| Page 1 of 198: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Index | 1979 reviews in total |
960 out of 1333 people found the following review useful:
A two-sided piece of art, 31 March 2007
![]()
Author:
gus495 from Netherlands
This film isn't for all people. That's to say about a lot of movies in
general of course, but this one in particular brings up a big clashing
point between critics; What do we want to see in our movies? What is
more important, to portray a fictional setting for the sake of giving
people a mind blowing visual experience or to amuse and amaze them with
clever plot twists and intelligent dialogs?
First lets analyze what exactly this film is made of. Basically, the
whole thing is just one epic fighting scene after another. Most
noticeably is the camera work and the visual effects. Every shot seems
like it was intended to be a work of art. The colors, the characters,
the costumes, the backgrounds... every little detail has been given so
much attention. During the big fights you'll also instantly notice the
unique editing. There are a lot of "time slowdowns" throughout the
battles which show what exactly is happening. Fatal wounds that slowly
leak blood spatters in the air, decapitated heads traveling in
slow-motion across the screen... it's all there.
The story on the other hand isn't very complicated, in the sense that
the whole movie could probably be described in a sentence or two. The
dialogs are simple and most often talk about moral values like freedom
and honor. If you would look at the script, it would probably look like
another movie that has nothing more to offer then idealistic visions of
how life should be.
Reviewers of this title seem to be split up in two groups. They either
love it with passion calling it an epic movie of the 21th century, or
hate it even more and throw it off like a piece of garbage consisting
of mindless action and silly cliché phrases. I feel reluctant to take a
position in this argument. Normally it's tolerable to weigh out both
sides of this matter to result in a fair judgment about a movie. Not in
this one. On the one hand the visual are surely among the best to be
witnessed in a movie. Every detail, every background, every special
effect set to the scenes are so mindblowingly stunning. On the other
hand the plot and dialogs are of the most simplistic and quite frankly
dumb kind. "I fight for freedom! I'd rather die in honor then live in
shame!" Sounds familiar?
Of course it could be debated that this movie was never intended in the
first place to have a unique plot that makes your head spin. But from
an objective point of view it's still lacking in this department, so it
should be noted.
Now that's fine and all, but does that all make of the film? Is it
worth watching or what? I think it is. For me the good outweighs the
bad by miles. From the second the movie started it grabbed me and
didn't let go. Every battle, every scene of the movie had me at the tip
of my chair. Everything from the strong acting to the wondrous visuals
to the war-shouts of the soldiers was just so stunning... it was truly
a wonderful experience.
I did not one single moment felt like the movie lacked anything. But I
could imagine why other people did.
So here's the deal.
If you are easily impressed by beautiful landscapes, wonderful
camera-work and editing and powerful acting then go see this. Right.
Now. You'll be missing out if you don't. There is so much to see, so
much power in the way this comic is translated to the big screen...
It'll leave you in awe.
However, you are looking for a good story, clever plot twists, some
innovating to the world of the movies then skip this. 300 contains
nothing of this, nor does it wants to give you this.
I enjoyed this movie so much, but I know there will be people that will
pass of as rubbish, and that's understandable. Just be sure to make up
your mind about what you want to see when you go to the theater
yourself instead of being drawn into bias by the tons of reviews this
site has to offer.
818 out of 1289 people found the following review useful:
Chills!, 13 March 2007
![]()
Author:
deadmonkeys from Ottawa, Ontario
After I saw the teaser for 300 I knew I HAD to see this movie! From
then on I avoided all other previews, reviews, etc. as not to influence
my expectations of the movie. I then went into the theater on opening
night with no knowledge of the plot... only that it had something to do
with Greeks and Frank Miller! Ignorance is bliss! I was absolutely
blown away. I'm a 26 yr old female who generally doesn't watch violent
films... but I found the battle scenes so well done and breath taking.
I had chills and goosebumps virtually the entire film. I'm with many
other reviewers, who felt like they had to contain themselves from
shouting "yeah!" at times. Maybe I'm crazy, but I thought the whole
movie was very sexy and passionate, whether it was the sex scene, a
battle scene, or Leonidis addressing his men.
I think it is a shame that so many people are condemning this movie for
it's historical inaccuracies, or it's "racism", etc. People are reading
far too into this movie. Whatever happened to enjoying a movie simply
because it is entertaining and pleasing to to the eye? Don't people
watch movies anymore to escape from the daily grind of life? I know I'm
not as well spoken as many who have posted here. I just think this was
a fantastic movie. I didn't go see it to learn anything! I just wanted
to be entertained! And boy was I!
1295 out of 2405 people found the following review useful:
The Evolution of Epic Battles, 15 February 2007
![]()
Author:
Alex_Papas from Italy
After gaving us some of the greatest epic movies in the last 50
years,it was clear that filmmakers needed to take them to the next
level.
But how can you make a new movie,for the audience to like,without
recycling old material?
Answer:You improve what old filmmakers couldn't:Graphics.
Ben Hur,Braveheart,Gladiator,Spartacus and perhaps even Troy are only
some of the epic movies that gave the audience so big thrills that they
cannot be repeated. Almost every epic movie that will be made today,no
matter how good the story will be or how faithful will be to reality,is
bound to repeat itself.We got examples from Alexander and Kingdom of
Heaven.
300 doesn't apply to this category.Besides it takes the epic to the
next level.And more are like to follow.
Just like in the Lord of the Rings,much CGI was used here.
The result? This movie was a pleasure for the eye.
All the camera work and graphics exceeded my expectations. I thought
they were comparable,if not better,to the LOTR,go see for yourselves.
I could write something about the plot or the actors's outstanding
performances(especially Gerard Butler's..you see,being Greek-Italian,I
wanted the best from the actors..Butler gave it. The anger in his
eyes,the fury in his voice and the violence in his actions really
reminded an ancient Greek king),but I won't ruin it for you. You must
see it to understand how great this movie is.
But always remember that this is a movie that is based on a graphic
novel and is by no means a faithful depiction of what really happened
in Thermopylae in 480 B.C. All those who will pay the ticket to see
this movie,must be prepared not for a historic movie,but for a stylish
battle movie.
This movie,together with the LOTR,is the entrance to the 21st century's
new epic movies.
Kudos to Zack Snyder,who came from nowhere and has,already from Dawn of
the Dead,proved that he is a brilliant and capable director. We will
surely see more of him in the upcoming years.
So,you read my Comment?
Aren't you curious?
What are you waiting for?
Run to the nearest cinema,see this piece of art and when you are
finished don't forget to come to IMDb to vote. This movie is destined
to be at least in the top 100.
C'mon people!Hail for 300,the Evolution of Epic Battles!
661 out of 1152 people found the following review useful:
Forget the Naysayers, 300 Delivers!, 31 March 2007
![]()
Author:
CrassActionHero from United States
300(2007)
Review: 300 has been given lots of criticism. People like to view in
the political way. That is not the way. Here's my take.
300 is an entertaining movie. This is all about the action and it's
Spartans. The movie takes about the first 30 minutes to give us plot
development before the Spartans take it to the battlefield.
The action is the key. The slow motion action is what really delivers.
This is like a ballet of blood done so nicely. The action needless to
say is satisfying. We are given lots of campy dialog and some good
humor here and there that works. Gerard Butler is wonderful. He
embodies the great king. Becomes him.
Now, on to the politics, 300 has it's own politics, but it was also
based on a comic book written back in 1998. How can this be a pro-Bush
statement? This is just like another Frank Miller picture, Sin City.
The point is to make the comic book come to life. 300 was written by
Frank Miller almost a decade ago and you think this is right-wing
propaganda?
Listen to me. Take a deep breath and lighten up. Okay?
One last thing, this movie is NOT a history lesson. This is based on a
graphic novel, similar to a movie made back in 1962, and is inspired by
the battle in 480 B.C. This is not racist either.
The Last Word: 300 delivers what is was sent out to do. Action.
Entertainment. Skin. Ignore the naysayers and enjoy. Excellent popcorn
fun.
532 out of 923 people found the following review useful:
Much worse than the trailer, 10 March 2007
![]()
Author:
EdWont from Youngstown, Ohio
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
In a word: disappointment.
I was one of the fanboys who loved the graphic novel, and watched the
trailer on repeat for months. I'm half Greek and love action and
comics, so I was superbly amped. Sadly, the movie fell so short of the
mark that I was immediately reminded of how I felt after watching Star
Wars: Episode I for the first time. I left it thinking, "I liked it? It
was good? Right?" But I knew that it wasn't. Here are some of the ups
and downs.
Let's start with what's good in the feature. The battle scenes are
spectacular. The choreography didn't hinge on speed as much as it
relied on visually stunning, artistic brutality (it sounds like an
oxymoron, but it applies in this context). The timing during these
scenes was unique, too. The motion sped up and slowed down in a way
that really complimented the film. Of course, the entire movie is a
mindblowing visual experience: The art direction and cinematography
were stunning. This is especially true of the costuming and "creature"
effects. My favorite aspect of the art direction was this profound
grittiness (manifested in the dirt, bloodshed, contrast, and other
details that were brought forth because of the filming technique) that
almost became a character in itself, contributing to the harshness of
the plot. All these things were simply standout.
Now, for the reasons I gave this film 3 out of 10 stars. The plot
aspect of this film was practically nonexistent. In terms of character
development, not only was it predictable, but almost tragic that they
didn't pursue other avenues. I especially mean this when referring to
the Queen Gorgo subplot that wasn't bound by Miller's original concept.
There were a variety of plot holes including, but not limited to, the
end of Gorgo's subplot in which it's revealed that a traitor was
carrying evidence of his crimes on him for what we can assume was the
entire movie, when there's no plausible reason as to why he'd be
carrying the evidence. Given the precious little plot in the film, it's
sad to say that any plot holes exist. The acting was pretty terrible,
spare the less demanding guttural shouting of the Spartan warriors, but
I can't really fault the actors given that the writing was so, so
painfully bland. Even when there was a "rallying, morale boosting"
speech, as is a staple for these films, it was so upsettingly cliché'
that I found it agitating to watch. What was most troubling was that
the entire movie was seasoned in an all-to-blatant hyper-nationalism.
It was hard to enjoy this film without examining it from a modern
context because of the frequent use of the word "freedom." It was being
thrown around like it was conservative talk radio. At one point one of
the characters even said, "freedom isn't free." I have no problem if
filmmakers wish to make patriotism a theme in their film (indeed, the
historic events lend nicely to such a theme). However, they did it so
straight-forwardly that it dumbed the movie down a great deal. And yes,
the Spartans founded the term "laconic" but they were at least witty.
Had it been more subtle or brought about in a more refined way (as
opposed to the hero simply spouting about freedom and its virtues
repeatedly throughout the film) then it probably would've contributed a
great deal to the movie.
All in all, this has a lot to offer in terms of eye-candy. But, it has
so little substance that it's aggravating to watch. Something didn't
click, and it's apparent. It feels like they could've done more with
it. That's why it's aggravating. That's why it's a disappointment.
360 out of 591 people found the following review useful:
More oiled men than a night at Kaptain Quendo's Man-Love Palace, 1 April 2007
![]()
Author:
gundognc from United Kingdom
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Oh dear god this is bad.
As far as I can tell the most significant characters in 300 are the
deltoid, bicep, abdominals and the other great muscle groups. It is a
testament to how awful this film is that this is somehow a relief. The
human cast are entirely secondary to the main aim which is to show lots
of people slaughtering lots of other people. The whole thing appears to
be some sort of visual love poem to the human body.
*may contain spoilers*
The plot of 300 can be summed up thusly: "300 Spartans die". It's not
much of a plot but there you go.
King Leonidas (lit. "maker of chocolates") is unhappy at the
possibility of all the Spartan health-clubs being closed by Xerxes.
Having been told that he isn't allowed to defend the Spartan
calisthenics program by a bunch of lepers with their own lap-dancer he
decided to lead 300 prime Spartan beefcake to the "hot gates" for a
body building dance-off with the 9 foot tall Xerxes and his army of
slaves. Both sides do some flexing before getting down to the fighting.
The Persians roll out the most farcical military units they can think
of and contrive to get themselves slaughtered very cinematically. A
Rhinoceros for #*$@'s sake! A #*$@ing RHINO! Really. A giant, some
elephants and a guy with blades for arms who looks as if he should be
auditioning for the next Clive Barker movie (who we sadly never see
fighting). I was really surprised that there weren't some orcs and
maybe a cave troll or two.
Finally a hunchback, who looks as if he is a silicon sex toy for the
advanced user, sells out the Spartans and shows Xerxes a way round
Thermopylae. Then all the Spartans die.
Admittedly there seems to be some sort of side plot about some nasty
Spartan chappie trying to get the queen into the sack but I assume that
this is just a time filler because they couldn't afford to make an
entire two hours of CGI fighting.
*end spoiler*
I would thoroughly recommend that everyone see this film. It's
appalling. It's the best comedy this year. It's a homo-erotic
masterpiece.
319 out of 536 people found the following review useful:
What is the point?, 28 March 2007
![]()
Author:
blacklove from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I saw this film last week, and I couldn't put into words what I saw.
This film was so mortifyingly awful that I needed time to find words to
really describe it. The words I came up with are insane, racist,
homophobic, misogynistic, gratuitously violent, and not at all
entertaining. I thought to myself that this will be the film viewed by
a disturbed teenager who plans on doing the next Columbine type of
murder.
Not only is the story bad, but I also hated the fact that I felt like I
was looking at a Playstation video game for two hours. Every scene was
filled with this flat, boring, dreary-looking copper-color. The music
is so cliché that I could have hummed it in my sleep. I rolled my eyes
every moment the opera-like singing started.
The viewer is suppose to be rooting for the Spartans, but because they
come across as blood-thirsty psychopaths who were only put on earth for
battle, I found myself rooting against them. Yes, war and violence are
apart of life, but the realistic human emotions that are a result of
war makes movies about the subject matter fascinating (i.e. Braveheart
and Gladiator, two great films). This film cares nothing about story
and human emotions. All this film cares about is showing spears go
inside and then back out of a human body with blood splattered about
and cliché dialogue in between. Even be-headings are played out as if
the only result the filmmaker is going for are the three words "that
was cool!"
I didn't understand why the leader of the Persian side, the mascara and
piercing faced Xerxes, had to come off as a mix between Rupaul and Bam
Bam Bigelow. The reverberated voice that they used for the character
was distracting and unnecessary. Also, I kept wondering why Xerxes kept
using the words "kneel in front of me," to the leader of the Spartans,
and in one scene Xerxes places his hands on the leader of the Spartans
in a way that seemed sexual. It was just plain weird and unnecessary!
From the casting, the viewer thinks that the enemy Persians are nothing
more than effeminate Asians and other dark people of the earth that are
trying to bring down the tough and ripped bodied white male Spartans
that are outnumbered.
The one woman in the film came across as a fool that is so easily
deceived (and deceived into having sex!) that her only salvation is to
stab her enemy with a sword. Of course, her enemy conveniently carried
around Persian coins that fell all over the place when he was stabbed,
this conveniently showed us in a spoon-fed way that this guy is a
trader. No thinking allowed in this movie!! The only other use for the
female character in this film is a ridiculous soft- core sex scene.
Instead of this movie just coming off as a fantasy, it takes itself way
too seriously and as a result I kept shaking my head at the blatant
stupidity. In Kill Bill, Quentin Tarantino plays out a scene with Uma
Thurman defeating a bunch of ninjas in a way where the viewer is
disconnected from reality but is in awe of the cinematic technique of
the film. In 300, when the 300 Spartans are defeating a gazillion
enemies, you could almost hear the director saying, "These guys are so
tough that this could REALLY happen.... until the end of the movie,
that is."
Actors are not necessary for this film. It is as if the casting
director went to Gold's Gym for the casting. Pectoral muscles get the
screen time that isn't taken by spears and blood. Even the stale jokes
told by the Spartans seem like the brainless banter of a stereotypical
gym rat.
300 is an experiment in digital pop-art cinema gone wrong! Unlike
pop-art cinema like A Scanner Darkly that advances visual aesthetic by
saying something about the human condition through its story, 300 is a
let down via story and visually. The entire outcome of the film leaves
the viewer asking in a confused tone, "What was the point of that?"
311 out of 526 people found the following review useful:
A great movie!, 21 May 2007
![]()
Author:
shoukanmahou from United States
It seems that everyone who hated this movie must have written a review,
so I thought I'd throw in my two cents to even things up a bit. First,
if you assume every movie is made simply to uppercut some sort of
ideology into the audience's chest, then yes, it does seem very racist,
xenophobic, and the like. However, this film is based on a freakin'
comic book! The Spartans were some of the most skilled, nastiest,
nationalistic fighters out there, and certainly had reason to be more
driven and nationalistic than Persia's, which was not an army of
individuals fighting for their land and families. Should they have been
portrayed differently simply to satisfy the current political climate?
Are you mad? The cheesy one-liners are also evidence that this movie IS
BASED ON A COMIC BOOK. The exaggerated characters is further evidence
that this movie IS BASED ON A COMIC BOOK. This is not a historical
movie, it is a movie which seeks to put a rockstar, no-holds-barred
spin on a particular historical event. It isn't attempting to be
accurate, or balanced, or anything of the sort, and it SHOULDN'T,
because that isn't it's purpose. It shouldn't be obligated to do
anything of the sort. It's ENTERTAINMENT. Nothing more. And it's damn
good entertainment, in my opinion.
Every scene is beautifully crafted. I found the slowdown to be
stylistic and much of the dialogue, which is apparently cheesy and
fascist to everyone else, to be at least somewhat inspiring, and
certainly engaging. These Spartans were trained their entire lives to
be warriors, their entire culture is built around success in battle,
and you don't expect them to be quite skilled, much more so than a
slave army, and quite patriotic? Also, this movie was from the point of
view of the Spartans. How would this army have appeared to the
Spartans? Wouldn't their stories now be over-exaggerated,
over-simplified, almost legendary? There isn't a great amount of
character development because this movie is about a battle, ONE battle,
THE battle for the continuance of the Western world, and yes, IF the
Spartans had been simply overwhelmed from the start, and if their
Athenian allies hadn't completely CRUSHED the much larger Persian navy
at sea, the West simply could not have existed in any similar manner as
it has. And yes, the Western world is guilty of arrogance,
overextending it's boundaries to the point of imperialism, however, it
has given our world a plethora of all-too-important philosophical
ideals that are simply irreplaceable if we want to live in a free
society.
I realize I spent a great deal of my time being critical of other
reviews, so I would like to take the time to apologize for perhaps
wasting the time of someone who was simply searching for a detailed
point of view on the film. I can assure you that the film is
action-packed. The scenes are absolutely beautiful, every one of them.
The film is gory, but artistically gory, if that makes any sense.
You'll know what I mean. The story is simple, direct, and inspiring.
The acting is excellent. The movie, overall, was a tremendous
experience. I give it a 9.
612 out of 1138 people found the following review useful:
300 Worldpremiere Berlin, 23 February 2007
![]()
Author:
barb1140 from Austria
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I have been at the World Premiere of 300 in Berlin where I watched this
fantastic movie a movie not only for MEN! I got sucked in from the
very first moment! I don't want to say too much about the story
itselfI don't want to spoil anything for you. But let me explain that
this kind of movie isn't usually my cup of tea. But when I saw the
first trailer I knew I wanted to see it badly. And 300 didn't
disappoint meit was even better than expected.
From the very first moment, you can see the fantastic colors and the
amazing visuals. I got hooked. I loved the way how the film sped up and
slowed down at some certain key moments. It was stunning!!! There were
moments where the music set in and shivers and adrenaline were running
thought my body. Moments where I held my breath. Sometimes I had to
hold myself back not to scream out loud "YEAH!" You can see how much
this movie sucked me in.
The battle scenes: I feared them, because I hate too much violence in a
movie. But they were stunning. These scenes were incredibly beautifully
choreographed. These scenes gave me the feeling of a choreographed
dance of warriors. Beautiful to watch. Powerful, aesthetic and elegant.
Yes, they were brutal (without a doubtsometimes I had to hold my hand
before my eyes but only for a short moment because I didn't want to
miss something) but they still were amazing. And all this slowing down
and speeding up makes these scenes more tense more beautiful. And you
can feel the adrenaline rush of the warriors.
And in between these scenes there were this modern phrases like "we are
in for a wild night." Some could say they don't fit into this movie. I
loved it. It's incredibly cool and they made me laugh sometimes. And
that was great; it eased the tension. These sentences lightened the
moment. The perfect pause before the action goes on again.
Gerard Butlers acting is absolutely powerful. It is full of passion,
full of emotions (love, anger and so much more). You can see the fire
burning inside of him, the sadness, the inner struggles, but also the
dignity and the kindness of the King. (I guess these were the scenes I
loved mostwhere I saw his dignity, kindness and love). His way of
showing you his emotions through his eyes, I guess is stronger than
ever. I love this I love when actors are able to express so much only
with their eyes without saying anything. And all these fantastic
close-ups just made these scenes perfect! But it was not only Gerard
Butlers acting, but the other actors also performed extremely well. A
perfect team and I got the feeling that all the actors are chosen
because of this ability to be a team. It would take too long to mention
every single actor/actress. For me it was an incredible cast.
The sound was excellent, especially during the battle scenes. For
example, when metal meets metal(it's hard to explain this for me but
when you see the movie you might know what I'm talking about). Not to
forget the soundtrack. It makes the whole impression of this movie
complete. Again full of power and then very emotional. I loved it.
This movie is more than an action movie for me. It's about love,
camaraderie, the defending of what they love, of what they believe in.
It's about the power not to give up but follow their destiny and to do
what they think is the right thing to do. And it's also about the big
love between the King and the Queen.
For me personally this movie is unique. It's a masterpiece of visual
effects, color, sounds, soundtrack and the absolutely stunning
performance of the actors. That's my own personal opinion. The opinion
of a woman who already loved the powerful trailer, but wasn't sure if
she would like the movie as well. Maybe you get the feeling that I'm
praising this movie too much. But I can't help myself. That's exactly
what I'm feeling, what I'm thinking. And believe me, if I thought
differently, I wouldn't bother to write anything about it. And I'm
definitely longing to see this movie again.
Even now as I'm writing this, I can feel the same emotions as I felt
during the watching of 300. It just blew me away. After the movie there
were standing ovations !!! What a great evening! What an amazing movie!
239 out of 408 people found the following review useful:
Shallow characters. Ignorant representations. A stupid movie., 15 March 2007
![]()
Author:
SteveTobias from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I'll be looking at three specific areas of the film: historical
inaccuracy, representational issues, and a general critique based on
film-making.
Once established that a film is fictional, in other words not
historically accurate, it shouldn't matter whether it is accurate or
not. However, the way the filmmakers deal with that abstracting of
reality can disturb those who are knowledgeable about the subject, or
who are simple keen on common sense. In other words, certain choices
don't make sense, don't seem valid within the context of the fiction,
or perhaps gear themselves more towards low-culture language/symbolism
(ie Hollywood clichés). When information is taken from, in this case,
the historically realistic, it still must be reassembled in valid
manner. If you add a talking dragon to a King Arthur movie, there
should be some explanation as to why it is there, and if it breathes
flying sheep instead of fire then it contradicts the common conception
of a dragon. Ultimately, it comes down to an intelligent use of
elements that are abstracted from reality.
One of my problems with 300 is that I think it did a poor job of doing
this. The fact that there's monsters and fictional creatures in the
story is fine. What isn't fine are things like, dull blades that can
cut a man's leg clean off in one swing, men who fight with a cross
between WWE and matrix-style fighting, a dude eating a random red apple
after a fight, other random choices that don't make sense (Japanese
masks on the Persian soldiers), etc. In Kill Bill the Hansu sword
didn't bother me when it cut off limb after limb, because there was a
valid explanation/premise behind it. In 300 you get this huge
abstraction of the phalanx, running bare-chested through a bluescreened
field, throwing spears and magically killing thousands of men. In the
large picture of 300, the fighting wasn't *that* bad, the Spartan
soldiers would get hurt and there weren't many "Chuck Norris"-like BS
moments. But I was not moved by any of it. There was no technique
behind it.
As for the representational issues, I've heard many points and counter
points: that it is a huge insult to Iran and Persian culture, that the
film is only based on a comic book so this doesn't matter, that white
people are the good guys and blacks and Arabs are the bad guys, etc. It
all comes down to this: this is a Hollywood, specifically Warner Bros,
picture. One good thing about modern Hollywood is that they cater to
the mass audience and thus are usually considerate about race issues
and whatnot. It is their responsibility. This film was extremely,
extremely ignorant in its defamation of Persian/Iranian culture/history
and its use of race in good vs evil. It *does not matter* what was in
the comic book. Frank Miller can write whatever he wants in a comic
book, because it is a very abstract medium that is taken for granted as
"cartoonish." When Warner Bros. decides to ADAPT this comic into a live
film, it is an entirely different deal. They had to realize all these
hidden and obvious implications, and how ignorant and insulting it is.
This film single-handedly mocks millions, millions of people. WB could
have adapted any comic book into a film, any of Miller's other works.
It was just a bad move to make this film, and that's all there is to
it. No one could argue that an alternative script selection could have
turned out worse. Nevertheless, 300 was made.
As for Iranians, I've heard/seen some reasonable negative reactions,
and some unreasonable, uneducated reactions. I honestly don't think
that most Iranians have the knowledge required of the film industry in
order to properly assess a film such as in this situation. Most
Americans don't even. But ultimately, there was no reason for them to
receive this stupid insult of 300, and I feel ashamed to be in any way
associated with it.
Getting to the more technical critique of the film: there was WAY too
much post production, the writing and actor direction were HORRIBLE,
there was zero character development, one-dimensional everything,
everything was a caricature with no followable emotional track or
realism, and so forth. The speeding up and slowing down of the film
tried to emphasize certain actions and imbue it with drama or power,
but instead was distracting and amateurish. EVERY single shot was
over-color-corrected and looked like crap, it was so obvious to tell.
The acting consisted of a few extremely cliché, hyper-masculine
dramatic speeches, stealing from every epic film ranging from
Braveheart to Last Samurai. The actors ONLY yelled. There was a scene
where one soldier cried, but this added nothing. No one cared when
people died because no one grew to know any of the characters. They
only showed one side of themselves, they were caricatures. The actual
content of their lines was disgraceful and rested at a 5th grade
reading level. The director's choice to make the characters like
football players or wrestlers, instead of increasing the power of the
characters, made them incredibly fake and ineffective; whereas giving
them moments of desperation, doubt, or any other realistic emotion
could have lended to making them more powerful. Imagine one of the last
scenes in Braveheart where Mel Gibson is being tortured in public. Now,
imagine him having been a total emotionless A-hole the whole film, and
instead of yelling "freedom" in a last cry, he yells it like a football
player who doesn't give a crap. That was what 300 was like.
Anyway, I felt obligated to write against this film, though I never
usually write reviews. I originally gave it a 6 because it didn't seem
*that* bad, but am lowering it to a 4 because of the actual HARM it is
doing to other people.
| Page 1 of 198: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Plot summary | Plot synopsis | Ratings |
| Awards | Newsgroup reviews | External reviews |
| Parents Guide | Official site | Plot keywords |
| Main details | Your user reviews | Your vote history |