PDA

View Full Version : Weekend Box Office Charts


Pigeon
03-19-2007, 04:31 PM
Once again 300 slays the competition (overused pun!)

1 - 300 - $31,185,000
2 - Wild Hogs - $18,825,000
3 - Premonition - $18,000,000
4 - Dead Silence - $7,771,000
5 - I Think I love My Wife - $5,715,000
6 - Bridge to Terabithia - $5,141,000
7 - Ghost Rider - $4,000,000
8 - Zodiac - $3,073,000
9 - Norbit - $2,722,000
10 - Music and Lyrics - $2,200,000
11 - Amazing Grace - $2,049,000
12 - The Number 23 - $1,750,000
84 - Borat - $296

Eric_T_Cheng
03-19-2007, 06:02 PM
There's already talk of a 300 "sequel (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/070318e.php)."

Of course a direct sequel is out of the question, but now Variety reports that Frank Miller is hard at work prepping a follow-up to "300" based on another mythic tale from Greek history.

Which one though? Miller won't divulge details, and in any case is busy prepping to helm the "Sin City" sequel (due to begin filming inn June), an adaptation of Will Eisner's "The Spirit" and has comic commitments.

eth3rton
03-19-2007, 06:03 PM
There's already talk of a 300 "sequel (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/070318e.php)."

My dear God....Pleeeeeeeease be true..!!

Sandman
03-19-2007, 06:04 PM
Why are that many people going to see Wild Hogs? It boggles the mind. Also, Premonition looks ok, but only as a rental.

phenom1223
03-19-2007, 06:04 PM
Another battle in history filmed in the same style and such could be cool. Just as long as they cut out some of the slow motion. I think thats the biggest problem I had with 300, that it had way too much slow motion. Still a great movie though.

GrinR
03-19-2007, 06:05 PM
Whatever it might be, it won't be as good. Zack Snyder was the breath of life for that movie - without him it would have been Sin City all over again.

mkelehan
03-19-2007, 06:28 PM
Once again 300 slays the competition (overused pun!)
Nowhere near as overused as "CBS gets great 'Numb3rs' Friday."

camberiu
03-19-2007, 06:29 PM
300 was an amazing looking movie with a God awful script. The lines were just....painful. It was almost as if the dialogs and speeches were written by Donald Rumsfeld himself. I know that 9/11 really messed with Frank Miller and I know how strongly he feels about Arabs and so on....But the dialogs were just painful to listen to.

Tyrant
03-19-2007, 06:31 PM
I wonder who would still go to the theatres to view Borat when the price of admission almost covers that of the DVD.

GrinR
03-19-2007, 06:33 PM
300 was an amazing looking movie with a God awful script. The lines were just....painful. It was almost as if the dialogs and speeches were written by Donald Rumsfeld himself. I know that 9/11 really messed with Frank Miller and I know how strongly he feels about Arabs and so on....But the dialogs were just painful to listen to.

The lines that were straight from recorded history, or the ones Miller wrote in 1998?

walkstheplanes
03-19-2007, 06:35 PM
Another battle in history filmed in the same style and such could be cool. Just as long as they cut out some of the slow motion. I think thats the biggest problem I had with 300, that it had way too much slow motion. Still a great movie though.

Personally, I loved the slow motion -- it's really put to light the detail in the choreography and ultra violence.
The worst parts of the movie were the parts that weren't in the original graphic novel, in all honesty (I'm not comic snob, just being flat out honest). Though I've heard arguments that they were necessary for American audiences' need for a "deeper" plot. Regardless I loved 300, and will probably watch it again. Also, I forgot where we are dining tonight...

LilAbner
03-19-2007, 06:42 PM
84 - Borat - $296

WTF? This is out on DVD now! I know $296 nationwide isn't a lot, but still....

camberiu
03-19-2007, 06:43 PM
The lines that were straight from recorded history, or the ones Miller wrote in 1998?

A few lines from recorded history, such as "we will fight on the shade", but most lines were from either Frank Miller or the screen writer. I did not read the comic book, so I do not know if the lines were taken from the graphic novel verbatim, but they were cheesy as hell. Sometimes it felt almost like I was watching a US Marine Corps commercial .

pomeroy
03-19-2007, 06:44 PM
Personally, I loved the slow motion -- it's really put to light the detail in the choreography and ultra violence.
The worst parts of the movie were the parts that weren't in the original graphic novel, in all honesty (I'm not comic snob, just being flat out honest). Though I've heard arguments that they were necessary for American audiences' need for a "deeper" plot. Regardless I loved 300, and will probably watch it again. Also, I forgot where we are dining tonight...

TONIGHT. WE DINE. IN HELL!

Yep.

phenom1223
03-19-2007, 06:49 PM
TONIGHT. WE DINE. IN HELL!

Yep.


Hell probably throws a mean BBQ.

GrinR
03-19-2007, 07:08 PM
A few lines from recorded history, such as "we will fight on the shade", but most lines were from either Frank Miller or the screen writer. I did not read the comic book, so I do not know if the lines were taken from the graphic novel verbatim, but they were cheesy as hell. Sometimes it felt almost like I was watching a US Marine Corps commercial .

Wow. You didn't like the movie because of things you imagined that had nothing to do with reality. In addition, you are put off by the very sight of martial glory - nevermind the actual historical glory.

I bet you loved V for Vendetta, right?

Basalisk
03-19-2007, 07:09 PM
300 was an amazing looking movie with a God awful script. The lines were just....painful. It was almost as if the dialogs and speeches were written by Donald Rumsfeld himself. I know that 9/11 really messed with Frank Miller and I know how strongly he feels about Arabs and so on....But the dialogs were just painful to listen to.


The lines were actually taken from the historical records. Herodotus a historian at the battle recorded phrases used in the conflict and these records have survived. The events of the battle are actually well recorded. In fact Spartans were famous for having a Laconic (the province which the city of Sparta resides) form of speech. Laconic speech is an economical form of speech which use a short phrase to disarm a long speech. It is historically accurate in that regard.

Freak705
03-19-2007, 07:12 PM
I really didn't care about the dialogue at all. I went in expecting gore, I got plenty, I was happy. End of story. Definitely going to see it again. And for my 2 cents worth I thought the slow motion was badass.

Loganrapp
03-19-2007, 07:12 PM
The lines didn't bother me, it was the delivery sometimes.

Codicier
03-19-2007, 07:15 PM
Wow. You didn't like the movie because of things you imagined that had nothing to do with reality. In addition, you are put off by the very sight of martial glory - nevermind the actual historical glory.

I bet you loved V for Vendetta, right?

GrinR is great.

bryan
03-19-2007, 07:19 PM
The movie is all about archetypes, and it makes no apologies for it. Of course the lines are gonna be cheesy. *rolls eyes*

camberiu
03-19-2007, 07:22 PM
The lines were actually taken from the historical records.

Source, please? I very much doubt that the Spartans at the time were making speeches about tyranny, freedom and reason back then. The concept of "freedom" back in Hellenic Greece of the time was VERY DIFFERENT of how we understand those words today. Yet, they were spoken during the movie as if directed to a 21st century American Audience. In the movie, they were talking about the Jeffersonian concept of Freedom and Liberty, something that simply did not exist at the time. Worse, they were talking about it on a cheesy Rush Limbaugh way. The Spartan society of the time relied HEAVILY in slavery and the spartan were particularly cruel and brutal towards their slaves (few lived more than 5 years under captivity). Yet the movie shows King Leonidas making a passionate (and corny) speech about an "age of freedom", and how the Greeks must defeat Tyranny that comes from the East. The only thing missing there was a picture of Osama Bin Laden as the devil from Persia.

bryan
03-19-2007, 07:26 PM
Oh boy does this have to been gone through again and again? First of all the movie was based on a graphic novel, which was heavily stylized. This is not a historical movie folks. It's a fiction loosely based on history.

jwbxx
03-19-2007, 07:28 PM
Source, please? I very much doubt that the Spartans at the time were making speeches about tyranny, freedom and reason back then. The concept of "freedom" back in Hellenic Greece of the time was VERY DIFFERENT of how we understand those words today. Yet, they were spoken during the movie as if directed to a 21st century American Audience. In the movie, they were talking about the Jeffersonian concept of Freedom and Liberty, something that simply did not exist at the time. Worse, they were talking about it on a cheesy Rush Limbaugh way. The Spartan society of the time relied HEAVILY in slavery and the spartan were particularly cruel and brutal towards their slaves (few lived more than 5 years under captivity). Yet the movie shows King Leonidas making a passionate (and corny) speech about an "age of freedom", and how the Greeks must defeat Tyranny that comes from the East. The only thing missing there was a picture of Osama Bin Laden as the devil from Persia.Rack him

And if the lines were taken from historical context I think he would have said "Tonight we dine in hades." I'm pretty sure they were polytheistic and believed in greek gods.

Anyways, why the fuck are we talking about the historical accuracy of this movie? I hate war like everyone else, and i just got back from the anti war rally in frisco, but I thought that damn movie was pretty fucking awesome.

Tentaro
03-19-2007, 07:31 PM
Hmm, the only movies I've seen on that list are The Host, Tears of the Black Tiger, Borat, and Pan's Labyrinth. 300 is playing at the Cinerama though, so I'll try to see it there before it leaves. That theater is fucking cool.

camberiu
03-19-2007, 07:34 PM
Oh boy does this have to been gone through again and again? First of all the movie was based on a graphic novel, which was heavily stylized. This is not a historical movie folks. It's a fiction loosely based on history.

That is fine Bryan. I truly do not have a problem with that. I LOVED Gladiator despite the fact that is is a fictional historic movie.
But 300 would have been a MUCH better movie without lines such as "freedom isn't free!" I mean, how cliche is that? Why did we have to get a Bush inauguration speech whenever Leonidas opened his mouth? It could have been a great fictional movie if they had dropped the corny lines.

GrinR
03-19-2007, 07:42 PM
That is fine Bryan. I truly do not have a problem with that. I LOVED Gladiator despite the fact that is is a fictional historic movie.
But 300 would have been a MUCH better movie without lines such as "freedom isn't free!" I mean, how cliche is that? Why did we have to get a Bush inauguration speech whenever Leonidas opened his mouth? It could have been a great fictional movie if they had dropped the corny lines.

Mutated fat man with chainsaws for arms: No problem.
Gay giant Xerxes with Bene Gesserit "voice": No problem.
Freakish mystics guarding floating oracle: No problem.
Voicing of core western values: ALERT ALERT PANTS SOAKED IN URINE!!!

kokyunage
03-19-2007, 07:48 PM
Mutated fat man with chainsaws for arms: No problem.
Gay giant Xerxes with Bene Gesserit "voice": No problem.
Freakish mystics guarding floating oracle: No problem.
Voicing of core western values: ALERT ALERT PANTS SOAKED IN URINE!!!

LOL. I generally disagree with GrinR but this is a great post. We need a post of the month award. I would nominate that in a heartbeat.

hund_
03-19-2007, 07:49 PM
Gladiator was ok but paled next to the better The Fall of the Roman Empire. http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0058085/

i like the 300[great graphics]but it was equally as cheesy in the dialogue department as the original 300 spartans.

camberiu
03-19-2007, 08:24 PM
Mutated fat man with chainsaws for arms: No problem.
Gay giant Xerxes with Bene Gesserit "voice": No problem.
Freakish mystics guarding floating oracle: No problem.
Voicing of core western values: ALERT ALERT PANTS SOAKED IN URINE!!!

I think this is an amazing description of how I feel about the movie. You nailed it. I probably would not have had a problem with the "voicing of core western values" either if it had been done in less childish "be all you can be" way. I know I am the minority here, but since we are talking about a movie in which 300 men stood against an army of 1 million, forgive my boldness for defending my point against an overwhelming majority.

TrackZero
03-19-2007, 09:10 PM
Why are that many people going to see Wild Hogs? It boggles the mind. Also, Premonition looks ok, but only as a rental.

Dads who like motorcycles (like mine), 'nuff said.

bryan
03-19-2007, 09:18 PM
I must agree that to some degree it was a corny, but it's a mythic type of movie. It's meant to be corny, it would help your enjoyment of it immensely if you could just accept that.

Devilturnip
03-19-2007, 09:20 PM
I know I am the minority here, but since we are talking about a movie in which 300 men stood against an army of 1 million, forgive my boldness for defending my point against an overwhelming majority.

Wow, die on the cross much lately?

300 was great for what it was. If you always let one little thing destroy your enjoyment, I'm guessing you don't really enjoy all that much.

EternalGamer
03-19-2007, 10:18 PM
Mutated fat man with chainsaws for arms: No problem.
Gay giant Xerxes with Bene Gesserit "voice": No problem.
Freakish mystics guarding floating oracle: No problem.
Voicing of core western values: ALERT ALERT PANTS SOAKED IN URINE!!!

I agree that it is a silly thing to complain about. Heaven forbid the movie attempt to allude to a current conversation that might actually make it more relevant and less of just a throw away two hours of entertainment. However, I highly question your notion that "freedom isn't free" is a mantra indicative of "Western values." It is a mantra of a very specific political administration and one that doesn't do much to engage the actual debate of what should be done on the international scene.

Once again, however, my problem with the film had nothing to do with political perspective. My problem was that the film has the aesthetic sensibilities of an 8 year old boy. The opening the film is a new born baby being held over a mountain of skulls with fire in the background, already only one step away from "flaming skulls driving motorcycles. From there it only becomes more of a carnival ride and one that is every bit as pretentious as it is kitsch. If there was 5 minutes in it without slow motion and wind machines to blow people's hair around, it would be tough to locate. And all of this hyper stylizing along with the color palette just made the characters seem less like human beings and more like two dimensional videogame characters. For a movie supposedly singing the virtues of tough alpha males afraid of displaying any signs of would be feminine traits, it sure spends a lot of time posing in the mirror.

The actual storyline and dialogue seemed pretty well written for what it is. I'm pretty convinced it is Zack Snyder who is responsible for what went wrong. In comparison, Braveheart and Gladiator look like films that show mature restraint. 300 is more like a recounting of an epic battle told to one prepubescent boy to another. The interesting stories involve the ones where these boys grow up and realize that actual war is nothing like the childhood fantasies that are culturally marketed to them in films such as this one.

theevilnarwhale
03-19-2007, 10:45 PM
Once again 300 slays the competition (overused pun!)

1 - 300 - $31,185,000
2 - Wild Hogs - $18,825,000
3 - Premonition - $18,000,000
4 - Dead Silence - $7,771,000
5 - I Think I love My Wife - $5,715,000
6 - Bridge to Terabithia - $5,141,000
7 - Ghost Rider - $4,000,000
8 - Zodiac - $3,073,000
9 - Norbit - $2,722,000
10 - Music and Lyrics - $2,200,000
11 - Amazing Grace - $2,049,000
12 - The Number 23 - $1,750,000
84 - Borat - $296
I think a better question is why does this list have an 84.

bryan
03-19-2007, 11:04 PM
I agree that it is a silly thing to complain about. Heaven forbid the movie attempt to allude to a current conversation that might actually make it more relevant and less of just a throw away two hours of entertainment. However, I highly question your notion that "freedom isn't free" is a mantra indicative of "Western values." It is a mantra of a very specific political administration and one that doesn't do much to engage the actual debate of what should be done on the international scene.

Once again, however, my problem with the film had nothing to do with political perspective. My problem was that the film has the aesthetic sensibilities of an 8 year old boy. The opening the film is a new born baby being held over a mountain of skulls with fire in the background, already only one step away from "flaming skulls driving motorcycles. From there it only becomes more of a carnival ride and one that is every bit as pretentious as it is kitsch. If there was 5 minutes in it without slow motion and wind machines to blow people's hair around, it would be tough to locate. And all of this hyper stylizing along with the color palette just made the characters seem less like human beings and more like two dimensional videogame characters. For a movie supposedly singing the virtues of tough alpha males afraid of displaying any signs of would be feminine traits, it sure spends a lot of time posing in the mirror.

The actual storyline and dialogue seemed pretty well written for what it is. I'm pretty convinced it is Zack Snyder who is responsible for what went wrong. In comparison, Braveheart and Gladiator look like films that show mature restraint. 300 is more like a recounting of an epic battle told to one prepubescent boy to another. The interesting stories involve the ones where these boys grow up and realize that actual war is nothing like the childhood fantasies that are culturally marketed to them in films such as this one.


It's story retold by an orator around a campfire to his fellow soldiers, before an impending battle. As I understand it, when you're a soldier everything is clear cut and simple. Hence the story is as well. As for the hyper-reality (color palette, wind machines) well it's a campfire story. It's meant to stir the imagination and get your blood pumping. And well for me it most certainly did achieve that affect.

EternalGamer
03-19-2007, 11:19 PM
It's story retold by an orator around a campfire to his fellow soldiers, before an impending battle.


Well, as I indicated, if the emphasis was placed on this social construction, at leas there would have been interesting exploration of the human drama to be found.

As I understand it, when you're a soldier everything is clear cut and simple.


How many soldiers have you talked to? Because I have entire reference library of ex-soldiers turned writers as well as actual friends that have returned from the current one that would say otherwise.

bryan
03-19-2007, 11:26 PM
That's outside of battle. This is before an impending battle. Before and during a battle everything has to be clear cut and simple so you can react quickly, unfettered by a cluttered mind. That's why military is so heavily regimented, and why you are drilled so heavily.

edit: oh and also why if you disobey an order during combat it's the death penalty, right? Vaguely remember that.

GrinR
03-19-2007, 11:40 PM
I agree that it is a silly thing to complain about. Heaven forbid the movie attempt to allude to a current conversation that might actually make it more relevant and less of just a throw away two hours of entertainment. However, I highly question your notion that "freedom isn't free" is a mantra indicative of "Western values." It is a mantra of a very specific political administration and one that doesn't do much to engage the actual debate of what should be done on the international scene.

Once again, however, my problem with the film had nothing to do with political perspective. My problem was that the film has the aesthetic sensibilities of an 8 year old boy. The opening the film is a new born baby being held over a mountain of skulls with fire in the background, already only one step away from "flaming skulls driving motorcycles. From there it only becomes more of a carnival ride and one that is every bit as pretentious as it is kitsch. If there was 5 minutes in it without slow motion and wind machines to blow people's hair around, it would be tough to locate. And all of this hyper stylizing along with the color palette just made the characters seem less like human beings and more like two dimensional videogame characters. For a movie supposedly singing the virtues of tough alpha males afraid of displaying any signs of would be feminine traits, it sure spends a lot of time posing in the mirror.

The actual storyline and dialogue seemed pretty well written for what it is. I'm pretty convinced it is Zack Snyder who is responsible for what went wrong. In comparison, Braveheart and Gladiator look like films that show mature restraint. 300 is more like a recounting of an epic battle told to one prepubescent boy to another. The interesting stories involve the ones where these boys grow up and realize that actual war is nothing like the childhood fantasies that are culturally marketed to them in films such as this one.

That is an excellent academic view. Very intellectual. Cerebral, even.

Perhaps you should stick with movies more suited to... that sort of thing.

LostToys
03-20-2007, 01:20 AM
300 just didn't know the type of movie it wanted to be. At times you had moments of speech which felt right for the place and time, then just seconds later they infused it with modern humor sensibilities.

The movie was just a clash of several styles. Nothing really melded for me.

bryan
03-20-2007, 01:29 AM
Could you point out modern humor sensibilities please?

Wyrm
03-20-2007, 03:07 AM
I don't really think anyone can sit and defend some of the writing. The movie was good, yes, but the writing needed some help. Some of the lines were awesome, others fell so ridiculously flat.

I'm ecstatic about another Sin City, and any movie where the visuals are similar to 300, I'm there just to see the visual orgasm. 300 had tons of 'moments' where they shot was just absolutely perfectly created. It was a pleasure to watch from start to finish, and though the writing lagged a bit behind the visuals, I was not disappointed.

Wyrm
03-20-2007, 03:13 AM
I agree that it is a silly thing to complain about. Heaven forbid the movie attempt to allude to a current conversation that might actually make it more relevant and less of just a throw away two hours of entertainment. However, I highly question your notion that "freedom isn't free" is a mantra indicative of "Western values." It is a mantra of a very specific political administration and one that doesn't do much to engage the actual debate of what should be done on the international scene.

Once again, however, my problem with the film had nothing to do with political perspective. My problem was that the film has the aesthetic sensibilities of an 8 year old boy. The opening the film is a new born baby being held over a mountain of skulls with fire in the background, already only one step away from "flaming skulls driving motorcycles. From there it only becomes more of a carnival ride and one that is every bit as pretentious as it is kitsch. If there was 5 minutes in it without slow motion and wind machines to blow people's hair around, it would be tough to locate. And all of this hyper stylizing along with the color palette just made the characters seem less like human beings and more like two dimensional videogame characters. For a movie supposedly singing the virtues of tough alpha males afraid of displaying any signs of would be feminine traits, it sure spends a lot of time posing in the mirror.

The actual storyline and dialogue seemed pretty well written for what it is. I'm pretty convinced it is Zack Snyder who is responsible for what went wrong. In comparison, Braveheart and Gladiator look like films that show mature restraint. 300 is more like a recounting of an epic battle told to one prepubescent boy to another. The interesting stories involve the ones where these boys grow up and realize that actual war is nothing like the childhood fantasies that are culturally marketed to them in films such as this one.

You know, you make some good points, but your post really depresses me. If this is any indication of how you watch films in general, I'd say you probably don't like many of the ones you see. I go to movies to be entertained, simple as that. It's sad when people stop seeing movies just to see them. Everyone is a critic now days, and no one can sit back and enjoy a decent movie for what it is.

Wokapto
03-20-2007, 03:25 AM
I don't think the dialogue was politically influenced, I just think Frank Miller tends towards overly melodramatic writing. Don't you guys remember Sin City?

Also, people getting stabbed with spears in slow motion is awesome.

Wyrm
03-20-2007, 04:03 AM
I don't think the dialogue was politically influenced, I just think Frank Miller tends towards overly melodramatic writing. Don't you guys remember Sin City?

Also, people getting stabbed with spears in slow motion is awesome.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever had a problem with slow motion, especially not the way it was used in 300.

I actually loved the dialog in Sin City because it was so over the top. It's the type of movie that lends itself well to writing like that. 300, less so, but still, it's a movie adaptation of a graphic novel. Sin City is actually leaps and bounds better written than 300.

Yellowman
03-20-2007, 05:02 AM
You know, you make some good points, but your post really depresses me. If this is any indication of how you watch films in general, I'd say you probably don't like many of the ones you see. I go to movies to be entertained, simple as that. It's sad when people stop seeing movies just to see them. Everyone is a critic now days, and no one can sit back and enjoy a decent movie for what it is.

Gee forgive us for wanting a little artistic expression in our art. Maybe we should all just be watching endless sequals to Jackass: The Movie. That's entertaining right? You see, I need you to tell me how to be entertained since cleary you know exactly what is entertaining to me.

Heretic Machine
03-20-2007, 05:13 AM
without him it would have been Sin City all over again.

...One of the best action movies ever made?

phantomhitman
03-20-2007, 05:13 AM
I know I am the minority here, but since we are talking about a movie in which 300 men stood against an army of 1 million, forgive my boldness for defending my point against an overwhelming majority.
Even in the damn movie they showed more than 300 soldiers with the Spartans. There were a hundereds of the Athenians with the Spartans during the entire battle. 300 just states the number of Spartans in the battle, not the total number of people fighting. The Persian force overwhelems them anyways, just like in the real battle. But the 300 Spartans did in fact take a huge chunk out of the Persian force.
I would like to see a follow up movie to this battle. The Persians eventually broke the lines and moved further inland but got raped by sea due to bad weather and miscalculations. Actually that would suck to watch, what is another cool Spartan era battle?

Hlektana Dbonsky
03-20-2007, 06:18 AM
...One of the best action movies ever made?

Yeah I have to agree, what are you saying GrinR?

zombiekiller13
03-20-2007, 07:19 AM
I enjoyed the movie. I went in not expecting some Oscar-winning piece of artwork that would become an immediate classic; I went in to see a violent movie, that had been adapted from a graphic novel, about a historic battle.

Had I been told prior to seeing it that the acting was the greatest ever seen and the story was 100% accurate to the events that occurred during the battle, I would have been disappointed. Well, slightly disappointed.

Basalisk
03-20-2007, 07:57 AM
Even in the damn movie they showed more than 300 soldiers with the Spartans. There were a hundereds of the Athenians with the Spartans during the entire battle. 300 just states the number of Spartans in the battle, not the total number of people fighting. The Persian force overwhelems them anyways, just like in the real battle. But the 300 Spartans did in fact take a huge chunk out of the Persian force.
I would like to see a follow up movie to this battle. The Persians eventually broke the lines and moved further inland but got raped by sea due to bad weather and miscalculations. Actually that would suck to watch, what is another cool Spartan era battle?

Actually one of the greek tribes in the historical text stay with them. It is the Spartans and the Thespians that were overwhelmed at the end. The other tribes left.

Venkman
03-20-2007, 08:42 AM
Do you 300 haters normally go see action/special effects showcases for the dialog?

EternalGamer
03-20-2007, 09:13 AM
You know, you make some good points, but your post really depresses me. If this is any indication of how you watch films in general, I'd say you probably don't like many of the ones you see. I go to movies to be entertained, simple as that. It's sad when people stop seeing movies just to see them. Everyone is a critic now days, and no one can sit back and enjoy a decent movie for what it is.

Actually, I would say that I enjoy the vast majority of the films I see, but that is also because I am selective about which films I do go see. In the same week I saw 300, I also saw Venus and The Queen and enjoyed both immensely (especially The Queen, which is probably the best film I have seen all year). And it is not even that I don't like action movies. As I mentioned in my previous post, Gladiator and Braveheart are two films that closely resemble this one in terms of thematics and both are much better films. They are better because they show some restraint and allow us to see the characters as less as a conduit to just another special effect and more as human beings in a violent struggle.


But if you mean by your post that I no longer have that excitement regarding this type of material as I did when I was twelve, well, you are correct. I also can no longer enjoy He-Man or Voltron like I used to. Growing up is every bit as much of an intellectual inevitability as it is a physical one. Rather than pining over the fact that I can no longer enjoy (or enjoy being manipulated by) thinly veiled marketing vehicles, I would rather embrace where I am. None of us can return to Wonderland, and even if we could we would only discover that it was our lack of perceptiveness that made it seem wonderful, not the place itself.

Jacob Singer
03-20-2007, 09:48 AM
:confused: But if you mean by your post that I no longer have that excitement regarding this type of material as I did when I was twelve, well, you are correct. I also can no longer enjoy He-Man or Voltron like I used to. Growing up is every bit as much of an intellectual inevitability as it is a physical one. Rather than pining over the fact that I can no longer enjoy (or enjoy being manipulated by) thinly veiled marketing vehicles, I would rather embrace where I am.

I would like to buy you a beer, sir.

I'm getting so very tired of being told I should turn off my brain and "just enjoy" a film, game, book, whatever. Since when does critiquing a particular genre or piece of work require the critc to alter his standards?

Pigeon
03-20-2007, 09:52 AM
It's en vogue to criticize things that are popular

KingGorilla
03-20-2007, 09:53 AM
Could you point out modern humor sensibilities please?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTb-eH_xIJw

EternalGamer
03-20-2007, 10:08 AM
It's en vogue to criticize things that are popular

You seem to be confusing it being en vogue to criticize things that are popular with criticizing things that are popular because they are en vogue. To the former, yes, as you would anything else, popular or not. To the latter, no, although that is often the first step towards learning how to be critical. Mimicry of independant thought is often the first steps towards actual independent thinking.

Roc Ingersol
03-20-2007, 10:27 AM
That's awfully optimistic of you to say.

IME mimicry of independant thought is usually an attempt to find a more fashionable line of thought to march behind.

to rereail for a moment: 300's dialogue was atrocious. But that's what you get with Frank Miller. It's a testament to the production as a whole that it's watchable (effects, acting, direction, etc).

I now return you to your regularly scheduled derail.

critch
03-20-2007, 10:29 AM
I also felt meh to it. Battle scenes were awesome, sure...but the rest of it felt ham-fisted and cruddy. Effects were meh, acting was horrid outside of Gerard Butler, and it had a Halo 2 type ending. I wasn't fired up or happy with it when I left, I actually felt like I had just wasted my time.

Though I quite enjoyed Sin City, I have to say that Frank Miller just isn't that great of a writer. Yes, I know it's blasphemy to say bad things about the writer of "Robocop 2" and "3", but his lines were just awful. Saying that "Well that's just how they talked in the graphic novel!" doesn't excuse it. It's a fricking adaption, change it if it sucks!

Does not apply to the lines: "This is Sparta!" and "We will fight in the shade."

Yellowman
03-20-2007, 10:34 AM
It's en vogue to criticize things that are popular

Yes. En vogue.

Permenantly en vogue.

Things that get the most exposure attract the most criticism.

Pigeon
03-20-2007, 10:36 AM
No, I meant what I said. We call these people trolls.

phantomhitman
03-20-2007, 10:49 AM
Yes. En vogue.

Permenantly en vogue.

Things that get the most exposure attract the most criticism.
yep, even around these here internet forums people love to do it.

I also felt meh to it. Battle scenes were awesome, sure...but the rest of it felt ham-fisted and cruddy. Effects were meh, acting was horrid outside of Gerard Butler, and it had a Halo 2 type ending. I wasn't fired up or happy with it when I left, I actually felt like I had just wasted my time.
hmmm...I guess they could have completely rewritten history and let the 300 spartans, plus a few other fighters, destroy an army measuring 250,000 deep. But then again someone could still find errors in that.

udge not this movie not by the content of it's dialogue, but by the ass kickery of its action. I have a dream...

nihil
03-20-2007, 11:20 AM
One of the biggest problems I had with 300 was the pesky narrator. Damn, was he ever annoying. The rest of the dialogue was bearable, but every time that narrator opened his mouth it made me cringe. It was enjoyable to watch, but could have been something so much more (at least for me).

Devilturnip
03-20-2007, 11:49 AM
Reading through all this, it seems like the vast majority of criticisms basically amount to, "This movie wasn't what I wanted it to be."

Well, good for you. If a movie doesn't live up to the fallacious expectations you construct prior to seeing it, in my view that is your fault. Personally, I try to form my opinion of a movie (or game, book, etc.) based on the material I see as I'm seeing it. I find I get quite a bit more enjoyment as a result.

The only way anything is going to completely fulfill your expectations is if you create it yourself. Even then, there will be a thousand random strangers on the internet ready to say how it doesn't live up to their expectations.

Voodoo
03-20-2007, 01:14 PM
Those that were troubled with the historical accuracy of 300... Does Pirates of the Caribbean trouble you as well?

Check this out: Mythological Fictional Epic based on Historical Events.

If you want to watch a documentary, the History Channel is included in just about every television subscription service there is.

muddi900
03-20-2007, 01:38 PM
The lines were actually taken from the historical records. Herodotus a historian at the battle recorded phrases used in the conflict and these records have survived. The events of the battle are actually well recorded. In fact Spartans were famous for having a Laconic (the province which the city of Sparta resides) form of speech. Laconic speech is an economical form of speech which use a short phrase to disarm a long speech. It is historically accurate in that regard.


The greeks were known to dramatize their history. I've read the comic book, It was a total waste of money. The trailer looked like the over-stylized crap that hollywood is producing(No, blue screening your whole film only makes my eyes hurt). You guys seem to like it. I may check it out.

EternalGamer
03-20-2007, 01:45 PM
The greeks were known to dramatize their history. I've read the comic book, It was a total waste of money. The trailer looked like the over-stylized crap that hollywood is producing(No, blue screening your whole film only makes my eyes hurt). You guys seem to like it. I may check it out.

Whether people like it or not, it most certainly is an entire film that is blue screened. You would be hard pressed to find a single image that shows anything remotely resembling a real word aesthetic.

Devilturnip
03-20-2007, 03:04 PM
Whether people like it or not, it most certainly is an entire film that is blue screened. You would be hard pressed to find a single image that shows anything remotely resembling a real word aesthetic.

Clearly, that matters to you. Does that mean it shouldn't have been tried? Does the fact that it rang false to you make it any less valid? As you have made abundantly clear, this particular film was not your cup of tea. Instead of questioning the movie's value on a whole, why not just state that the movie was not for you and move on?

Jacob Singer
03-21-2007, 12:53 PM
Reading through all this, it seems like the vast majority of criticisms basically amount to, "This movie wasn't what I wanted it to be."

And all of the gushing praise basically amounts to "This movie was exactly what I wanted it to be."

So your point is that if you're ever disappointed in a film, you're expectations were just too darn high? Or does that only apply to THIS film?

And I love the idea others have suggested that people only criticize popular films because it's "fashionable". So I guess that makes anything popular automatically worthwhile and critic-proof?