300 (2006) Poster

(2006)

User Reviews

Review this title
2,196 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
A two-sided piece of art
gus49531 March 2007
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.
1,203 out of 1,684 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Chills!
deadmonkeys13 March 2007
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!
1,026 out of 1,640 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Forget the Naysayers, 300 Delivers!
CrassActionHero31 March 2007
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.
791 out of 1,396 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A great movie!
shoukanmahou21 May 2007
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.
436 out of 763 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
300
MR_Heraclius22 February 2020
300 tells the story of the 300 Spartans who defended their homes against the Persian army. The movie is a phenomenal action packed story that sticks pretty close to the actual events. The movie is done in a style similar to a graphic novel which adds high contrast and beautiful slow motion scenes. Overall, the movie is incredibly entertaining and tells a fascinating story.
51 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The Evolution of Epic Battles
Alex_Priest15 February 2007
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!
1,390 out of 2,596 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Strong on style; weak on reason
harry_tk_yung17 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I have to get something out of the way first. From the two movies I watched back to back in two days, there is enough blood to fill Lake Ontario. Done! (Oh yes, the other one is "Hannibal rising").

Frank Miller fans who have been so pleased with how faithfully "Sin City" has replicated the graphic novel (some even calls it just the animation of the novel, with a few real actors thrown in) will note that for "300", the movie makers have taken considerably more liberty in adapting. But then, the original graphic novel is itself an adaptation from real history.

While the main attraction of this movie is its stunning visual style, I do wish to point out some ironies before we store our brains away and sit back to enjoy. The irony is that the same hero who claims to be defending civilization and reason kills an emissary on the mere pretext of the latter's discourteous words. You would be hard pressed to find an act more barbaric. But this is good: it serves as a timely reminder that this movie is so one-dimensional that whatever the "heroes" do is right. The audiences that have recently winced at a scene in "Letters from Iwo Jima" where an American Marine shoots a surrendered Japanese soldier are unlikely to have the same reaction in witnessing the Spartan heroes gleefully thrusting their spears, en mass, through the heart of wounded soldiers lying on the battlefield. This mean only that such audiences are taking "300" for what it is.

Let us therefore move along to the visuals, which should be your only reason for watching this movie. Never has slaughters in battle been made to look so stylishly beautiful. As appetizer comes the first encounter which reminds me of the line of scrimmage in an NFL game. By sheer brutal force, the line of Spartans and shield holds back the seemingly unstoppable momentum of the onslaught of the first wave of Persian attack. While the evil attackers fall under the mighty thrust of the spears, their wielders are entirely unscathed – another thought association: "a wicked thrust, it's dust to dust; from fore to aft, they feel a draft" in Guenevere's witty lyrics in Camelot (1967) turns out to be an apt description of the scene. Next comes the Persian cavalry, which is disposed of with equal ease by the famous wedge formation. The third wave is a little more intimidating, the ghostly "immortals" plus a ghastly giant. That requires a little more work but at the same time provides King Leonidas an opportunity to shine.

After a brief time out, we are treated to huge beast with trunks that might have been on loan from "The Return of the King". By this time, the audience's thirst for blood should have been brought to a height. What follows is a sequence that I think is the highlight of the entire move. Through a skillful mix of slow and fast motion, we are shown how the "300" disposes of their opponents as if they were straw men, with limbs and heads flying around at will, and a rain of blood splashing on the screen in a glorious crimson.

But then the tide begins to turn as we see the first Spartan casualty. Standing in the midst of a sea of slaughtered enemies and bathing in glory, a young hero fails to notice the approach of a stealth and swift horse, carrying a deadly rider. Before we have a chance to blink, we witness the fall, in very slow motion, of his headless body. This is the son of the King's most loyal captain who, at the start of the march, told the King that his son "can be replaced" if lost in battle.

Some say that there is so much CGI that they may as well not have actors in this movie, but I don't agree. The fact that the real actors are acting almost entirely in front of a blue screen does not mean that they are not real. Gerard Butler, who did not impress me as The Phantom (but did quite well as The Stranger in "Dear Frankie" (2004)), is an impressive King Leonidas, with his raw power and determination. Also good, as the warrior queen, is Lena Headey who had a reasonably good role in "The cave" (2005) but was underused in "The Brothers Grimm" (2005). What I really love is the performance of David Wenham (a very memorable Faramir in LOTR) that gave me something to remember, in the last scene of this movie. Playing the sly traitor is Dominic West whom I have just seen yesterday in "Hannibal rising", as the French inspector. The acting in this movie is generally fine, on the one-dimension level.
36 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Much worse than the trailer
EdWont10 March 2007
Warning: 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.
637 out of 1,182 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
More oiled men than a night at Kaptain Quendo's Man-Love Palace
gundognc1 April 2007
Warning: 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.
542 out of 1,004 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A terrible mess
eilidh-611 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Seeing the enthusiastic comments here, I was almost wondering whether they were meant for the same film I saw. Unfortunately, there is no doubt it is the same.

Never mind the fact I am writing from Greece, and that I might be in any way biased: I didn't go to the cinema expecting to see a historically accurate film, and I never let this fact bother me in the very least. I knew it was based on a comic, and I thought I'd see a decent enough epic film. I am not hard to please when it comes to films, but honestly -- I don't think I've seen such bad directing before. Terrible overuse of slow-motion sequences, some of the most awkward posing and set-up regarding the actors, an absolutely pretentious use of colour and lightning, incredibly bad costume choices (uniform leather thongs -- give me a break) resulting in multiple layers of kitsch. There was undoubtedly some eye-candy: but it was stacked so sloppily together it ended up being unpleasant.

Add to this mess some of the cheesiest lines and concepts, and there you have it -- I would call it a complete waste of time, but in some sense it is so bad it is almost worth seeing. Flying severed limbs in the battle scenes may even bring in a good laugh -- just as most of the dialogue does.
385 out of 706 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
What is the point?
blacklove28 March 2007
Warning: 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?"
456 out of 847 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
300 Worldpremiere Berlin
barb114023 February 2007
Warning: 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 itself–I 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 me–it 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 doubt–sometimes 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 most–where 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!
672 out of 1,263 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
there're a few you cant blame for...
snooooks18 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
that this movie will probably be remembered as...? no, unlike the real battle of Thermopylae, this "film" wont be remembered at all.

but no, you cant blame Zack Snyder for it. for me "directing" a movie means, to make actors balance on the thin red line called story and to guide them on their way. and sorry, from this viewpoint there's no directing at all in 300. take away the decent special effects and there's not a whole lot left. yes decent special effects, not groundbreaking at all. "the terminator 2" was "groundbreaking" in effects and so was "jurassic park" at its time. but 300 didn't show anything that hasn't been done at least a dozen times before... so does the music.

neither you can blame paramount for it. all they did was, what most of the big studios do these days. they jumped on the money-train without really taking care about, what this comic book is about.

also Gerard butler isn't responsible for that "300" is nothing more than a waste of money and time. actually he's the only character in this so called epics, who leaves the 1st dimension at least in a few scenes. he acts as good as it gets under this circumstances.

but yes, there's one person you can blame for this movie: frank miller. and if its now "300" or "sin city", his world obviously is only black or white, good or bad, day or night... no shades between. and yes, this comic IS full of racism, prejudices and whats worst, disrespect for history. and as stated by others, this film is pretty close to the original comic book. so what else to expect? certain comics tried to approach historic events or periods and as seen in aster ix and a few others this can be done, if the author of the story shows respect to the events that happened. and herein lies the problem. obviously miller has a lack of respect for those who fought and died those days. yes, exaggeration in comics is a valid way to tell a story, playing with racism and prejudices isn't.

bottom line, neither from the viewpoint of a comic book.based movie nor from the historical viewpoint this film is worth to be seen. the effects and visuals don't carry it at all. neither does the acting of the cast. and whats left from the original great story of the battle of Thermopylae is as deformed and unreal as the Persian warriors.

actually there's only 1 thing that could have made this waste of celluloid even more ridiculous...

Charlton Heston, with a NRA bumper sticker on his butt, jumping out of a burning bush shouting...

FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS! while lightnings out of his hands kill Xerxes and company whilst hunchback, rhinos and elephants sail into the sun on Noah's ark and live happily ever after.
218 out of 395 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
300=big lie
shoun22 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Your new movie called �300� opening on March 9th in theatres all over the United States and based on a graphic novel by Frank Miller portrays the battle of Thermopylae in which King Leonidas and 300 Spartans fight against Xerxes and his Persian army. Upon seeing the previews of this movie, it immediately becomes apparent that apart from the actual names used in it, the entire depiction of this battle is based upon fantasy. Nowhere among the historical data that remains of the time of Xerxes and ancient Persian empires, do we come across any reference that shows those kings and soldiers as monsters with body-piercing, armors, facial features and demonic behavior that seem to have sprung out from the dungeons of hell. The inaccurate and derogatory depiction of ancient Persians that according to all historical data conducted warfare with mastery and dignity, and looked nothing like science-fictional monsters, is a depiction of how movie studios and authors sacrifice historical accuracy for would-be profits.

The author Frank Miller and Warner Brothers Studios should understand that distorting historical data is unethical, and so is feeding ignorance to viewers and readers. Fantasy-like characters should not have names that are based on actual historical figures. Xerxes was one of the many revered and respected rulers of an ancient civilization the vestiges of which last to this day and are acknowledged by historians of all nations. He did not look like a creature out of a frightening bedtime story. Neither did his soldiers.

By all means depict important historical events, but take the trouble to visit a library and to do some research before you do so.

We, The Undersigned, consider the movie �300� an outrage and boycott it.
128 out of 226 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
best animated movie of the year, worst historic movie ever
jkf00723 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
The movie is a fantastic animation movie. I wonder why they bothered listing the actors in the credits. There is a few things missing from this movie; acting, and colors. Everything is probably shot in front of a green screen and later painted in oker, sienna and umber. The earthy colors are the only colors you'll see in the movie, plus red or carmine. The acting is terrible. Only the faces of the actors have been saved for most parts, but even the beards and eyes are painted on. When an actor smiles or show pain you'll notice how the animators have tried to move parts of the face but doesn't succeed very well.

The story is completely nonsense. This is not Sparta, its some twisted wannabe historical document from the mind of the creator. There is a lot of talk about how these warriors cannot go to war without having felt the bussums of a woman.. Hey, man they practiced pederasty. Having relations with a woman was not for a warrior. They were supposedly doing it the lacedaemonian way. When training they were supposed to be oiled in and nude.

As mentioned before, this is good animation, but the worst ever movie I have seen. Save your money and watch TV instead.
138 out of 245 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I'm amazed at the enthusiasm for this assault on the senses
mesakid30 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I am puzzled by the praise for this bloated, repetitive, thin, overextended video game It has restored my cynicism about movies,or I should see the people who see them, which had been somewhat diluted by seeing Pans Labyrinth, the Lives of Others, the Departed and other excellent films during the last year I admit I am not a video game junkie nor a fan of graphic novels, of which this is apparently a good example I understand the majority of the film consists of computer graphics rather than actual acting. I think the "dialog" must also consist of digital bits because it is extremely repetitive I think they recorded a half dozen bits of dialog and then just plugged them in between impalements, be-headings, and lopping off of arms and legs. I would be willing to bet that the majority of this films fans could not find both Greece and Persia in an atlas, (hint: look for Iran) nor come within 1,000 years of guessing when the battle took place if they hadn't read about it in the reviews. In case it isn't apparent, I only saw this because someone else wanted to see it. I found myself wishing I had brought along a video game or something to keep me occupied during this film.
152 out of 272 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
this is one of the worst films I watched in the past 2 years
yaboa6 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
this is a mediocre, nonsense, lousy film. Don't watch this. I cant believe that IMDb qualifies it with 8 points. perhaps they are manipulating the ratings to get the people watch it. I put 1 point because i could not put 0. This film, not only has 0 on plot, 0 on script, and 0 on acting out of 10, but also, the battles and the people fighting look like a cheap 3d studio vectorial animation I could do without any effort. All the people are exactly the same, and you could notice a lack of preparation on the scenes. I was expecting something like troy or braveheart, which are too damn good to compare with this. This is why Hollywood is in the ruin. Another expensive and terrible movie. I watched 23 with jim carrey, and thought I could not watch a worse movie than that. But if you want to find something worse, just go to watch this. Otherwise, I would not suggest it unless you don't have a brain in your head or you go high just before it starts. Awful!!!!!!
199 out of 362 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Visceral, violent and visually stunning to the point where the lack of much else doesn't really matter
bob the moo18 November 2007
In the year 480 BC, King Xerxes of Persia set in motion his enormous slave empire to crush the small group of independent Greek states – the only stronghold of freedom still remaining in the then known world. As the countless armies of Xerxes approaches, King Leonidas petitions the ruling council to meet the army with whatever men can be found. With the council unwilling to release soldiers until after the religious festival, Leonidas sets out with his 300 strong personal army to meet Xerxes' men at a narrow pass knowing they must hold off the approach for as long as they can until the army arrives– even if it means their deaths.

Although I am surprised to see this film so highly rated on IMDb, I can understand why it is so because it does deliver a powerful experience, almost powerful enough to carry it through its lack of real depth or substance. You can see the selling point on the DVD cover or the poster because it is in these places where any film visually has to sell itself. With 300 though this selling continues across the entire film because, holding close to the graphic novel roots, the visual design is the all here. The plot is simple and, although there is a little bit of politicing back home, the film is all about the stand of the 300 against countless others. In this regard it is visceral, violent and visually stunning. The mix of effects with live action brings the action to live and is as suitably overblown as the legend.

Snyder's direction matches the effects and he wallows in every macho swing of the sword, doing really well to capture the action in a way that is engaging and clear. The lack of substance was a bit of a problem but to be honest the film does sweep you along in the moment of the battle and mostly this is all you care about. The cast don't really have characters so much as presence and mostly they deliver in this area. Butler is strong in the lead and he convinces in the role of Leonidas. Headley and West have the harder job back home to provide some interest in the politics behind the battle – they do well enough (particularly The Wire's West, but I'm biased) but the script does rather leave them to their own devices. The rest of the cast are appropriately muscular and heroic and fit in with what the script is trying to do.

Overall this is an effective but superficial film. The design and the look is the all but fortunately it delivers in this regard really well. The performances, the script and everything else falls into line in supporting the graphic novel feel of the film and, although I would like to say I favour substance over style, it is hard not to like when the style is this well done.
40 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Have we gone so mad we can not distinguish films from video games?
auberus29 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
For the life of me I can not understand why people would rave so much about this mockery of a movie…

I knew I was not going to see an accurate historical film. I knew I was in for a graphic novel adaptation.

But what I witnessed was a simplification of already simplified and false historical facts. The result is catastrophic.

Obviously it is easier to show "real Spartan warriors" not indulged in a fair amount of man love. But guess what they were… Obviously it is easier to show Persians as decadent, uncivilized, unsophisticated and without any understanding of military strategy…But guess what the Persian Empire established by Cyrus the great, the writer of the first human right declaration, was the most magnificent and civilized empire in 480 B.C. Obviously it is easier and convenient to imply that Greece won against Persia at the naval battle of Artemisium. But guess what, historically, the Greeks lost that naval battle as well. Obviously it is easier to define bravery as 300 Spartans warriors fighting against a million Persians. But guess what they were more like 10000 Spartans, Athenians, Thebans, Thespians and Phoceans against 200,000 Persians. Obviously it is easier to represent Xerxès the first as a giant homosexual, piercing adept. But guess what he was more like a sophisticated Persian and also a great military strategist. Obviously it is easier to make War and Killing the glorious thing a nation could ever accomplish. But guess what there is no Glory in War and Killing. Only Death… Obviously it is easier to make a baseless action movie rather than a real epic "peplum". An action movie staged in an imaginary Time and Place with imaginary heroes and villains. But guess what great movies are not easy to make, great movies are based upon a tangible scenario and everything else is aimed to support that scenario.

Some of us applaud the aesthetic of the film as I refuse to call it cinematography. But for me the glossy, saturated bronze color like background looked incredibly unrealistic. Some of us feel shiver down their spines when hearing talks of freedom" and "justice" coming out of King Leonidas, Gerard Butler's mouth. But for me it sounded more like an unintentional satire of America misadventure in Iraq. Some of us cheer at the slick fighting scenes and rejoice when Zack Snyder's camera abuses slow motions in order for the audience to enjoy the slaughtering. But for me that was the paroxysm of emptiness and the moment I felt lectured by a mediocre director as to why violence, racism, sadism are surprisingly virtues to be cherished. Some of us raise their arms in the air and wave at the ripped muscled Spartan men. But for me those leather pants Greek Warriors fighting thousands of ninjas almost died of ridicule. Some of us enjoy metal music mixed with "Gladiatoresque" chants. But for me it was noise and a sign that the film triggers 15 year old disturbed American boys who think Leonidas is a brand of chocolate and Xerxès an upcoming video game.

It's fine to make movies out of comics. It's fine to make violent films. It's also fine to use CGI in order to display thing you could not without. Eventually it is fine to fantasy an historical period. But make no mistake there is nothing groundbreaking or breathtaking in 300. As there is no soul in this film only flesh…As there are no story only events…As there is no cinematography only computerized background…As there is no feeling only fading impression…This is virtual at its worst. What's best to erase a virtual film? I suggest we all make a virtual fire in our mind in which we'll burn 300. And maybe the flames will be so big it will enlighten Hollywood once and for all...
140 out of 252 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Lord of the Rings meets Stargate meets TMNT
kirby-styles16 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Are you kidding me? 9 out of 10 rating. No way. This epic story of a battle that was fought by 300 of the roughest, toughest cold hearted warriors has so many inconsistencies and is so pointless that I actually wished I was watching Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy again, Bleeehhh! As far as this review being a spoiler, if you couldn't tell from the trailers that blatantly pointed out that all 300 of these morons die, well, ALL 300 OF THESE MORONS DIE! There, ruined it for you and hopefully saved you the ten buck admission fee. These young Spartan boys are kicked out into the world to fend for themselves right about the time they hit puberty. Then after fighting off the tallest, skinniest looking mangy wolves, they get to come back and be Spartan warriors. They are so ruthless, the Spartan King kicks the Persian messenger into a huge hole in the middle of town (which was apparently finished off by expert masons) just for asking him to kneel in submission. Haven't they ever heard the phrase 'Don't kill the messenger'? Although he may have deserved it since he was standing right on the edge of aforementioned huge hole in the ground while divulging the bad news of having to "Get on your knees (Texas Pete)!"

So now the ass-clown senators have to ask the gods if they should fight this huge Persian army made up of apparent computer programmers, stock brokers and (ha ha) kittens. These gods are 13 year old semi-nude girls who are the gods of Downy dryer sheets on acid-- yeah, go ask them for advice...makes sense, karate monkey. So Captain Jack Spartan convinces everybody that fighting is a bad idea. Everybody except the king and 299 easily led automatons. Meanwhile this Johnny Depp look-alike wannabe Captain Jack is being paid off in Cortes' gold by the king/god leader guy of the Persian army who will definitely go #1 in the first round in next year's NBA draft. Now the 300 are told not to go fight so the king dupes the senate by saying they aren't going to battle, they are just taking their swords and stuff to get their merit badges for the Spart Scouts. OK, we believe you. So off they go and on their way they meet up with Gollum's older hunchback brother who says he will help. Apparently 301 is a crowd so he is shunned, which, you would think he would be used to by now but I guess not, and hunch-boy doesn't take it too well. I had a hunch he would be a factor in the 300's downfall. He later in the movie rats out the fact that there is a 'secret passage' side road so the Persian army can flank the morons leading to their eventual doom. I don't know why they needed hunch-boy...you would think an army that size would carry a map.

Anyway, after fighting the first wave of programmers, then pushing attacking wooly-mammoths into the sea, then having a goal line stand against triceratops, the Spartans eventually have to go at it against teenage mutant ninja disappointed V for Vendetta guys. They were good but not good enough. Time for Navy Seals. Oh, wait, we're getting flanked. Well time to give up, especially after seeing your heartless ruthless warrior buddy CRYING over seeing his heartless ruthless killing machine warrior son's head chopped off during a timeout! Now the whole reason you went on this bogus merit badge trip was because there was no way you would ever get on your knees before some 9 foot 8 inch Stargate character god guy and submit to him. So why would you do it right before you die??? You get on your knees, you remember hearing one of your buddies blurt out "God Speed" (which god? Downy god? Other god? Some god from Apollo 13?) and it makes no sense and then you stand up and throw not a strike-- but a ball, high and away. It's way out of the strike zone and the only reason you hit Persian god/leader Stargate guy on the shoulder with your throwing knife is because he is 9'8" tall (should have been called for a balk anyway, you can't kneel on the rubber). All that got you was a hundred billion arrows shot at you simultaneously bringing your demise, although only three arrows actually hit you. Meanwhile back at the ranch, Queen Spartan is dropping trow to service Cap'n Jack in return for letting the rest of the Spartan army help save her husband. Did you hear that?? The REST of the Spartan army? Oh, yeah there are hundreds of thousands of these heartless ruthless killing machines waiting in the wings. A little information that would have been helpful YESTERDAY! These guys don't show up until after the queen kills Cap'n Jack (who ironically bleeds Cortes' gold) for dissing her after she was ready to accept the business end of his...man-sword. This is the point where you become really ticked off about how pointless this battle was and really want the 1 hr and 57 minutes of your life back. Besides that, I guess it was pretty good.
78 out of 135 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
what a disappointment
satanicimp9 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
i was really expecting to see a masterpiece of a movie, instead it was one of the most boring war movies of all time. i know that films aren't always intended to be historically correct, which isn't the issue with 300, i prefer having semi-mythical beasts and what not, thats what makes entertaining movies, but its just the dialogue and the plot was so empty, i mean gerrad butler must have shouted the word Sparta like 300 times in the movie, yes yes we understand all for the glory of sparta, but for god's sake put something else in the movie! i mean some things were unbelievably stupid, boys born are to be dumped off cliff sides and further on beat each other up and fight a wolf in the freezing cold with nothing but a loin cloth on, i mean we get the point that they wanted tough men to be made of them, but the message was conveyed in such a funny way. thats thing, this movie had so much potential, combining the legend of the spartans and 21st century special effects it should've really rocked. but it just sucked big time. one other thing, it was so obvious that when the directors ran out of interesting baddies to throw at the mere 300 men (all sorts of weirdoes, your usual dispensable foot soldiers, then some samurai/persian death dorks, then some moorish bomb throwers, then all sorts of big animals etc... come on its like one big circus) they suddenly looked at their watches and said, OK they'll die from a volley of arrows, which, quite interestingly was depicted at the start of the movie, and they successfully blocked it, but happened to die of it at the end. what a flop, i really liked frank millers sin city, but 300 was really an over produced piece of junk. avoid like the plague, trust me you wont be missing anything special.
46 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This movie is god awful
zvelf10 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is a celebration of stupidity (never retreat and never surrender), death, and dismemberment. You might as well be watching a snuff film. 300 seems to think war and killing is glorious as it lovingly films decapitations left and right.

It's also homophobic. Xerxes was not really gay, and real Spartan warriors also indulged in a fair amount of man love.

Could the dialogue be any more ludicrous ("Spartans! Enjoy your breakfast, for tonight we dine in hell!")? And yeah, the traitor walks around carrying his incriminating evidence everywhere with him. Oh, and historically, the Spartans lose that last (unseen) battle in the movie.
184 out of 337 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Thank you Hollywood,.... NOT!!
awpkiller223 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Before I saw this movie, I read a lot of comments about this it, and that the fact is that most of it is negative made me wanted to see this movie anyway to get my own opinion about it. Before I saw it I thought maybe some comment were too harsh or maybe not entirely accurate. But to my surprise, all of the trashing comments were very accurate. Every comment like trashy 3D/CG effects, poor directing, shitty script, racist propaganda, crappy fighting, well the list is long and you can find it all here about this movie. So I'm not going to repeat what everyone has said here, and instead direct this comment to the director of this movie. STICK TO MUSIC VIDEO MAKING PLEASE, and save everybody the wasted time, wasted money, anger, and most of all, making me feel compelled to waste "my time" to write this comment.

I don't understand how comments like "A masterpiece" or "An epic movie" could get so much good user ratings like "740 out of 1293 people found the following comment useful", I don't believe that a person in his right state of mind would give this movie 10 stars and call it a "Master piece".

I give this movie2 stars, and both of the stars goes to Gerard Butlers acting performance. My advice to you, despite all this, if you have the time to waste, watch this movie anyway (try not paying for it), and you will find out that all the trashing comments for this movie are true. My last words, hopefully after this flop Zack won't get another chance to ruin the day.
36 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Hitler would have liked it!
alexandermangoldt12 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Movies like these often make me wonder about the decision finding-process of an actor. For hypothesis' sake, let's take a journey into Gerard Butler's mind after reading the script: "Hmm, okay, sounds pretty much like a gory battle film to me. There isn't much of a story, but the public these days really seems to be into epic war movies, probably with the war in Iraq and 9/11 and all. Now, some of the scenes, especially those at the beginning remind me of something I learned in history class, I think it had something to do with Hitler and survival of the fittest. I don't really endorse these values, but the film seems to. Well, I'm only a second rate actor and I haven't had my big success yet, so maybe, taking on the role of Leonidas might be a good idea and an excellent career move, since the film is provocative, to say the least, and even if it turns out to be a bad movie with fascist tendencies, people will still talk about me. And all these months at the gym will finally pay off, because I get to show my sexy body throughout the entire movie. I won't be wearing much, accept for some briefs made of leather and a red cape around my neck. The text isn't too hard either, I don't have to act much, all they want me to do is shout and shout in a belligerent way like the warmonger I see on TV all the time. Yeah, I think I'll give my agent a call. There's nothing good on TV, so what the heck, let's do this flick".

To the film itself: After twenty minutes into the movie I got bored. A juxtaposition of battle scenes, monsters that looked like prototypes from the LORD OF THE RINGS and a more than stupid side story with King Leonidas wife and some gossamer thin malice spun by a third rate playwright. Whether this film endorses fascism or not doesn't really matter, because this film boils down to one simple adjective: stupid!
67 out of 115 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An Epic Film
walken_on_sunshine23 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
After seeing a 99% complete 300 at a 24 hour film festival i was amazed by the accuracy and beauty before my eyes.This film is an adaptation of Frank Miller's (Sin City) graphic novel 300 and wow is it ever accurate.I am very glad to see two magnificent pieces of Frank Millers art Sin City, and 300 have successfully transferred over to the big screen without losing anything in between.Visually the film drops you off your feet and it's not even completed yet so when this eventually debuts in the theaters it will have double the impact on me as i plan on seeing this again.The mix of live action and CGI creates beautiful landscapes, gorgeous backrounds, and amazing dimension to the characters.The film's dialog is pretty much exactly the same as it is in the graphic novel much like how most of the dialog in Robert Rodriguez' Sin City was taken directly from Frank Millers graphic novel.Personally i think that 300 is the best film of it's kind.It's got a faster pace than Lord Of The Rings, is more accurate than Troy, more compelling than Tristan and Isolde, and more violent than Gladiator.This movie so far deserves the academy award for best picture and without a doubt deserves the academy award for best cinematography for the originality and sheer beauty put into it's visuals.The battles are well filmed and action packed so for those of you who want gore and violence you'll get it and you'll be satisfied.Overall this is a movie of epic proportions and deserves a lot of recognition for it's originality,visual beauty, and it's accurate portrayal of it's original source.
631 out of 1,215 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed