300 *spoilers*

Mik3 said:
I have to agree. After watching the trailer I was expecting something to rival Troy with the special effects of LOTR. It looked to fake almost like a video game.
Click to expand...

I struggle to understand people sometimes. You said you watched the trailer, but then you thought it looked too fake? :confused: But you said you watched the trailer! What were you expecting! Oh, something like Troy? So a shined-up turd in the form of Brad Pitt larking around in a dress? :p

mks2005 said:
Anyone else think John Fashanu when the Spartans did their war chants?
Click to expand...

lol. I personally kept thinking of the 'hua!' thing the soldiers in Black Hawk Down do. I'm sorry to harp on, but i really feel some people have missed the point when they complain about the blood looking 'too CGI' when it was clearly meant to be that way.

Jack Snyder said:
Films do look different, but a tree's usually a tree and a rock's a rock. In our case, the trees are weird. But we aren't trying to be Lord of the Rings.

If you ask a digital artist to do a (computer-generated) shot, maybe a glass dropping on the ground, you can show it to anyone and ask, "Does that look real?" They'll say "yes" or "no." With 300, I was asking my artists to create something that looks surreal or fantastic, to create environments that were impossible. I was asking them to be artists again, to be expressive, to express their own emotions through the skies and landscapes.

...

90 percent of it is 2-D blood. In the punching scene, where my son Eli is playing the young Leonidas, we used the scans of blood off of the cover of the book.
Click to expand...

I'm only saying this because i think it was great how they took a totally different approach to a story that could have easily turned out as a run-of-the-mill sandals-and-swords action film. It's just a bit discouraging when people complain about something simply because it's moved away from what they expected.
 
I went to watch this yesterday... and feelings were pretty mixed. the acting wasn't great... lines were delivered with a hammy, unconvincing style and for the first 30 minutes if the file I was really thinking "crap, i've just wasted £7.50 here".

However the fight scenes were generally decent I suppose... though certainly not half as good as films like Galdiator. It wasn't the sort of realistic gore that had be twitching with sadistic glee, more a sort of "ok yeah, he's dead, yup and that pther guys just died in exactly the same way. And that guy. Oh, that guy too". While I realise there are indeed only a limited number of ways you can kill a man with a spear and sword, I just don't think they used those fight scenes to create the impact that they otherwise could have had. Some of the scenes were a tad boring, or just seemed incredibly disjointed... they could have made the rhino/elephant battles far more interesting instead of "here comes rhino, oh yep now it's dead in 3 seconds. Same for the elephants". What they did in this film was rush all the bits that had potential... and spend too long on the scenes which weren't of huge worth.

Back to the acting... some of it was truly awful... the Persian prince-God Xerxes was so appallingly bad that I was just hoping he's deliver his lines and **** off asap. Similar stories for the persian agents... I think what they tried to do was capture a "cartoon" way of delivering lines... but instead of succeeding it failed miserably imo... and instead sounded crap. The script and the way in which it was delivered really let this film down, for me it failed to capture the epic atmosphere that this film so much deserved. By the end it had all really started to get tiresome.

All in all this film was watchable but could have been about 100x better. It really wanted to be a lot bigger and cleverer than it actually was. I was very very dissappointed, and I generally love this type of film.

6.5/10.
 
Last edited:
Solid 7 from me. I expected a weak storyline and a fair amount of gore. Got a decent storyline and a lot of gore. Excellent :)

Considering the basis of the film I think it translated to the big screen rather well.

pyro said:
Hot gates?! What the hell, Hollywood? It's called Thermopyale. Fools! You have ripped my country's history countless times. Why instead of focusing on Alexander's achievments, the only real issue was weather he was gay or not. And Xerex wasn't a crossdressing giant :confused:

Anyway, this is like making a 9/11 film with the terrorist in the plane played by the devil himself, 300 is a super-action stupid film.
Click to expand...
Isn't hot gates a literal translation of thermopyale?
seek said:
only lots of man-boobies unfortunately.
Click to expand...
The oracle? Xerxes' hareem? The Sparta Queen?
Nitefly said:
You mean a Sagat / Dhalsim lovechild?

Now that you mention it......
Click to expand...
I'd have said those two and I can see it :)
 
Gilly said:
The oracle? Xerxes' hareem? The Sparta Queen?
Click to expand...
hm, well the oracle and the queen are only 2, so hardly 'lots'. though tbh, i'd actually completely forgotten the hareem part. but then that's probably because i was psychologically trying to block out the memory of that hunchback freak getting his end away. :o
 
a lot of critics are missing the point with this as well

it isnt a history lesson..its a simple comic book homage...its styled to not look real..and I presume you dont have long monologues in a speech bubble

and its very basis is the glory of war....modern morality tells us war is bad

but war used to be glorious...you made your name as a king by deed and by conquest and defeating your enemies was the ultimate in kudos

there isnt much of a story because its simply about a battle which lasted a few days and then when the inevitable happened and the smaller force got wiped out thats the end (until the greeks reassemble in real life and defeat the persians..but that wasnt in the comic so it aint in the movie)

in the real world rorkes drift was our thermopalyae...just we won
 
for boobs it appears every1 is forgetting the big orgy lesbo scene in dennis rodmans hut.

why are ppl whinging it looked to CGI especially about the blood, its supposed to be like that hahah.

a thought it was a good popcorn film tbh, and am glad i saw it on the big screen as i think its one of them films that excells better on the large screen instead of waiting for dvd.
 
Gilly said:
Actually, thats the hareem I mentioned.
Click to expand...

yeah buts lets face it, who said to there m8s after it was finished what a mint hareem?

more like " hey member that bit when there was all them lesbos getting it on in rodmans hut, that was sweet!"
 
Saw it last night, enjoyed it. Very entertaining! Some people moaned about the start of the film, but I didnt see anything wrong with it. A lot of the reviews seem to be reading in to it a bit much, I dont think it was created with that in mind!
 
EasyG said:
yeah buts lets face it, who said to there m8s after it was finished what a mint hareem?

more like " hey member that bit when there was all them lesbos getting it on in rodmans hut, that was sweet!"
Click to expand...
I didn't say either actually, we were talking about the blood and gore. Soft-core lezzers ftl.
 
The blood was clearly not designed to be particularly realistic so I can forgive that, but what really irked me was the lack of residual blood. The ground was as clear as day! I found it quite annoying. I think Gladiator style gore would have made more people squeaming and added a much needed air of brutality to the film.

Also, anyone notice the Spartan Queens T.B jab? Who'd of thought those Spartans has harnessed the technology of immunization? :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom