I,m really looking forward to seeing this film,but the one and only local DVD hire shop has it booked out for about two weeks ,so I,ll see it then.
I,m wondering is my anticipation worth it ?
RORY
I did you like the graphic novel it was taken from?
I thought it was awesome.
If you like heavily stylised gory violence then it’s the film for you.
It was a pretty vivid film…in some ways it reminded me of “Conan the Barbarian,” which is one of my all-time favorites.
Not exactly thought-provoking, but definitely quite a ride.
–James
It’s worth the wait because you’ll have enough time to get the appropriate apparel for watching the film. “300” could become the next Rocky Horror experience.
I found it particularly boring after the first half-hour or so. I am really not that fond of ogling naked men, no matter how buff they are, and the other big feature in the film is Leonidas roaring and growling at his troops, over and over and over.
There is a particular production design that comes right out of the comic book. It is done extremely well, but like its’ other two major elements, the naked/semi-naked body-builder types and Leonidas’ roaring and growling, it is repeated ad nauseum.
I like special effects/computer graphics, and these were well done. It’s just that once you’ve seen them, the film, for me at least, had nothing else to offer.
djm
All my sons loved the movie (one of them saw it about 3 times), so they rented it so that Mark (hubby) and I could see it, too.
I watched about half hour, then went on to other pursuits.
Mark thought it was ok.
I think it’s a young guy thing, maybe, and I’m sure you’ll enjoy it.
Anyway, if you want a killer ride, go see “3:10 to Yuma” while you are waiting for your name to come up on the list.
Now THAT’S a movie…
M
I remember learning about the Battle of Thermapolae (spelling??) in school and always thought it would transfer well to the screen. It’s a fairly decent adaptation of the graphic novel (roll on Sandman the Movie) and is loosly based on history with style more than accuracy to the fore. Its a bit fascist in its imagery - the Persians are mutants, bisexuals (nttawwt) and slaves while the spartans are freedom loving (look up Helots -the spartans enslaved an entire nation). Didn’t like the line about the Athenians being boy-lovers (pederasty was prevalent in greco,roman, celtic etc societies ‘back then’ including spartan society).
That said, I saw it in the cinema and have alrerady bought the DVD.
I saw this in the theaters and I thought it was a pretty good stylized popcorn flick. Not great but definitely good. I been meaning to get it on HD DVD but was waiting for the price to come down somewhat.
Good action, but the story line was extremely thin.
I agree with everybody else. The side stories and background stuff did nothing for me. I’d take Sin City over 300 any day.
As a bit of a history freak, I can not compliment this movie. Effects were good but they still did not do enough for me. The representation of persians as barbaric tyrans and slavers and spartans as “freedom fighter” is historicly totaly wrong, for crying out loud sparta was a military aristocracy, and the reason they had such a well trained army all the time is becouse they needed someone to keep thier slaves in their place (who rebeled all the time) and the slaves did all the work, making it possible for “free” men to train in the art of war all the time.
Ok that being said, still a good movie to have a socially acceptable reason to snack by.
The core of the Spartan army was pairs of soldiers
who trained together from childhood, fought together and were lovers.
Each would rather die than bring humiliation on the other.
Haven’t seen the film, but I trust it did justice to this.
No, somehow (rather predictably), that part got left out.
Fact is, somehow that part gets left out of a lot of history classes, too: this is the first I’ve heard of it.
(That doesn’t mean much; I’m no expert in that particular area of history.)
–James
Remember, it’s not a film based on a history lesson. It’s based on a graphic novel inspired by history. So it has no reason to be accurate in it’s portrayal of events or persons.
I was being ironic, of course.
Yeah, homosexuality was at the core of the Spartan military;
indeed, it has had a long involvement with extremely military
cultures, for obvious reasons. Youngish men on campaigns
together, training together, lots of powerful bonding
in life and death situations, etc. The Spartans actually
deliberately put it to work.
In Sparta women had property rights equal to those of men
and they received military training, though they didn’t
fight. I believe a good deal of military training was
done in the buff for both sexes.
Women weren’t subjected to certain laws to which
men were, e.g. it was illegal for men to be fat. It was
often said that the reason Spartan men were so willing
to die in combat was so that they wouldn’t have to
go back to Sparta.
There was a great hankering for things Spartan among the
aristocracy in Athens, largely because Sparta didn’t suffer
from democracy. As philosophers came from the aristocratic
classes, or were supported by them, Socrates and Plato
are often holding up Sparta as an example of what
a society should be.
The real reason Socrates was tried and executed was that his
students kept trying to overthrow
the democracy and his lover, Alcibiades, had betrayed
the Athenians to the Spartans. Because
there was a political amnesty at the time of his trial, the real
charge couldn’t be brought–except in the thinly veiled
guise of ‘corrupting the youth.’
Ironically philosophers were not
tolerated in Sparta, nor is there art
or poetry or plays or much music there–which Plato applauded.
He saw art as a sort of deception, and music tended
to arouse the young.
Ultimately Sparta sounds like a very unpleasant place,
but Spartans could fight. That was the meaning of their
lives, it seems.
Helen of Troy was a Spartan.
Hmm… Lesbos is just a hop, skip and a jump from Troy you know.