300

The movie doesn't open in theaters until March 3rd.

In the UK we have to wait til 23rd of March!!

Elephants? At Thermopylae? Oh brother!

I'm waiting for the sequel - 301

This movie was done by the same people who came up with Sin City, I believe. I loved the stylized way they did that movie, and this one looks like it's the same kind of deal. Looks cool.

Is that 301 elephants under the sea?

Maybe 301 Greek historians turning over in their grave.

Agreed, I think it's kind of sad movies like 300 get more praise than true historical movies (though I guess history is boring for a lot of people) Alexander is a good example of a historically accurate film. The revisited version of the movie is just incredible as well. 300 does look like a nice technical accomplishment though and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing it (I got free movie passes when I bought Alexander Revisited)

Stone followed the history outlined in Plutarch's "Life of Alexander," but the characterizations, most notably Alexander himself, were so wacky and confused that I could not get emotionally involved with the movie. I'm afraid historical accuracy isn't the only criteria for a good movie. It has to have dramatic coherence.

Article from Time magazine this week:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1595241,00.html

yeah and hand grenades too, a little poetic license with Herodotus (who also knew quite a bit about poetic license himself).

Oh, for Richard Egan and "The 300 Spartans."

At least "Troy" stuck to Homer for the most part.

lets remember what Plutarch was doing with "Lives," comparing Greeks with Romans by character and actions and by putting comparable lives side by side showed through contrast why they were men to be considered "great" (or not so great)... (Alexander was compared to Julius Cesaer)

ps I just finished Vol 2 of Lives about a week ago, but my favorite was that Nixonesque, Alcibiades... who had he known what Alcibiades would do to Athens, would have been strangled by Pericles in his crib.

Oh fer cryin' out loud!

And I suppose that it will just be 300 Spartans against the might of the Persian empire -- the 700 Thespians (no, not actors -- soldiers from Thespiae) who stuck with the Spartans at Thermopylae until the very end will be totally ignored.

(Well, 700 pissed off Lesbians having their period at the same time might actually be damned tough to face, extrapolating from the bad craziness from my ex- under estrus.)

The history of the battle described from Herodotus states that although the Persians had much greater numbers, the troops were generally equipped with only the traditional battle garb of their respective nation. All the Greeks, even the non-Spartans were heavily armored, weaponed and trained citizen-hoplites, the best, most magnificent soldiers of the age fighting not as soldier-slaves at their king's command, but their homeland and freedom itself. Herodotus describes leevees equipped with pointed wooden sticks, wicker shields and animal skin for armor. It would be like a battalion of US Marines with body armor going against street gangs, albeit in the hundreds of thousands. Only Xeroxes "Immortals" had comparable weaponry or training, but never had they faced foes who had so much practice in killing, or so much to lose. One needs to recall that the Greeks had been fighting amongst themselves in hoplite garb for decades and knew all the tactics that would make Alexander ruler of Asia 170 year later.

The Battle of Marathon really showed what the Greek hoplites could do to a slave army equipped with wooden spears. There, the Persians lost tens of thousands with the Greeks according to Herodotus losing 201. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Marathon...

You could almost hear the voice of Howard Cosell ..." Down goes Persia, Down goes Persia!"

Actually, the early '60s film "The 300 Spartans" fairly well adheres to Herodotus' description at Thermopylae and the film shows the Greek weaponry, and armor advantage in good detail.

Watch it first before viewing "The 300"

The reviews:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/300/

I have to say that the movie was B E A U T I F U L .

And I have never seen so many beautiful half naked men in my life. This is one of the first movies that I have seen where the MEN were 1/2 dressed and sexy most of the time and not the women.

On that note...


I call 300 " A heavy metal music video with lots of fighting, beautiful screen shots and tons of blood. No plot, so substitute that with some skin for good measure and you have 300"

This movie is quite the serious piece of eye candy.

Eye candy being beautiful land scapes.

Fabulous outfits.

Dramatic fight scenes sprinkled with thunderous music.

Beautiful people with forceful words offer little substance compared to the sheer beauty of this film.

As I said, there is no plot.
I mean, it is based on a comic book.. so you cant expect too much.. .

But what plot there is goes something like this :

Spartans get mad, seek religious advice
300 Spartans go to war, against religious advice
300 Spartans kill ALOT of people...
People attack Spartans again
A few less then 300 Spartans kill again
Undead people attack
Spartans kill again
-Insert goofball human here who thinks he is a God -
Spartans try to kill him
Don't succeed.
End of story

Kill, try to kill, then kill some more. Simple plot.
Great scenes, good acting.

But if you truly think you want to see this movie please Don't waste your time and rent it.
You lose the eye candy completely and you will be left with a bare bones rather simple plot. Since this movie was produced simply FOR eye candy, do give it that it deserves and see it on the big screen. HA!
No home TV system can carry this movie as it should be carried.


Well worth the visual enjoyment, but don't expect the plot to to truly move you farther then the impressive cinematography will.

This is a visually stunning movie, absolutely stunning. It sets the bar as to what CGI can accomplish.

Frank Miller's graphic novel of the same title, upon which the movie is based, was inspired by the 1962 movie 300 Spartans, which he had seen as a child. Zach Snyder did a good job of capturing the feel of Miller's novel. It's highly stylized aesthetic kind of parallels the ancient Greeks' own love of stylized beauty:

(Poseidon Soter at Artemisium [c. 575 B.C])

I think the ancient Greeks would have been mostly pleased by this movie's aesthetic.

The most outlandish liberty taken was with the representation of king Xerxes, taking him from looking something like this:

(Relief of an Achaemenid king, possibly Xerxes or Darius, on the wall of Persepolis Palace)

to a Body Modification, BDSM sex-club freak:

(Xerxes in 300)

It makes you want to giggle. But then again, most sandals & swords flicks have a rather high cheese factor. 300's inspirational story raises it above its sea of cheese.

Its out this week in the UK, cant wait to see it.
Im more into 'meaty' films rather than rom coms, I hope this one doesnt dissapoint.

I think some of the people in the audience probally hated me for about 40 seconds or so when king "XerXes" came on the screen.

I just could not help myself.

He looks SOOOOO gay. And he was supposed to be terrifying...

but ... SOOO gay..

I did love it though.

And I think they did JUST THAT with him so that you as the viewer could completely grasp, with just a simple look that he was just too full of himself, and not truly a god.
Since there was no real character development beyond title and ability, you HAD to rely on looks almost completely.

By quick glance , with the words " I am a god" coming out of his mouth you know - Arrogant, NOT a god, power hungry- are all words that will describe him.
And do.