the price of admission to see it on the big screen. But I doubt I'll ever watch it again. Xerces apparently being moddled after Rupaul was a bit lame as well.
2.5/5.
Last edited by Josh Hinkle; 03-10-07 at 12:40 AM.
03-10-07, 12:47 AM
#27
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Short Take
Eh.
My Long (-Winded) Take
Well, consider me let down by the film; like Sin City before it, 300 continues the trend of directors who apparently don't understand that comics and film are two different mediums, and as such have different needs, but rather than trying to take the core story, characters and imagery and craft it into a workable script, they think that a slavish adaptation of the source material will work far better. It doesn't.
Snyder gets points for style, but much like Rodriguez and Sin City, that's about all he gets. First off, Gerard Butler was the wrong choice for the role of Leonidas; he (like the rest of the cast) is very impressive physically, but Butler lets his sculpted body do much of the performing, and for some reason he thinks that constantly bellowing and sneering his lines is the right way to go, like it will give the dialogue some weight; for that to work, the movie needs an actor with a more commanding, charasmatic presence (perhaps Liam Neeson? Daniel Day-Lewis? Eric Bana? Kenneth Branagh circa Henry V?), and Butler simply does not have it. The rest of the cast is serviceable (and nothing more), but considering most of them let swords and spears do the talking, not much is required of them outside of the ability to not look completely ridiculous wearing only a cape and a loincloth.
When it comes to the meat of the film--the battles--300 manages to both deliver and fail. Thankfully, Snyder does not go down the route of making thousands of edits during the fights, and thanks to the sparse, open areas, you can clearly see what is happening, with every stabbing, slashing, blood spurting and loss of limbs put front and center. Unfortunately, Snyder's choice of constantly shifting between slo-mo, regular speed and fast motion is extremely annoying. One shot of Butler mowing down Persian soldiers like they were minor pests would have looked FUCKING AMAZING (and more graceful) had it been kept entirely in slo-mo; but instead it flicks back and forth between slow and fast, looking like the work of a hack who is aping modern cinematic trends. On top of that, for a movie that goes on about heroism and braving incredible odds, it would have been nice for the fights to actually have some kind of danger to them; as thrilling as some of the fights were to watch, the Spartans are basically unstoppable killing machines in the movie, and the Persian armies are seen as little more than living, breathing training dummies.
The heavy-handed dialogue (what little of it there was) worked in the comic, but, again just like Sin City, it doesn't work on film, especially when movie is (apparently) meant to be taken seriously (at least Sin had a sense of humor and had no ambitions above being pulp). The added subplot of Leonidas' wife trying secure backup for the Spartans seems to be like something out a second-rate TV movie adaptation of the comic; while the Sparta scenes are logically placed to give a breather in between the action, they could have been easily cut from the film and lost nothing overall, save for Dominic West's amusing soul patch (oh McNulty, how can you of all people suck in this movie?). I really wish the movie had begun and stayed at the battle site, never cutting away except for the one neccessary flashback (ie, "THIS IS SPARTAGHGHGH!!!"), as it would have perhaps given us time to know a bit about the soldiers.
And in the end, that is ultimately what does in the movie. When the Spartans reach their inevitable fate, because there's no depth whatsoever to the characters, because the acting has no life to it, I just didn't give a damn about them and shrugged. Like Sin City, it's another stylish-as-hell Miller adaptation, but once the novelty of the visuals wears off, it becomes readily apparent just how empty and bland the movie is.
A couple of other minor things:
- Directors have really got to stop using soundtracks where some female singer overwroughtly moans over some vaguely exotic music; it's been a cliche for years now, and it's getting to be an annoying one at that.
-
This movie has been hyped to hell everywhere. Thanks to excellent timing from Warners, it'll do gangbusters business this week, and since there seems to be little competition, next week as well. Chances are it'll drop sharply on the 23rd, when ninja turtles, snipers, Adam Sandler and imbred mutants fight it out.
Eh.
My Long (-Winded) Take
Well, consider me let down by the film; like Sin City before it, 300 continues the trend of directors who apparently don't understand that comics and film are two different mediums, and as such have different needs, but rather than trying to take the core story, characters and imagery and craft it into a workable script, they think that a slavish adaptation of the source material will work far better. It doesn't.
Snyder gets points for style, but much like Rodriguez and Sin City, that's about all he gets. First off, Gerard Butler was the wrong choice for the role of Leonidas; he (like the rest of the cast) is very impressive physically, but Butler lets his sculpted body do much of the performing, and for some reason he thinks that constantly bellowing and sneering his lines is the right way to go, like it will give the dialogue some weight; for that to work, the movie needs an actor with a more commanding, charasmatic presence (perhaps Liam Neeson? Daniel Day-Lewis? Eric Bana? Kenneth Branagh circa Henry V?), and Butler simply does not have it. The rest of the cast is serviceable (and nothing more), but considering most of them let swords and spears do the talking, not much is required of them outside of the ability to not look completely ridiculous wearing only a cape and a loincloth.
When it comes to the meat of the film--the battles--300 manages to both deliver and fail. Thankfully, Snyder does not go down the route of making thousands of edits during the fights, and thanks to the sparse, open areas, you can clearly see what is happening, with every stabbing, slashing, blood spurting and loss of limbs put front and center. Unfortunately, Snyder's choice of constantly shifting between slo-mo, regular speed and fast motion is extremely annoying. One shot of Butler mowing down Persian soldiers like they were minor pests would have looked FUCKING AMAZING (and more graceful) had it been kept entirely in slo-mo; but instead it flicks back and forth between slow and fast, looking like the work of a hack who is aping modern cinematic trends. On top of that, for a movie that goes on about heroism and braving incredible odds, it would have been nice for the fights to actually have some kind of danger to them; as thrilling as some of the fights were to watch, the Spartans are basically unstoppable killing machines in the movie, and the Persian armies are seen as little more than living, breathing training dummies.
Spoiler:
The heavy-handed dialogue (what little of it there was) worked in the comic, but, again just like Sin City, it doesn't work on film, especially when movie is (apparently) meant to be taken seriously (at least Sin had a sense of humor and had no ambitions above being pulp). The added subplot of Leonidas' wife trying secure backup for the Spartans seems to be like something out a second-rate TV movie adaptation of the comic; while the Sparta scenes are logically placed to give a breather in between the action, they could have been easily cut from the film and lost nothing overall, save for Dominic West's amusing soul patch (oh McNulty, how can you of all people suck in this movie?). I really wish the movie had begun and stayed at the battle site, never cutting away except for the one neccessary flashback (ie, "THIS IS SPARTAGHGHGH!!!"), as it would have perhaps given us time to know a bit about the soldiers.
And in the end, that is ultimately what does in the movie. When the Spartans reach their inevitable fate, because there's no depth whatsoever to the characters, because the acting has no life to it, I just didn't give a damn about them and shrugged. Like Sin City, it's another stylish-as-hell Miller adaptation, but once the novelty of the visuals wears off, it becomes readily apparent just how empty and bland the movie is.
A couple of other minor things:
- Directors have really got to stop using soundtracks where some female singer overwroughtly moans over some vaguely exotic music; it's been a cliche for years now, and it's getting to be an annoying one at that.
-
Spoiler:
I have a feeling this is going to do better than expected. Every showing, at three theaters, was sold out tonight.
03-10-07, 02:16 AM
#28
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: puckland
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The visual style of 300 was amazing. Unlike Sin City, the performances were actually pretty good too. Zack has clearly gotten a lot better at dealing with actors. Unfortunately, the screenplay needed some work. The voiceover was frequently intrusive and heavy handed. A lot of the dialogue was generic, trite, or even hilariously ironic. e.g. It's pretty fasionable for heroes in american films to spout off about freedom, and Snyder's Leonidas is no exception. Now, this is not a movie you expect to be even remotely historically accurate, but it's still hard to stifle a laugh since sparta had more slaves than citizens!
This is a flawed film, but still a hugely entertaining ride.
This is a flawed film, but still a hugely entertaining ride.
03-10-07, 07:11 AM
#30
DVD Talk Legend
The History Channel is currently airing a show called "The Last Stand of the 300", which is pretty good... may want to check it out... fleshes out more of the "history" behind this event.
03-10-07, 07:41 AM
#31
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Ranger
I have not seen 300 or read its comics, but I have seen the cell and am really puzzled about why you thought that movie would be anything like 300.
But it is nothing, nothing compared to Sin City. Yes, there's some overlap: Sin City is all black and white, and 300 is all browns and reds. Both excel in visual style. Both have hammy acting with line delivery that you just know if it was in a comic dialogue balloon, would be bolded, italicised, and with three exclamation points in the end.
So, not "This is Sparta!" but:
"This is SPARTAAA!!!"
The thing is, Sin City stays engrossing throughout the entire movie and none of its side stories are in any way boring. 300 only has the battle scenes to support it, and maybe the part with the oracle and the creepy inbred priests. Once you're in ther village or the senate, it's snooze-time. Imagine 300 without the battle scenes, with just the other stuff. Rome could dance circles around it and you'd be wishing you'd be seeing Troy again.
And, like so many others, I'm a bit baffled and confused at the fact that the Spartans died so easily at the end AND that it took a year for the next battle to happen.
03-10-07, 08:19 AM
#32
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I enjoyed the film, it was a nice brainless action fest. It was also ripe for an Mystery Science Theater 300 treatment, which we prompty gave it in hushed tones (and fought to stifle our laughter).
Question to those that know more about trailers - we didn't get the Spider-Man 3 trailer. This isn't the first time that we've gone to Showcase Cinema (National Amusements) and did not get the "major" trailer that everyone was talking about. How is it that some theaters get the trailer and some don't?
Question to those that know more about trailers - we didn't get the Spider-Man 3 trailer. This isn't the first time that we've gone to Showcase Cinema (National Amusements) and did not get the "major" trailer that everyone was talking about. How is it that some theaters get the trailer and some don't?
03-10-07, 08:42 AM
#33
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Columbia, TN
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hated this movie, could not care about any of the characters, could not care about any of the battles. For all the talk about honor, freedom, and sacrifice the queen was well if you see the movie you know what she was. I just could not get into it.
03-10-07, 08:52 AM
#34
YAY for boobies!
saw it yesterday. damn IMAX was sold out early, and i didn't feel like going to a midnight show. but it's good enough that i'll go again to see it in IMAX.
what follows are minor spoilers, so read if you want. I figured we don't need tags, as we're in the reviews thread.
Very entertining movie. Visually stunning. amazing fight sequences.
now my nitpicks:
It started VERY Slowly. Takes about 30 minutes before you get to any fighting, which are the best parts (or at least it seemed that long).
one of my biggest pet peeves was with the narrtor/storyteller. we're supposed to believe that this guy is a master storyteller and that people hang on his words... yet his voice annoyed the ever-loving crap out of me. it was like nails on a chalkboard to me for some reason.
i didn't like the addition of "freaks" to the storyline. that was not in the novel. Not talking about the hunchback or the ephors, they're in the book. I mean the appendage-less woman in Xerxes harem, or the weird fat guy with the Bone/Knife arms. just so, so strange.
I also didn't like Xerxes drag queen painted-on eyebrows. i read a review, and i agree with what it said - it's nice to see RuPaul getting work. weird to think that Xerxes is Paulo from LOST (who is Paulo? good point. he's the worthless new guy).
and one part that REALLY annoyed me was the death of the captain's son (the captain's son wasn't specifically shown in the book). so these guys are amazing warriors, but the guy can't hear a single horse charging up behind him when there is no other action taking place?
decent lines, but certainly not great (the graphic novel is more about the images than the dialogue). and there is definitely overacting. and butler's lisp annoyed me.
I saw this with a friend, and when we left, he said, "it was good, but it didn't get you like Braveheart." I immediately told him that even mentioning 300 in the same breath as Braveheart does a HUGE injustice to Braveheart. 300 is a good movie. breathtaking, too. but you are never really, truly attached to what is going on, because it simply does not feel real (even though it's based on a true story). I feel that the freak addtions add to that, plus the fact that you can tell it's a "green screen" movie. and the blood is tarantino-esque. The ending, which is supposed to be powerful, doesn't have the gripping, emotional effect that it should have because of these things.
ok, review over. i still think everyone should see it, even though i like to nitpick. i'd still buy it when it comes out on DVD, the action scenes are that good.
saw it yesterday. damn IMAX was sold out early, and i didn't feel like going to a midnight show. but it's good enough that i'll go again to see it in IMAX.
what follows are minor spoilers, so read if you want. I figured we don't need tags, as we're in the reviews thread.
Very entertining movie. Visually stunning. amazing fight sequences.
now my nitpicks:
It started VERY Slowly. Takes about 30 minutes before you get to any fighting, which are the best parts (or at least it seemed that long).
one of my biggest pet peeves was with the narrtor/storyteller. we're supposed to believe that this guy is a master storyteller and that people hang on his words... yet his voice annoyed the ever-loving crap out of me. it was like nails on a chalkboard to me for some reason.
i didn't like the addition of "freaks" to the storyline. that was not in the novel. Not talking about the hunchback or the ephors, they're in the book. I mean the appendage-less woman in Xerxes harem, or the weird fat guy with the Bone/Knife arms. just so, so strange.
I also didn't like Xerxes drag queen painted-on eyebrows. i read a review, and i agree with what it said - it's nice to see RuPaul getting work. weird to think that Xerxes is Paulo from LOST (who is Paulo? good point. he's the worthless new guy).
and one part that REALLY annoyed me was the death of the captain's son (the captain's son wasn't specifically shown in the book). so these guys are amazing warriors, but the guy can't hear a single horse charging up behind him when there is no other action taking place?
decent lines, but certainly not great (the graphic novel is more about the images than the dialogue). and there is definitely overacting. and butler's lisp annoyed me.
I saw this with a friend, and when we left, he said, "it was good, but it didn't get you like Braveheart." I immediately told him that even mentioning 300 in the same breath as Braveheart does a HUGE injustice to Braveheart. 300 is a good movie. breathtaking, too. but you are never really, truly attached to what is going on, because it simply does not feel real (even though it's based on a true story). I feel that the freak addtions add to that, plus the fact that you can tell it's a "green screen" movie. and the blood is tarantino-esque. The ending, which is supposed to be powerful, doesn't have the gripping, emotional effect that it should have because of these things.
ok, review over. i still think everyone should see it, even though i like to nitpick. i'd still buy it when it comes out on DVD, the action scenes are that good.
Last edited by Big Boy Laroux; 03-10-07 at 03:57 PM.
03-10-07, 09:46 AM
#35
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Originally Posted by IMRICKJAMES
I heard that there is a sequel in the works
anyone that knows history would assume that this is just a little hard to pull off. I mean whats next, Titanic 2?
anyone that knows history would assume that this is just a little hard to pull off. I mean whats next, Titanic 2?
03-10-07, 11:33 AM
#37
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain
Posts: 20,085
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
7 Posts
I enjoyed it. Not nearly as much as I had expected to, but it was still well done. It's nice to see a blood-and-balls testosterone-fueled sword-and-sandal film. My only real complaint was the total overuse of slow-mo shots. Everything was shot to enhance the impact of the moment but all it really did was detract from it. I felt like I was watching Peckinpah on valium. If you were to speed up the slow shots the film would drop from 2 hours to 90 minutes. Other than that I found it to be a lot of fun and I'm sure the eventual dvd will be great for the home theater crowd.
03-10-07, 12:35 PM
#38
Challenge Guru & Comic Nerd
Ending spoiler
Originally Posted by monkeyboy
The end of the 300 spartans definitely seemed anti climactic, I mean, all of a sudden nobody is using shields to block arrows? WTF? What seemed an invincible crew fell to something they had easily handled earlier.
Overall, I'd say that I agree with much of what has been written here so far. I'd give it a B-, and will definitely buy the DVD on release week.
03-10-07, 01:42 PM
#39
DVD Talk Legend
Pretty much loved it, always fascinated by this story and the action and visuals were great. Sure there are going to be comparisons to Sin City due to Miller, but Sin City is pretty much all visuals as well, and I thought this was just more entertaining, just my opinion though...
As far as "giving up" at the end, the point wasn't to end the war and conqueror the Persian army there, it was to inspire the rest of the Greeks to fight and defeat them. They knew they weren't going to win that battle so they put fear into the Persians by trying to kill their King and at the same time inspire the rest of Greece to rise up and fight.
As far as "giving up" at the end, the point wasn't to end the war and conqueror the Persian army there, it was to inspire the rest of the Greeks to fight and defeat them. They knew they weren't going to win that battle so they put fear into the Persians by trying to kill their King and at the same time inspire the rest of Greece to rise up and fight.
03-10-07, 01:45 PM
#40
Inane Thread Master, 2018 TOTY
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Are any of us really anywhere?
Posts: 49,449
Received 913 Likes
on
773 Posts
"Balls out action flix...with unexpected heart"
Visually arresting and emotionally stunning!
I knew it would be visceral, but i didn't think it would have as an emotional impact as it did. I have to disagree with most of what has been negative about this film.
This was a very good movie that had me glued. The battle scenes were nothing that has been done before and I loved that. To see originality is what i love most about films and to say this movie wasn't entirely original would be false.
Sure, we've seen epic battle sequences in "Braveheart", "Gladiator", and the like, but these battles were all about position and the narrowness of space. It was reminscent of the end battle in "The Two Towers" , but I thought much more effective in "300".
I was glued to Gerard Butler's King Leonidas' every word. Lena Headey is gorgeous and reminded me of a mature Keira Knightly. I thought the performances as a whole were not wooden and had impact emotionally that i never thought i would get from this movie.
I really loved it for everything that it was. A visual masterpiece with epic battles, gorgeous cgi landscapes, and characters that brought what could have been a mindless action flix to a very decent war film.
Zach Snyder had a passion for Frank Miller's material, much the same way Robert Rodriguez had for another visual stunner in "Sin City" . While I loved SC, I thought "300"was a very nice companion to Frank Miller's stories and another great movie to be extracted.
Can't wait for the DVD!
I knew it would be visceral, but i didn't think it would have as an emotional impact as it did. I have to disagree with most of what has been negative about this film.
This was a very good movie that had me glued. The battle scenes were nothing that has been done before and I loved that. To see originality is what i love most about films and to say this movie wasn't entirely original would be false.
Sure, we've seen epic battle sequences in "Braveheart", "Gladiator", and the like, but these battles were all about position and the narrowness of space. It was reminscent of the end battle in "The Two Towers" , but I thought much more effective in "300".
I was glued to Gerard Butler's King Leonidas' every word. Lena Headey is gorgeous and reminded me of a mature Keira Knightly. I thought the performances as a whole were not wooden and had impact emotionally that i never thought i would get from this movie.
I really loved it for everything that it was. A visual masterpiece with epic battles, gorgeous cgi landscapes, and characters that brought what could have been a mindless action flix to a very decent war film.
Zach Snyder had a passion for Frank Miller's material, much the same way Robert Rodriguez had for another visual stunner in "Sin City" . While I loved SC, I thought "300"was a very nice companion to Frank Miller's stories and another great movie to be extracted.
Can't wait for the DVD!
Last edited by OldBoy; 03-11-07 at 12:05 PM.
03-10-07, 01:49 PM
#41
Inane Thread Master, 2018 TOTY
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Are any of us really anywhere?
Posts: 49,449
Received 913 Likes
on
773 Posts
Originally Posted by FantasticVSDoom
As far as "giving up" at the end, the point wasn't to end the war and conqueror the Persian army there, it was to inspire the rest of the Greeks to fight and defeat them. They knew they weren't going to win that battle so they put fear into the Persians by trying to kill their King and at the same time inspire the rest of Greece to rise up and fight.
03-10-07, 02:56 PM
#42
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As drama "300" is a failure, as eye candy entertainment it's a success. Visually stunning with carefully framed visuals for widescreen theaters (much as Miller's original graphic had the "quality" with the double wide panels). Is it perfect? No but if you're going in there for a good time with almost pornographic levels of violence, then you'll enjoy it for what it is.
Director Synder borrows quite a bit from Ridley Scott's "Gladiator" and, yep, the "Lord of the Rings" films. I found that a bit disappointing as I expected something a bit more original (but then again Synder did the remake of "Dawn of the Dead" which while fun to watch came in a poor second for me to--of all things--"Shaun of the Dead").
If you're looking for a riveting drama you'd do better to seek out "Zodiac".
Director Synder borrows quite a bit from Ridley Scott's "Gladiator" and, yep, the "Lord of the Rings" films. I found that a bit disappointing as I expected something a bit more original (but then again Synder did the remake of "Dawn of the Dead" which while fun to watch came in a poor second for me to--of all things--"Shaun of the Dead").
If you're looking for a riveting drama you'd do better to seek out "Zodiac".
Last edited by Wayne Klein; 03-10-07 at 02:58 PM.
03-10-07, 04:38 PM
#43
I just got back from it and I had expected to enjoy it more. When I first saw the trailers for it I thought the movie looked terrible. But later on I warmed up to it and was very nearly hyped for it. So, because of that I was let down.
First off: Sin City >>> 300
Let's get that out of the way. Sin City was amazing top to the bottom. 300 not so much. Like everyone is saying the visuals are great but the story is hollow. That's not really my problem with it though. I can deal with shallow stories. What bothered me the most was the pacing. The battle starts maybe only 15-20 minutes into the film. Which I think is pretty cool because hey for the next 90 minutes we are going to have some kick ass battle scenes. And for the most part we do. But then the oh so badass action scenes are interrupted with a silly subplot that eventually ends with some amusing laughter from the audience. It felt like those scenes were thrown in there as filler. So back to what 300 was great about: Spartans kicking ass! And they do kick ass only verrrry slooooooowly. Or is it quick? All that kick ass action that makes this movie great suddenly comes to a dead stop. Here's what was going through my head near the end of the film:
SPOILERS
So, there we are at the end of the film on the edge of our seats waiting to see what's gonna happen next. Leonidas isn't really kneeling down is he? Aha no! It's a trick! He hurles his spear and MISSES? WTF? I haven't seen a Spartan miss the mark on anything this entire movie. Some dude killed a giant charging mutant rhinoceros from like 50 yards away but King Leonidas misses? Ok, fine. I'll buy it. Leonidas must be really pissed now and he's gonna charge up there and slice down that big Rupaul character with his sword. Yeah, that's it. Next shot: Leonidas is there with 2 arrows stuck in his chest. WTF? Is this movie ending now? These invincible warriors somehow end up putting themselves in a very compromising position, strategically of course, and now they die? And the Persians are going to win? But they fight like women, don't they? And then the movie ends, sorta. Well, Faramir tells us it's gonna be alright because he's going to lead a whole lot of men into battle. Which is kinda hypocritical because the point of the whole movie before that was the power of strategy and being outnumbered and all that crap.
I expected to like the movie more. It wasn't bad but it's wasn't that good either. Zodiac is still the best movie of the year. And Spider-Man 3 looks sweet!
First off: Sin City >>> 300
Let's get that out of the way. Sin City was amazing top to the bottom. 300 not so much. Like everyone is saying the visuals are great but the story is hollow. That's not really my problem with it though. I can deal with shallow stories. What bothered me the most was the pacing. The battle starts maybe only 15-20 minutes into the film. Which I think is pretty cool because hey for the next 90 minutes we are going to have some kick ass battle scenes. And for the most part we do. But then the oh so badass action scenes are interrupted with a silly subplot that eventually ends with some amusing laughter from the audience. It felt like those scenes were thrown in there as filler. So back to what 300 was great about: Spartans kicking ass! And they do kick ass only verrrry slooooooowly. Or is it quick? All that kick ass action that makes this movie great suddenly comes to a dead stop. Here's what was going through my head near the end of the film:
SPOILERS
So, there we are at the end of the film on the edge of our seats waiting to see what's gonna happen next. Leonidas isn't really kneeling down is he? Aha no! It's a trick! He hurles his spear and MISSES? WTF? I haven't seen a Spartan miss the mark on anything this entire movie. Some dude killed a giant charging mutant rhinoceros from like 50 yards away but King Leonidas misses? Ok, fine. I'll buy it. Leonidas must be really pissed now and he's gonna charge up there and slice down that big Rupaul character with his sword. Yeah, that's it. Next shot: Leonidas is there with 2 arrows stuck in his chest. WTF? Is this movie ending now? These invincible warriors somehow end up putting themselves in a very compromising position, strategically of course, and now they die? And the Persians are going to win? But they fight like women, don't they? And then the movie ends, sorta. Well, Faramir tells us it's gonna be alright because he's going to lead a whole lot of men into battle. Which is kinda hypocritical because the point of the whole movie before that was the power of strategy and being outnumbered and all that crap.
I expected to like the movie more. It wasn't bad but it's wasn't that good either. Zodiac is still the best movie of the year. And Spider-Man 3 looks sweet!
03-10-07, 04:43 PM
#44
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux
YAY for boobies!
I also didn't like Xerxes drag queen painted-on eyebrows. i read a review, and i agree with what it said - it's nice to see RuPaul getting work. weird to think that Xerxes is Paulo from LOST (who is Paulo? good point. he's the worthless new guy).
I also didn't like Xerxes drag queen painted-on eyebrows. i read a review, and i agree with what it said - it's nice to see RuPaul getting work. weird to think that Xerxes is Paulo from LOST (who is Paulo? good point. he's the worthless new guy).
No wonder I couldn't spot him in the movie.
And yeah, that queen had some pencil erasers on her.
03-10-07, 04:50 PM
#45
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 3,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Loved the film! A very inspirational one (not the story nor the plot.. but the freakin outcome of the actor's workout to have those Spartan stone curved bodies)
03-10-07, 05:28 PM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On Jay Leno last week Butler had said that he had a beer belly when he started the movie and the studio hiring Mark Twight to get him in shape was a nightmare. The day he met Twight he said that the first thing Twight said was * I am here to make you die *. Mark from what I have read is a elite trainer for CIA operatives and MMA fighters.
Go here click Making of 300 - Video Journals - Spartan Training
http://300themovie.warnerbros.com/
Have to give him his due for getting in shape like as well as the other actors.
At least Mark Twight tells you everything straigh up on his main page.
http://www.gymjones.com/
Go here click Making of 300 - Video Journals - Spartan Training
http://300themovie.warnerbros.com/
Have to give him his due for getting in shape like as well as the other actors.
At least Mark Twight tells you everything straigh up on his main page.
http://www.gymjones.com/
Last edited by BBEANLPHIE; 03-10-07 at 05:37 PM.
03-10-07, 06:41 PM
#48
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: maryland
Posts: 1,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i really enjoyed this also. i had no idea that was rupaul
overall i thought it was a great action movie and the effects as everyone else said were stunning. the queen was gorgeous!
now that i think about the ending more, it does seem kind of odd that they didn't do anything with their shields to block any arrows, but i can see why.
definitely going to grab it on dvd.
"i don't need that eye, that's why god gave me another."
overall i thought it was a great action movie and the effects as everyone else said were stunning. the queen was gorgeous!
now that i think about the ending more, it does seem kind of odd that they didn't do anything with their shields to block any arrows, but i can see why.
definitely going to grab it on dvd.
"i don't need that eye, that's why god gave me another."
03-10-07, 08:05 PM
#50
Originally Posted by Corvin
I'm going to see this tomorrow morning. I have a question though: film or DLP? The theater I am going to has both.