Author Topic: 300. (Read 4813 times)

twist · **Reply #45 on:** March 24, 2007, 22:19:53 PM

Re:300.

Reply #45 on: March 24, 2007, 22:19:53 PM

Saw it today!

It was much better than I expected! Seriously ace film

Sam · **Reply #46 on:** March 24, 2007, 23:00:04 PM

300.

Reply #46 on: March 24, 2007, 23:00:04 PM

Its alright guys, but youre going on as if youve just seen Star Wars for the first time.

Goblin · **Reply #47 on:** March 25, 2007, 09:58:06 AM

300.

Reply #47 on: March 25, 2007, 09:58:06 AM

It rocked. Im not going to pretend it was a masterpiece of film making, but it was a glorius audio and visual treat, with some wonderfully comic moments

***SPOILER***
(just after the first battle where they are wandering around stabbing the survivors with spears)
***/SPOILER***

Well worth a watch in the cinema and I suspect the DVD release will be pretty good too.

So, lots of eye candy, terrific soundtrack, not much plot, pretty horrific dialogue but none the worse for that.

8/10

Cheers Beaker, cant believe I couldnt remember the NIN track, guess I dont listen to The Fragile enough

Cypher · **Reply #48 on:** March 25, 2007, 23:56:52 PM

Re:300.

Reply #48 on: March 25, 2007, 23:56:52 PM

It was better than I was expecting.

Chuck Norris · **Reply #49 on:** March 26, 2007, 09:05:06 AM

Re:300.

Reply #49 on: March 26, 2007, 09:05:06 AM

I didnt like it.

matt5cott · **Reply #50 on:** March 26, 2007, 10:37:46 AM

Re:300.

Reply #50 on: March 26, 2007, 10:37:46 AM

I went to see this on premier last night as we had tickets from Christmas that will expire soon.

Dogsh*t, Im surprised that there are so many glowing reviews in this thread.

I would happily never see that again, it was boring, unoriginal and dragged its heels to two hours long, the end really could not come quick enough for me.

The action scenes arent even action, I found them all unimpressive, if you get your jollies to unrealistic CGI then I suppose you might like this film. Its nice how so many people are slaughtered, blood spraying everywhere, and yet everyoneâ€™s so clean afterwards, reminds me of the tar pit scene in true lies.

I suppose it was nice to see an attractive womanâ€™s breasts, but its a big shame about the other 1 hour and 55 minutes.

Clock'd 0Ne · **Reply #51 on:** March 26, 2007, 12:12:42 PM

Re:300.

Reply #51 on: March 26, 2007, 12:12:42 PM

Im quite surprised you thought it was so awful. The film was always going to be a CGI fest I knew, so I dont discount it for that. Maybe Ill think less of it on a repeat viewing.

Serious · **Reply #52 on:** March 26, 2007, 13:56:18 PM

Re:300.

Reply #52 on: March 26, 2007, 13:56:18 PM

LotR was also a cgi fest, but it was a believable one in its context.

Had this been properly portrayed as a similar piece of fiction then it might be OK. Unfortunately it wasnt.

Quixoticish · **Reply #53 on:** March 26, 2007, 14:06:26 PM

Re:300.

Reply #53 on: March 26, 2007, 14:06:26 PM

Quote

LotR was also a cgi fest, but it was a believable one in its context.

Using Lord of the Rings and believable in the same sentence doesnt really add weight to your argument Serious.

Serious · **Reply #54 on:** March 26, 2007, 14:12:45 PM

Re:300.

Reply #54 on: March 26, 2007, 14:12:45 PM

Quote from: Chris H

Quote
LotR was also a cgi fest, but it was a believable one in its context.

Using Lord of the Rings and believable in the same sentence doesnt really add weight to your argument Serious.

It actually does, I used the same argument Clockd did. If its weak for LotR then its non-existant for 300

Clock'd 0Ne · **Reply #55 on:** March 26, 2007, 15:02:03 PM

Re:300.

Reply #55 on: March 26, 2007, 15:02:03 PM

I still dont understand where this idea has come from that this was presented as a factual account, it clearly wasnt and was supposed to be heavily styled in this way, "a glorius audio and visual treat" as Goblin put it.

Serious · **Reply #56 on:** March 26, 2007, 15:11:05 PM

Re:300.

Reply #56 on: March 26, 2007, 15:11:05 PM

It should be described as almost totally fictitious and visually overdone which I doubt they would ever do. Their aim is to get bums on seats to watch the thing, not be factually accurate in any way.

Should we be overdoing historical events in this way? Only providing that its obvious that it is a fictitious rendering. It should be made clear and obvious that this is the case, otherwise idiots believe it, like the Davinci code rot.

In this case the real event is heroic enough without the silicone breast implants and fake muscles grafted onto it.

Nos · **Reply #57 on:** March 26, 2007, 15:16:33 PM

Re:300.

Reply #57 on: March 26, 2007, 15:16:33 PM

Quote from: Serious

It should be described as almost totally fictitious and visually overdone which I doubt they would ever do. Their aim is to get bums on seats to watch the thing, not be factually accurate in any way.

Should we be overdoing historical events in this way? Only providing that its obvious that it is a fictitious rendering. It should be made clear and obvious that this is the case, otherwise idiots believe it, like the Davinci code rot.

It was described as based on Frank Millers graphic novel 300. It was not at any point billed as a factual and accurate rendition of events at Thermopylae.

So there :mrgreen:

Cypher · **Reply #58 on:** March 26, 2007, 18:08:31 PM

Re:300.

Reply #58 on: March 26, 2007, 18:08:31 PM

Quote from: matt5cott

I suppose it was nice to see an attractive womanâ€™s breasts, but its a big shame about the other 1 hour and 55 minutes.

Strange I didnt notice she had any. Presuming you mean the oracle.

Clock'd 0Ne · **Reply #59 on:** March 26, 2007, 18:40:54 PM

Re:300.

Reply #59 on: March 26, 2007, 18:40:54 PM

There was the sex scene as well he could be referring too.

I already pointed out its based on the graphic novel too Nos, it seems to have falled on deaf ears :mrgreen:

News:

Author Topic: 300. (Read 4813 times)