The Vicar wrote:Well said, Peven.
8.5 to 9 of 10.
Retardo_Montalban wrote:The Vicar wrote:Well said, Peven.
8.5 to 9 of 10.
8.5 to 9?? thats a pretty indecisive score, Vic. That's the kind of indecisiveness that gets you KILLED on the battlefield. This is war, boy. Now cowboy up and Give us a rating
The Vicar wrote:
We're not seeing the story of the 300 as historical fact, but as a fireside tale - Xerses becomes a towering monster, everything becomes exaggerated.
The story grows in the telling.
buster00 wrote:Spartanesque po?
Lady Sheridan wrote:The Vicar wrote:
We're not seeing the story of the 300 as historical fact, but as a fireside tale - Xerses becomes a towering monster, everything becomes exaggerated.
The story grows in the telling.
Now that's a really interesting idea. I hadn't thought of that before (and me writing a massive literary paper!) and I like that. One of my sole gripes about the movie are when it gets a bit too LOTR--massive troll warriors, the freaky look of the Immortals, Xerxes' massive height...some of it came with the Frank Miller territory but most of it was Snyder's own.
But to think of Dilios spinning it to incite Greece...I love that. They weren't just Persians, guys, they were the sickest Persians you've ever seen! We didn't just take down a rhino--it was an enormous rhino.
Vicar, you are teh smartness!
The Vicar wrote:We're not seeing the story of the 300 as historical fact, but as a fireside tale - Xerses becomes a towering monster, everything becomes exaggerated. The story grows in the telling.
The Vicar wrote:
Love ya too, darling.![]()
Personally, I think your boy Butler channelled Leonidas bigtime.
You must be so proud.
And possibly aroused.
Or have you forgotten Gerard's bum shot?
I thought not.
Vegeta wrote:Vegeta gives 300 five out of five punches:
MonkeyM666 wrote:Vegeta wrote:Vegeta gives 300 five out of five punches:
ahhh.... I've missed the punches...
So IMAX wasn't as good as a regular cinema. Interesting... I was going to go to IMAX for the first time ever to see this flick (maybe as part of a UK meetup) but now I'm unsure. Is there anyone else who can give their opinion on this?????
Lord Voldemoo wrote:SPOILERS EVERYWHERE O NOESSSSS!!!!!!!!!
Just saw it!!!!!!! I don't want to rehash everything in detail for those of you lucky enough to have already seen the film, but here are my initial thoughts having just walked in the door (one note, I suck at remembering character names without looking them up again so bear with me):
RANTS:
1) Everything was a little derivative. As much as the visuals are spectacular and innovative a lot of the film felt like it had been done before. I'm not even really referring to the overarching themes (freedom against tyranny, the mighty few versus the hordes, the fight for one's country, etc) as I consider those to be universal themes that have been addressed in various artforms for centuries. I'm referring to more nitpicky stuff like the Persian elephants, which looked far too much like the Oliphaunts of Return of the King; and the old "pull the spear further into my gut so that I may reach out and kill you" technique which was done in Fellowship (albeit with less success). Those are two examples, but in a film which has been described (accurately) as a series of "money shots" strung in a row, watching several of those money shots and saying to oneself "HEY, I SAW THAT IN..." is a little distracting.
2) I agree with someone's (Peven's?) note above about the Queen's subplot feeling rushed and a little forced, though it was necessary. I don't think it could have been cut, I wish we'd had a little more. I LOVED the fact that she was the one who killed the douchebag senator, though and in the senate chamber, no less. I thought that Faramir (see, I suck at character names) would be the one to make that kill upon his return. Part of Leonidas' final orders. I'm glad that wasn't the case.
3) The CGI was teh suk. Actually, it was really good except one part: the spartan abs!! They didn't look at all realistic....Oops, I've just been handed a note that some peoples' abs actually DO look like that...off to do some situps.
4) I thought the oracle was hot, then she was described in the film as being fifteen or something, which made me feel dirty.
ETA: 5) I forgot about this one: Hunchback Smeagol was ghey.
RAVES:
1) I should really have just limited my "review" to a few short words I saw on the back of someone's camaro the other day: "Get in, sit down, shut up and HOLD ON!" That's what this film was for me. I described the film by plagarizing someone else's review (Mori's?) and calling it a series of money shots. That it is, to a large extent. You know what, it works though!! It's just fucking cool. I loved the fight scenes, I loved the editing style (though it felt slightly repetitive into like the 3rd major fight). It is a mindfuck of a ride and I had a blast on it.
2) Gerry. Man, this guy carried the movie. I want to hate him just to give LS and I something to spar overbut I can't. If you miscast Leonidas, this film is straight to video garbage. If you can't take him seriously, the Spartans become a joke. This type of role, with all of its bombast and machismo could have become a walking cliche or, worse, funny, but Gerry didn't let it. THIS IS SPARTA!!!!!! is what people will remember, but it's his quieter moments with his wife, his son and especially his men that sold me on the character and on Gerry. Gerry gave Leonidas some depth that was desperately needed. He was really fucking good.
3) So. Fucking. Pretty. (the movie, not Gerry)
4) Xerxes. Dude was fucking creepy and the scene between him and Leonidas was fantastic.
Vicar- I think your point about it being told as a story, and a wartime story no less, is right on and was kind of how I was thinking of it from the start. It showed Faramir speaking to the men around the campfire at the beginning of the film and so I just interpreted the movie from that persepctive, as it sounds like you did. That's why the more fantastical elements of the film didn't bother me.
Overall, a great fucking ride. I'd give it 9 out of 10. I'm off to do some situps.
EDIT x2: I said the word "fuck" a lot in that review. I chalk it up to all the testosterone in the movie...
havocSchultz wrote:Quick question - did anybody else's theatre break into applause when the Queen gutted the dude in the Senate - and repeated his previous line to him - except saying: "I am not your Queen" as opposed to "I'm not your King"
The Vicar wrote:havocSchultz wrote:Quick question - did anybody else's theatre break into applause when the Queen gutted the dude in the Senate - and repeated his previous line to him - except saying: "I am not your Queen" as opposed to "I'm not your King"
Both times I saw it the audience reacted - the first time ( Thursday night/Friday morning) it was general approval....the second time, with more ladies in attendance, there was applause & shouting.
The Vicar wrote:Nota bene - wasn't Gorgo a giant lizard type that attacked London back in the 1961?
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:The Vicar wrote:Nota bene - wasn't Gorgo a giant lizard type that attacked London back in the 1961?
You be a the judge, eh?
Lady Sheridan wrote:Everyone cheered Gorgo at our showing--she got big cheers at BNAT too. It's an awesome scene.
Now's my chance to rant about the Oracle--you don't know how much I wish I had gone to try out for her! I saw the call sheet, and you had to be 5'4, slender, red-haired and fair skinned...I was a shoe in. But they asked that she be at least a C cup breast size because "Spartan men have their needs."
Then I see the movie and what do I find? She has the same chest as I do. I could have been the Oracle.
Cha-Ka Khan wrote:But you would've had to be licked by an old, pustulent, warty F.Murray Abraham-ish looking guy.
Lady Sheridan wrote:I knew I'd get a second chance with your films, havoc!
havocSchultz wrote:Another thing I'd like to mention - it was one of my girlfriend's favorite little moments in the entire film.
It was the small, subtle "glance of confirmation" that Loincloth gives to his wife just before punting the messenger and yelling the infamous "Red Sauce on Pasta!" line.
It was a nice little gesture that showed Loincloth actually respected and loved his wife.
It's not like he actually "needed" permission to do it - but it was a nice thing to do.
Like I said - she noticed it right away and really liked that it was put in there.
Thank you for your time...
Cha-Ka Khan wrote:
And finally... the whole point of going to the Hot Gates was to funnel Xerxes' army through its passage, reducing the advantage of his numbers. So why then does Leonidas send his army outside the Gates out into the open facing the full brunt of whatever Xerxes throws at them?
havocSchultz wrote:To show Xerxes that yes - they could be funnelling them through the passage if they wanted to - but fuck that - they're Spartans - they'll come out in the open anyways!
Cha-Ka Khan wrote:havocSchultz wrote:To show Xerxes that yes - they could be funnelling them through the passage if they wanted to - but fuck that - they're Spartans - they'll come out in the open anyways!
Yes, well then, they're just stupid and they deserved their fate.
havocSchultz wrote:Why prolong their death by trying to strategize too much and have the Persians fall into their traps?
Cha-Ka Khan wrote:havocSchultz wrote:Why prolong their death by trying to strategize too much and have the Persians fall into their traps?
Oh, I don't know... there was that whole concept of "SPARTA!" perhaps that might have encouraged them to hold on and strategize for a little longer. The whole wives, children, families thing...
I mean, they were doing a pretty decent job of things, and Faramir even said "Xerxes had already shown his hand... he sent his best after just a few volleys." After they had cut down the Immortals, the rest should have been child's play for them.
Lord Voldemoo wrote:Cha-Ka Khan wrote:havocSchultz wrote:Why prolong their death by trying to strategize too much and have the Persians fall into their traps?
Oh, I don't know... there was that whole concept of "SPARTA!" perhaps that might have encouraged them to hold on and strategize for a little longer. The whole wives, children, families thing...
I mean, they were doing a pretty decent job of things, and Faramir even said "Xerxes had already shown his hand... he sent his best after just a few volleys." After they had cut down the Immortals, the rest should have been child's play for them.
I don't think Leonidas, except for that one brief moment the night after the seconc major battle, ever actually thought that he'd win. He was there to slow them, to serve as a symbol for the rest of Greece to rally around. He was there to die in glory. Not for his own personal glory but to die as a martyr. The best way to accomplish that goal is to fight the Persians in the open, not skulking in the shadows. He already had the Persians on a narrow road so they couldn't use their full force against him. Once he'd driven back the first wave he was locked into his position. Spartan law (for better or worse) said that you DO NOT, under any circumstances, retreat and as they said in the film even the King is not above the law.
Is it smart? Maybe not but it's the basis of the movie so I took it as fact.
Cha-Ka Khan wrote:Yeah, I suppose you guys are right. I'll buy that for a dollar!
havocSchultz wrote:I don't know if the film was technically "light on substance"
I mean yeah - it only really had the one basic running through it.
Never surrender - never give up - always fight -
Free men fight to stay free men.
It's not the most complex of ideas or plot points - but it is still a plot point -
and worthy enough theme.
It sums the Spartans up quite nicely - and they stick to it.
I mean - even being a Spartan - you'd think the choice that Loincloth has to make near the end would still be a tough one (if Xerxes is to be trusted) then he is offering quite a lot to Loincloth and his fellow Spartans.
Most men would take the deal to try and spare as many lives as possible.
But not the Spartans!
Not Loincloth!
It was never about surviving - it was just about fighting as long and as best as possible.
To show that no matter what is thrown and/or offered to the Spartans - they will just fight.
That's what they're born to do.
And that's what they're gonna die doing.
Like I said - it might not be anything complex or revolutionary - and I know the stylistic approach to the story might take away from almost everything else - at least upon initial viewing - but I still think that saying the film completely lacked substance is a bit of a dismissal of what the film itself is trying to say.
Because I think the film made it's points and themes and intentions very clear - and it stuck to them.
It might not be heavy on substance - but it does have a beating heart - and that heart was worn proudly on the end of a spear for all to see...
But that's just kinda the feel I got from the whole thing...
RogueScribner wrote:havocSchultz wrote:I don't know if the film was technically "light on substance"
I mean yeah - it only really had the one basic running through it.
Never surrender - never give up - always fight -
Free men fight to stay free men.
It's not the most complex of ideas or plot points - but it is still a plot point -
and worthy enough theme.
It sums the Spartans up quite nicely - and they stick to it.
I mean - even being a Spartan - you'd think the choice that Loincloth has to make near the end would still be a tough one (if Xerxes is to be trusted) then he is offering quite a lot to Loincloth and his fellow Spartans.
Most men would take the deal to try and spare as many lives as possible.
But not the Spartans!
Not Loincloth!
It was never about surviving - it was just about fighting as long and as best as possible.
To show that no matter what is thrown and/or offered to the Spartans - they will just fight.
That's what they're born to do.
And that's what they're gonna die doing.
Like I said - it might not be anything complex or revolutionary - and I know the stylistic approach to the story might take away from almost everything else - at least upon initial viewing - but I still think that saying the film completely lacked substance is a bit of a dismissal of what the film itself is trying to say.
Because I think the film made it's points and themes and intentions very clear - and it stuck to them.
It might not be heavy on substance - but it does have a beating heart - and that heart was worn proudly on the end of a spear for all to see...
But that's just kinda the feel I got from the whole thing...
I agree with your points generally, but I will say that the film was constructed to entertain, not so much think about, and that's why I (and some others, I suppose), it was a little light on substance. I'm not saying the film didn't have a worthy theme or ideal, but it was dressed up as popcorn entertainment and many people are therefore going to digest it as such. And there's not much there to dig deeper into. Freedom good; slavery and rape bad. Good message, but I didn't really make that emotional connection with any character precisely because the film focused more on the visuals than the heart or mind. I enjoyed the movie, but it falls short of greatness just for that reason.
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Okay, what have a you done with a the REAL Havoc, eh?
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:You should a let him out a more often, eh?
Cha-Ka Khan wrote:Just some thoughts...
Did anyone else find the makeshift wall that the Spartans put up look rather puny in the grand scheme of things? Xerxes could have just as easily sent out a group of men to dismantle the wall while his elite guard kept the Spartans busy.
Also, it bothered me when he said to the hunchback "show us the hidden path behind the mountain and you will be rewarded etc." If he knew there was a hidden path there, why not just send a squadron out there to look for it? How hidden can it be?
And finally... the whole point of going to the Hot Gates was to funnel Xerxes' army through its passage, reducing the advantage of his numbers. So why then does Leonidas send his army outside the Gates out into the open facing the full brunt of whatever Xerxes throws at them?
Peven wrote:light on substance? yeah, right. i guess Snyder should have thrown in a Jesus allegory and an illegitimate kid to give it more depth.![]()
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Peven wrote:light on substance? yeah, right. i guess Snyder should have thrown in a Jesus allegory and an illegitimate kid to give it more depth.![]()
Holy crappa, how could a you MISS a the Jesus allegory atta the end, eh? Leonidas laying onna the ground inna full Jesus-crucifiction pose, no?
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Peven wrote:light on substance? yeah, right. i guess Snyder should have thrown in a Jesus allegory and an illegitimate kid to give it more depth.![]()
Holy crappa, how could a you MISS a the Jesus allegory atta the end, eh? Leonidas laying onna the ground inna full Jesus-crucifiction pose, no?
Peven wrote:
and Havoc, i found Headey's nipples to be none too big at all. in fact, i'd say they're juuuuuussttt right.she was gorgeous from head to toe in this movie, imo, and the way her character handled herself made her all that more beautiful. who says men don't find strong women attractive.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests