data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ad2c5/ad2c53fb3d5e740337368b7737a22a667126023b" alt=""
I've just watched
300 in HD.
No doubt, it's a great looking film. Very abstract, hardly anything but the humans are filmed, most of it is done in the computer, and well.
But I think that we should well remember that this is not a great movie. A good movie, perhaps, but it's basically violence porn. Sure, slick and well produced violence porn, but still.
Frank Miller (who wrote the comic that the film is based on) says that "there was no way of telling the story of 300 without it being amazingly brutal." Clearly he is trying to justify the dozens and dozens of
very graphic beheadings and skewerings in the movie. But really, is this not why he chose this story? Quick, mention a Frank Miller story without violent deaths in it.
I'm not saying that this a wrong or that this kind of film "corrupts our children". I'm just saying keep a perspective about what kind of film it is. You won't learn much history from this film (as they freely admit), and it's not a great drama or an intricate story. Basically what it has going for it is two thing: eye candy (including a few titties, which I'm all for), and lots and lots of hard violence. I think it's indicative of how important the violence is to the movie that every skewering is accompanied by CG blood flying towards the camera. Even the titles after the movie have blood flying everywhere.
Update: it seems I am not having any original thought here; try googling
"frank miller" "violence porn" 300I like this
review.
"For a movie that has such intense, and cartoony (not to mention borderline ridiculous) gore the film is far too self-serious." It's true. The film tries to make every single scene and line of dialogue bombastic and dramatic, and it's just silly.
Joe sez:
The movie had some of the same flaws as Steven Pressfield's novels about the Spartans, in that it gave them a nobility that they lacked in reality. I mean, here we have a warrior society that existed only because they had enslaved an entire people, whom they were encouraged to hunt for sport.Yes. I love that they regarded other peoples as "barbarians", when they had one of the most barbaric cultures ever.
The whole thing is bad exploitation. What's the good kind? Something like Kill Bill or Jackie Brown which are inspired by exploitation films and have fun with it. They're partly self-parody.Indeed.
300, however, I found to be grotesque. It is intended to appeal to that kind of guy (the violence), and the bodies of the men are there to keep the ladies interested. You wouldn't get that if it they were covered in armour.And the gays! Lots of hot male bodies, has to be said.
Still, it is a lot better than Beowulf, which looks like a piece of crap.I agree, what I've seen looks like a video game. Very disappointing, since it's a Neal Gaiman story.
The 300 film and documentaries make like the Spartans were fighting for democracy. Which is BS. There was zero democracy about Sparta.
Pascal says:
... from what I know, democracy was invented by Athens, the sworn rival city of Sparta. And eventually, in spite of all that tuff attitude of the Spartans (who gave the weak-looking of their newborns to the wolves!), Athens won the conflict. On the battlefield...