300 *spoilers*

Steedie said:
Can you leave this thread now? You're becoming rather boring.

This isnt the first thread that you've ruined with your rubbish either

So your rubbish is better than mine?

I would love to start another thread -
WHO ELSE THINKS 300 IS THE EMPERORS NEW CLOTHES?
but I know it will be closed because we've already got 5 threads on it.

However I will concede 1 point -
I did not know it was a film based on a work of fiction and it was purposely filmed crap to capture the essence of the comic.
If that was the intention then they've done an excellent job.
Since I don't read up on films before I see them and I don't listen to the hype either, I thought I went to watch a film based on historic fact and all I got was nonsense.

Thats me apologising for getting the wrong end of the stick of what this film is all about.
 
dmpoole said:
I thought I went to watch a film based on historic fact and all I got was nonsense.

Silly ol' you. ;)

Loved the film...bloody awesome fun. If you'd had the sense to look in to what the film was about rather than just going to see it you could have saved yourself some money and disappointment. You say it wasn't the hype surrounding the film that led you to see it...what did? :)
 
Scam said:
would ahve turned out something like a poor man's Troy, and that was dire enough.
Lol I thought TROY was great! :cool:

Braveheart, Last of the Mohicans, Gladiator, LOTR Triology, The Last Samurai, Hero, The House of Flying Daggers, Zatoichi, long list.

Some people are easy to please? maybe, some people are hard to please? most definitely :)

If you were to look at the type of Males that enjoyed this film I hazzard a guess they have facial hair, long hair or bald/shaven, an active lifestyle or involved in regular physical pursuits and would much rather have a six-pack than a big fat blubber belly lol! :p

Oh yeah an appreciation of heavy rock music is a must! :D
 
mks2005 said:
Sin City worked because it didn't take itself too seriously.
300 doesn't because it's awkwardly pompous.
The oracle scene, for example, just seemed pretentious. Too much 'arty' crap doesn't work unless you have the foundations of a decent film to start with - i.e. an absorbing plot, or at least some kind of emotional attachment to characters. Instead it just happens, with no real intent or purpose. I'm not against this kind of thing, but it has to be used effectively. So many scenes just felt like empty shells, albeit very pretty ones.
Not to mention the numerous other issues such as way too much slowmo and repetitive battle scenes.

And yes, I know it manages to very closely look like the original artwork - but I'm rating it as a film, not on how good a representation of the original book it is.
This man is wise. Listen to him and dmpoole, and me :p
 
Just watched this film at the movies and must say I was mightily impressed. The visuals were stunning, the fight scenes were gripping, all in all a good watch. The plot wasn't entirely complex but I was in the right mood for that kinda thing :)
 
dmpoole said:
I did not know it was a film based on a work of fiction and it was purposely filmed crap to capture the essence of the comic.


Did things like 'Based on the Graphic Novel by Frank Miller' plastered all over posters and trailers not raise even the slightest hint that it might not be entirely historically accurate? :/
 
divine_madness said:
Did things like 'Based on the Graphic Novel by Frank Miller' plastered all over posters and trailers not raise even the slightest hint that it might not be entirely historically accurate? :/
I think he was implying that the graphic novel either didn't translate well to the big screen without flaws being made apparent.
 
Have to agree with Dmpoole, some amazing visual moments but apart from the odd scene a pretty vacuous film, they were supposed to be fighting an army of over half a million but the most I saw on screen at any one time was about 20; lots of over acting a travesty of historical facts and a severe disappointment for a film I was looking forward to for months.

However I loved Sin City.
 
KASM said:
a travesty of historical facts


Were you really expecting historical fact from a film based on a novel that was loosely based on history?

If so, that's more your own fault for expecting it to be something that it made very clear it wasn't.
 
divine_madness said:
Did things like 'Based on the Graphic Novel by Frank Miller' plastered all over posters and trailers not raise even the slightest hint that it might not be entirely historically accurate? :/

Didn't see any posters.
I just don't go looking for these type of things and never follow hype whether its music or films.
 
and see also...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_movie

300_comparison.JPG
 
Last edited:
divine_madness said:
Were you really expecting historical fact from a film based on a novel that was loosely based on history?

If so, that's more your own fault for expecting it to be something that it made very clear it wasn't.


It's my fault that Frank Miller decided that historical facts had no importance when telling the story about one of the most important battles in world history?

Frank Millers a great story teller, heck I already said I loved Sin City but its unforgiveable to put forward such a twisted version of events.
 
Just got my hands on the film The 300 Spartans - hopefully this will fulfill my needs for history.
There again if its a Hollywood film theres no chance of that.
 
KASM said:
It's my fault that Frank Miller decided that historical facts had no importance when telling the story about one of the most important battles in world history?

Frank Millers a great story teller, heck I already said I loved Sin City but its unforgiveable to put forward such a twisted version of events.
i don't get why so many people in this thread are failing to understand the concept of 'fiction'. the story is -not- supposed an unbiased account of events, it's intentionally inacurate as it's told from the perspective of the spartans, and how they would have told their own people. hence some of the persians looking like monsters etc.

Fiction

Any story that is the product of imagination rather than a documentation of fact. characters and events in such narratives may be based in real life but their ultimate form and configuration is a creation of the author.
 
Last edited:
I just watched this tonight after having looked forward to it since last year, i've even listened to the NIN song thats on the trailer a fair amount of times, haha.

I have to say, after having looked forward to this for so long, my expectations must have been too high, as i was severely disappointed by the film as a whole.

Although the positives are there, i'd say the negatives outweigh them a bit. :(

It IS beautifully shot and rendered, although as mentioned previously, the slow motion ruins the blood effect a bit, seems too fake.

The slow motion IS overused, i thought it was gonna show him eating that apple in slow motion for sure!
I understand it's used for dramatic effect, but it did get to the point of bordering on the ridiculous.

I kept thinking of the narrator as Sean Bean's brother in Lord of the Rings too! Haha, :D His voice in 300 is so silly, but i guess they're trying to capture a certain feel with it.

It was very disjointed in the narration of it, and some characters were just plot vehicles, with no development which was a bit lazy. (The betrayal character for example)

I thought the guy who played Leonadis did very well considering what he had to work with, i just hope it doesnt pigeon hole him into the same character for the rest of his career.

Overall, it was created with good intentions, but i think something more could have been done with it, to raise it to the bar of a real, proper epic film.
(Not saying i could have done any better with it! :eek: )

There's my two cents on it :)

Probably still buy it when i can afford good HD stuff! :D
 
Back
Top Bottom