movie: 300
[apr 16 2007, 20:02]
well... how to start this review...
this is a tough movie to assess. it's got something, it really does, it has one thing: looks. the movie looks absolutely amazing. every single blade of grass is perfect, every wrinkle in the faces of the (pretty weird) creatures is perfect, every splatter of blood that hits the screen is perfect... but is that enough for a good movie? in a lot of people's opinion, it is. in my opinion, it isn't.
there was just too much wrong with the movie. every single sentence in that movie ended with a quotation mark, half of the scenes were some sort of pep talk before a battle, the rest of the scenes were the battles and a strange rest (don't ask me where that was coming from) was pointless scenes back in sparta.
oh, the story... the persians are conquering the world, want to annex sparta as well, sparta's king leonidas refuses, doesn't get the gods' blessing to start a war, picks up three hundred men (or two hundred and ninety nine? who knows), holds up wave after wave of persian attacks, ultimately dies in battle which makes the spartian (or spartan or spartatian or... whatever) senate agree to sending the rest of the troops...
that sounds like much but it really isn't. no, really.
it was as if the movie was screaming at the audience "hey, look at me, look at me, i'm so gorgeous, can you see that? hey, you're not looking". that worked great for sin city because it... well, because it had something to back the looks up. it had characters, it had story, it was fun to watch.
300 wasn't, most of the time. the battle scenes were absolutely amazing to watch, sure, but... argh.
damn. another movie with a lot of potential that lets it go to waste. damn.
if you want to see it, go now while it's still in your local movie theater because watching that thing on dvd is surely a lot worse.
charon
this is a tough movie to assess. it's got something, it really does, it has one thing: looks. the movie looks absolutely amazing. every single blade of grass is perfect, every wrinkle in the faces of the (pretty weird) creatures is perfect, every splatter of blood that hits the screen is perfect... but is that enough for a good movie? in a lot of people's opinion, it is. in my opinion, it isn't.
there was just too much wrong with the movie. every single sentence in that movie ended with a quotation mark, half of the scenes were some sort of pep talk before a battle, the rest of the scenes were the battles and a strange rest (don't ask me where that was coming from) was pointless scenes back in sparta.
oh, the story... the persians are conquering the world, want to annex sparta as well, sparta's king leonidas refuses, doesn't get the gods' blessing to start a war, picks up three hundred men (or two hundred and ninety nine? who knows), holds up wave after wave of persian attacks, ultimately dies in battle which makes the spartian (or spartan or spartatian or... whatever) senate agree to sending the rest of the troops...
that sounds like much but it really isn't. no, really.
it was as if the movie was screaming at the audience "hey, look at me, look at me, i'm so gorgeous, can you see that? hey, you're not looking". that worked great for sin city because it... well, because it had something to back the looks up. it had characters, it had story, it was fun to watch.
300 wasn't, most of the time. the battle scenes were absolutely amazing to watch, sure, but... argh.
damn. another movie with a lot of potential that lets it go to waste. damn.
if you want to see it, go now while it's still in your local movie theater because watching that thing on dvd is surely a lot worse.
charon