First review of "300"


Recommended Posts

I kinda agree with you R-Flex.

I loved it, my jaw dropped at parts but the story was too minor. I was expecting an epic like Gladiator but it was one battle (which I know the movie is about) at one place. I took my girlfriend and she usually doesn't like violent movies like this but she liked it too.

I think the movie is more art than meaningful. Go see it. Buy it.

EDIT: btw, the theatre was eeeeeeeempty. i got there later than i'd usually go (30 min till showtime) and I thought for sure i'd have to sit upfront. I get in and there were literally 5 people. When the show ended I saw about 20 people leaving.

I may have enjoyed it more if it was packed.

Edited by Ashiaveli
EDIT: btw, the theatre was eeeeeeeempty. i got there later than i'd usually go (30 min till showtime) and I thought for sure i'd have to sit upfront. I get in and there were literally 5 people. When the show ended I saw about 20 people leaving.

The theatre I went to was pretty packed. It is the first time in probably over a year that I've been to a theatre that was completely packed.

Absolutely brilliant film :yes:

I must say, the most beautiful scene throughout the entire film is the scene with the Oracle. Not just because she's beautiful and naked, but the directing of that scene, the slow motion, the coloring that the filmmakers decided to use. Everything fit so perfectly in that scene and was just absolutely beautiful.

8/10 Stars

I am in the minority with this opinion but I definitely did not think that this movie delivered. I wasn?t expecting historical accuracy or anything like that, what I was expecting was entertaining action and awesome visuals. Neither of those aspects of the film greatly impressed me. Overall I just didn?t see anything about this film that made it stand out as above average film. I won?t say I was bored, but I wasn?t greatly entertained either.

Nothing about the action in the film really stood out to me. It didn?t seem any different than anything I have seen a hundred times before. Well there was one thing that made it different than other movies in the same vein, the overuse of slow motion. I can understand why it was used most of the time, the battle scenes moved quickly so they needed to be slowed down so the audience could see what was going on. However, it was done way too much and several times it wasn?t even during fast moving action sequences. In some places it just seemed as if the slow motion was used for no other reason than it looked cool, but after being used so much it stops looking cool.

I also was not overly impressed by the visuals of the film. This definitely did not have the great visuals that I would have expected from something based on a Frank Miller work. Overall I was just unimpressed with the visual look of the film. Washing out the color to make everything have that grainy, reddish tint does not automatically make it look good. Now I haven?t read the graphic novel so I don?t know how closely Zack Snyder followed Frank Miller?s visuals but it is quite possible that it looked a lot better on paper than it did on the screen. It makes me wonder what the film would have been like had Frank Miller actually directed it instead of Zack Snyder.

One other kind of nitpicky thing that I didn?t like was Xerxes. I had no problem with the character himself, but that ridiculous overdubbed voice they used for him was horrible. I know he saw himself as a God and that the deep voice used for him was part of that but it really just seemed silly to me. And while I am on the subject of voices, I thought for the most part that the voice over narration was unnecessary. I understand that it was done because the one character is actually telling the story of what happened but I think they could have cut it back a lot or removed it entirely. It wasn?t at all necessary.

I?m not exactly sure how Zack Snyder did it but he actually managed to take one of the greatest battles in the history of man-kind and make it kind of dull. Then again he also made zombies dull, but that is another review. Overall I thought this was a fairly average film with a lot of potential to be very much more than that. I?m not sorry I saw it but I probably won?t be seeing it again.

Absolutely brilliant film :yes:

I must say, the most beautiful scene throughout the entire film is the scene with the Oracle. Not just because she's beautiful and naked, but the directing of that scene, the slow motion, the coloring that the filmmakers decided to use. Everything fit so perfectly in that scene and was just absolutely beautiful.

8/10 Stars

Saw it last night....absolutely agree, that scene was incredible.

I wish I had seen it in an IMAX theater, but even so, I thought it was stunning, great movie.

Bottom line: good movie, but not the masterpiece many make it out to be. As others have said, the focus on one battle through the entire thing just did not work. It felt claustrophobic; you want to see something other than the same cliff, small field, and wall of rock, but you don't... not for an hour and a half.

It just wasn't as epic as it should have been. Sure, there were thousands and thousands of Persians- overhead shots establish that. But why then does each wave of the battle only follow one or two Spartans? You know there's a lot going on... there's just not a lot going on on-screen.

The ending was also a huge let down. It was worse than rushed, bordering on nonexistent. And if you're wondering about emotional impact, that was absent as well. The acting wasn't necessarily bad, but the leads aren't given much more to do than yell and flex their pecs :/

I say three and a half stars out of five. Pretty good, but not great.

The Spiderman 3 trailer beforehand, however, is more than worth the price of admission.

Just got back from watching this movie and all I can say is ... "WOW". Absolutely ingenius directing, great acting, spectacular effects, superb camera work. Simply breathtaking. All that, and I went in with really high expectations because of all the great things that I had heard. Stunning. I normally don't like to see too many movies more than once, but I can't wait to go see this movie again (while it's still in theaters), it is that good of a movie. :drool:

It's funny how one person's opinion of the movie can differ so much from another's. That's why, in my opinion, talking about movies is so enjoyable.

I already posted my opinion of the movie but I agree, IMAX is the only way to see 300. It brought so much more to the movie, especially considering the wide, panoramic shots.

I don't know, I just am not sure how better the film could have been done. Maybe it's because I went into the movie not expecting something on the level of 'Gladiator'. It was everything I thought it would be.

Best review I've seen so far...

I just saw a movie that?ll give your eyes boners, make your balls scream and make you poop DVD copies of THE TRANSPORTER. It?s called 300. I don?t know what the title has to do with the movie, but they could?ve called it KITTENS MAKING CANDLES and it?d still rule.

It?s about these 300 Greek dudes who stomp the sugar-coated **** out of like a million other dudes. I have a feeling that a lot of high school sports coaches are going to show this film to their teams before they play. Also, gay dudes and divorced women are going to use screen captures for computer wallpaper.

The movie takes place about a million years ago, and it?s sort of like a prequel to SIN CITY. Except way less guns and cars but twice as much skull splitting. If you watch this movie and go into a Taco Bell, and say to the cashier, ?I need some extra sauce packets? guess what? You?re getting twenty sauce packets because your face will punch him in the brain.

I can?t spoil the plot because THANK GOD THERE ISN?T ONE. Just ass kicking that kicks ass that, while said ass is getting kicked, is kicking yet more ass that?s hitting someone?s balls with a hammer made of ice but the ice is frozen whiskey.

TWO COOL THINGS ABOUT THE MOVIE AND ONE THING I DIDN?T LIKE:

COOL THING ONE:

HEAVY METAL DURING BATTLE SCENES

Who gives a **** if the music isn?t historically correct? LORD OF THE RINGS could?ve used some Journey. This movie has that chu-CHUNG kind of metal that you hear in your head when your shift supervisor at Wetzel?s Pretzel is telling you that you?ll have to stay for clean up and you wish you had a sock filled with quarters in your hand.

COOL THING TWO:

FOES, MINI-BOSSES AND A BIG BOSS

Basically, the Greek dudes are fighting these Persian dudes, but the director, who must have a dick made of three machine guns, does it all like a video game. The Greeks fight every death metal video from the last ten years. There?s wave after wave of giants, freaks, ninjas, mutants, wizards, and a hunchback who looks like he?s got Rosie O?Donnell on his back.

Would I have been happy if Dom DeLuise from HISTORY OF THE WORLD, PART I had shown up? Maybe, but this movie more than makes up for that glaring oversight.

NOT SO GOOD THING:

DUDE NUDITY (?DUDE-ITY?)

These are Greek times, when there were a lot of naked women around. And there are some naked women in this film, but almost every naked woman scene has a muscular dude giving the screen an ass picnic. Dude-ity is something directors put in their movies so people will think they?re serious, I guess, and not just throwing in naked hotties.

Any directors reading this ? IT?S OKAY TO JUST THROW IN NAKED HOTTIES.

Can?t someone make a movie about naked Amazons and call it PAUSE BUTTON?

My final analysis is 300 the most ass-ruling movie I?ve seen this year, and will probably be the King of 2007 unless someone makes a movie where a pair of sentient boobs fights a werewolf.

Absolutely brilliant film :yes:

I must say, the most beautiful scene throughout the entire film is the scene with the Oracle. Not just because she's beautiful and naked, but the directing of that scene, the slow motion, the coloring that the filmmakers decided to use. Everything fit so perfectly in that scene and was just absolutely beautiful.

8/10 Stars

ok that scene was great, and well done, but served absolutely no point in the movie, like it wasn't needed in anyway, they could have gone up to the girl and been like "what do you think?" and she replies and thats it, but noooo she dances around naked for no reason for 2 minutes than whispers what everyone already knew. even if the oracle was said to have danced you can be sure it wasn't like that haha.

pointless. on a lighter note im all for nude women dancing around for no reason, but in a movie like this it left me thinking "wtf was that for"

ok that scene was great, and well done, but served absolutely no point in the movie, like it wasn't needed in anyway, they could have gone up to the girl and been like "what do you think?" and she replies and thats it, but noooo she dances around naked for no reason for 2 minutes than whispers what everyone already knew. even if the oracle was said to have danced you can be sure it wasn't like that haha.

pointless. on a lighter note im all for nude women dancing around for no reason, but in a movie like this it left me thinking "wtf was that for"

While she was nude, you don't see much. A little bit of her breast and the implication of more is really it. Other than that, the darkness of the room and the silk cloth rapped around her kept the audience from seeing much of anything. And we really don't know what she did back then, who knows if what we know is accurate? The scene was tranquil, IMO. I hate nudity in most movies I watch, I feel that nudity is distracting and takes away from the story, but in this scene it didn't force me to look at it, it was part of the scene, it was beautiful. It made the scene complete, they could have taken it out, but I don't think the scene would have been as beautiful as it was with it, the same goes for the blue coloring, the blue-gray smoke, etc. This scene had all the elements of one of the greatest scenes captured in a movie for years. I absolutely loved it and never thought once that it didn't belong or question why it was there. It felt like it fit.

Generally the prophet at the Oracle, was a woman who woudl inhale vapours that caused her to hallucinate, then she would say a bunch of **** and the priests there would translate. I really liked that part of the movie as well. (Y)(Y)

The way her face looked when she was doing that, it almost seemed like it was shot underwater behind a green screen.

Good scene, Good boobies, And she must have been on some good drugs. :laugh:

There was an article in wired about 300, they said the oracle scene was shot underwater.

just saw this in the UK, special previews or something both the screens were fully booked. Wow, what an awesome movie!

Still wondering where

he got that apple from, and why the quasimodo guy wanted a wizard hat, but yeh lol.

Also, who threw the spear at the beginning into that front dudes chest?

And, am i right in thinking that at the end, he threw the spear at Xerxes but missed on purpose to show he isnt a god? and that he bleeds, or was it just unlucky that he missed?

either way

a really great film, shame how it ended, although i did kinda expect that to happen, shame they didnt show the huge battle at the end.

Also, gotta love the killing of people with the shield =D.

Will definitley get this on DVD.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
    • I’m still using an Xbox One S, so time for an upgrade to play this but as much as I hate Sony, I think I’ll get the ps5 pro
    • I bought this game. Played it for an hour, and then got a refund from Steam. Not a fun game at all.
    • Nothing Ear buds with active noise cancellation are at their lowest price ever with 51% off by Fiza Ali Amazon is currently offering the Nothing Ear wireless earbuds at their lowest price ever with 51% off limited prime deal. The earbuds feature an 11mm dynamic drivers with a ceramic diaphragm, and support high-resolution audio codecs including AAC, SBC, LDAC, and LHDC 5.0. They support active noise cancellation of up to 45dB across a frequency range of up to 5000Hz, and include a smart ANC algorithm, adaptive noise cancellation, and a transparency mode that allows surrounding sounds to be heard when needed. Connectivity is provided via Bluetooth 5.3, with support for multiple profiles including HFP, A2DP, AVRCP, and others. The earbuds also support dual connection, allowing them to be paired with two devices at the same time. Additional features include IP54 water and dust resistance for the earbuds and IP55 for the charging case, in-ear detection, pinch controls, low-latency mode, Google Fast Pair, Microsoft Swift Pair, and a three-microphone system per earbud for clearer voice calls. The Nothing X app, available on Android and iOS, provides access to custom EQ settings, bass enhancement, personal sound profiles, ear tip fit testing, firmware updates, customisable controls, dual-device management, and a find-my-earbuds feature. In terms of battery performance, each earbud has a 46mAh battery and the charging case has a 500mAh capacity. With active noise cancellation (ANC) turned off, the earbuds should offer up to 8.5 hours of playback on a single charge and up to 40.5 hours in total with the charging case. With ANC enabled, playback should last up to 5.2 hours on the earbuds and up to 24 hours with the case. For calls, talk time should reach up to 5 hours on the earbuds and 23 hours with the case when ANC is off, while ANC on should provide up to 4 hours on the earbuds and 18 hours with the case. Finally, fast charging should deliver up to 10 hours of playback from 10 minutes of charging when ANC is disabled. Nothing Ear Wireless Earbuds Bluetooth: $73.15 (Amazon US) - 51% off Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      572
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!