300 (2006) User Reviews (2,676)

A two-sided piece of art

[gus495 · 8/10 · 31 March 2007]

This film isn't for all people. That's to say about a lot of movies in general of course, but this one in particular brings up a big clashing point between critics; What do we want to see in our movies? What is more important, to portray a fictional setting for the sake of giving people a mind blowing visual experience or to amuse and amaze them with clever plot twists and intelligent dialogs?

First lets analyze what exactly this film is made of. Basically, the whole thing is just one epic fighting scene after another. Most noticeably is the camera work and the visual effects. Every shot seems like it was intended to be a work of art. The colors, the characters, the costumes, the backgrounds... every little detail has been given so much attention. During the big fights you'll also instantly notice the unique editing. There are a lot of "time slowdowns" throughout the battles which show what exactly is happening. Fatal wounds that slowly leak blood spatters in the air, decapitated heads traveling in slow-motion across the screen... it's all there.

The story on the other hand isn't very complicated, in the sense that the whole movie could probably be described in a sentence or two. The dialogs are simple and most often talk about moral values like freedom and honor. If you would look at the script, it would probably look like another movie that has nothing more to offer then idealistic visions of how life should be.

Reviewers of this title seem to be split up in two groups. They either love it with passion calling it an epic movie of the 21th century, or hate it even more and throw it off like a piece of garbage consisting of mindless action and silly cliché phrases. I feel reluctant to take a position in this argument. Normally it's tolerable to weigh out both sides of this matter to result in a fair judgment about a movie. Not in this one. On the one hand the visual are surely among the best to be witnessed in a movie. Every detail, every background, every special effect set to the scenes are so mindblowingly stunning. On the other hand the plot and dialogs are of the most simplistic and quite frankly dumb kind. "I fight for freedom! I'd rather die in honor then live in shame!" Sounds familiar?

Of course it could be debated that this movie was never intended in the first place to have a unique plot that makes your head spin. But from an objective point of view it's still lacking in this department, so it should be noted.

Now that's fine and all, but does that all make of the film? Is it worth watching or what? I think it is. For me the good outweighs the bad by miles. From the second the movie started it grabbed me and didn't let go. Every battle, every scene of the movie had me at the tip of my chair. Everything from the strong acting to the wondrous visuals to the war-shouts of the soldiers was just so stunning... it was truly a wonderful experience.

I did not one single moment felt like the movie lacked anything. But I could imagine why other people did.

So here's the deal.

If you are easily impressed by beautiful landscapes, wonderful camera-work and editing and powerful acting then go see this. Right. Now. You'll be missing out if you don't. There is so much to see, so much power in the way this comic is translated to the big screen... It'll leave you in awe.

However, you are looking for a good story, clever plot twists, some innovating to the world of the movies then skip this. 300 contains nothing of this, nor does it wants to give you this.

I enjoyed this movie so much, but I know there will be people that will pass of as rubbish, and that's understandable. Just be sure to make up your mind about what you want to see when you go to the theater yourself instead of being drawn into bias by the tons of reviews this site has to offer.

Forget the Naysayers, 300 Delivers!

[CrassActionHero · 9/10 · 31 March 2007]

300(2007)

Review: 300 has been given lots of criticism. People like to view in the political way. That is not the way. Here's my take.

300 is an entertaining movie. This is all about the action and it's Spartans. The movie takes about the first 30 minutes to give us plot development before the Spartans take it to the battlefield.

The action is the key. The slow motion action is what really delivers. This is like a ballet of blood done so nicely. The action needless to say is satisfying. We are given lots of campy dialog and some good humor here and there that works. Gerard Butler is wonderful. He embodies the great king. Becomes him.

Now, on to the politics, 300 has it's own politics, but it was also based on a comic book written back in 1998. How can this be a pro-Bush statement? This is just like another Frank Miller picture, Sin City. The point is to make the comic book come to life. 300 was written by Frank Miller almost a decade ago and you think this is right-wing propaganda?

Listen to me. Take a deep breath and lighten up. Okay?

One last thing, this movie is NOT a history lesson. This is based on a graphic novel, similar to a movie made back in 1962, and is inspired by the battle in 480 B.C. This is not racist either.

The Last Word: 300 delivers what is was sent out to do. Action. Entertainment. Skin. Ignore the naysayers and enjoy. Excellent popcorn fun.

A great movie!

[shoukanmahou · 9/10 · 21 May 2007]

It seems that everyone who hated this movie must have written a review, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents to even things up a bit. First, if you assume every movie is made simply to uppercut some sort of ideology into the audience's chest, then yes, it does seem very racist, xenophobic, and the like. However, this film is based on a freakin' comic book! The Spartans were some of the most skilled, nastiest, nationalistic fighters out there, and certainly had reason to be more driven and nationalistic than Persia's, which was not an army of individuals fighting for their land and families. Should they have been portrayed differently simply to satisfy the current political climate? Are you mad? The cheesy one-liners are also evidence that this movie IS BASED ON A COMIC BOOK. The exaggerated characters is further evidence that this movie IS BASED ON A COMIC BOOK. This is not a historical movie, it is a movie which seeks to put a rockstar, no-holds-barred spin on a particular historical event. It isn't attempting to be accurate, or balanced, or anything of the sort, and it SHOULDN'T, because that isn't it's purpose. It shouldn't be obligated to do anything of the sort. It's ENTERTAINMENT. Nothing more. And it's damn good entertainment, in my opinion.

Every scene is beautifully crafted. I found the slowdown to be stylistic and much of the dialogue, which is apparently cheesy and fascist to everyone else, to be at least somewhat inspiring, and certainly engaging. These Spartans were trained their entire lives to be warriors, their entire culture is built around success in battle, and you don't expect them to be quite skilled, much more so than a slave army, and quite patriotic? Also, this movie was from the point of view of the Spartans. How would this army have appeared to the Spartans? Wouldn't their stories now be over-exaggerated, over-simplified, almost legendary? There isn't a great amount of character development because this movie is about a battle, ONE battle, THE battle for the continuance of the Western world, and yes, IF the Spartans had been simply overwhelmed from the start, and if their Athenian allies hadn't completely CRUSHED the much larger Persian navy at sea, the West simply could not have existed in any similar manner as it has. And yes, the Western world is guilty of arrogance, overextending it's boundaries to the point of imperialism, however, it has given our world a plethora of all-too-important philosophical ideals that are simply irreplaceable if we want to live in a free society.

I realize I spent a great deal of my time being critical of other reviews, so I would like to take the time to apologize for perhaps wasting the time of someone who was simply searching for a detailed point of view on the film. I can assure you that the film is action-packed. The scenes are absolutely beautiful, every one of them. The film is gory, but artistically gory, if that makes any sense. You'll know what I mean. The story is simple, direct, and inspiring. The acting is excellent. The movie, overall, was a tremendous experience. I give it a 9.

Chills!

[deadmonkeys · 10/10 · 13 March 2007]

After I saw the teaser for 300 I knew I HAD to see this movie! From then on I avoided all other previews, reviews, etc. as not to influence my expectations of the movie. I then went into the theater on opening night with no knowledge of the plot... only that it had something to do with Greeks and Frank Miller! Ignorance is bliss! I was absolutely blown away. I'm a 26 yr old female who generally doesn't watch violent films... but I found the battle scenes so well done and breath taking. I had chills and goosebumps virtually the entire film. I'm with many other reviewers, who felt like they had to contain themselves from shouting "yeah!" at times. Maybe I'm crazy, but I thought the whole movie was very sexy and passionate, whether it was the sex scene, a battle scene, or Leonidis addressing his men.

I think it is a shame that so many people are condemning this movie for it's historical inaccuracies, or it's "racism", etc. People are reading far too into this movie. Whatever happened to enjoying a movie simply because it is entertaining and pleasing to to the eye? Don't people watch movies anymore to escape from the daily grind of life? I know I'm not as well spoken as many who have posted here. I just think this was a fantastic movie. I didn't go see it to learn anything! I just wanted to be entertained! And boy was I!

The Evolution of Epic Battles

[Alex_Priest · 8/10 · 15 February 2007]

After gaving us some of the greatest epic movies in the last 50 years,it was clear that filmmakers needed to take them to the next level.

But how can you make a new movie,for the audience to like,without recycling old material?

Answer:You improve what old filmmakers couldn't:Graphics.

Ben Hur,Braveheart,Gladiator,Spartacus and perhaps even Troy are only some of the epic movies that gave the audience so big thrills that they cannot be repeated. Almost every epic movie that will be made today,no matter how good the story will be or how faithful will be to reality,is bound to repeat itself.We got examples from Alexander and Kingdom of Heaven.

300 doesn't apply to this category.Besides it takes the epic to the next level.And more are like to follow.

Just like in the Lord of the Rings,much CGI was used here.

The result? This movie was a pleasure for the eye.

All the camera work and graphics exceeded my expectations. I thought they were comparable,if not better,to the LOTR,go see for yourselves.

I could write something about the plot or the actors's outstanding performances(especially Gerard Butler's..you see,being Greek-Italian,I wanted the best from the actors..Butler gave it. The anger in his eyes,the fury in his voice and the violence in his actions really reminded an ancient Greek king),but I won't ruin it for you. You must see it to understand how great this movie is.

But always remember that this is a movie that is based on a graphic novel and is by no means a faithful depiction of what really happened in Thermopylae in 480 B.C. All those who will pay the ticket to see this movie,must be prepared not for a historic movie,but for a stylish battle movie.

This movie,together with the LOTR,is the entrance to the 21st century's new epic movies.

Kudos to Zack Snyder,who came from nowhere and has,already from Dawn of the Dead,proved that he is a brilliant and capable director. We will surely see more of him in the upcoming years.

So,you read my Comment?

Aren't you curious?

What are you waiting for?

Run to the nearest cinema,see this piece of art and when you are finished don't forget to come to IMDb to vote. This movie is destined to be at least in the top 100.

C'mon people!Hail for 300,the Evolution of Epic Battles!

300 Worldpremiere Berlin

[barb1140 · 10/10 · 23 February 2007]

I have been at the World Premiere of 300 in Berlin where I watched this fantastic movie – a movie not only for MEN! I got sucked in from the very first moment! I don't want to say too much about the story itself–I don't want to spoil anything for you. But let me explain that this kind of movie isn't usually my cup of tea. But when I saw the first trailer I knew I wanted to see it badly. And 300 didn't disappoint me–it was even better than expected.

From the very first moment, you can see the fantastic colors and the amazing visuals. I got hooked. I loved the way how the film sped up and slowed down at some certain key moments. It was stunning!!! There were moments where the music set in and shivers and adrenaline were running thought my body. Moments where I held my breath. Sometimes I had to hold myself back not to scream out loud "YEAH!" You can see how much this movie sucked me in.

The battle scenes: I feared them, because I hate too much violence in a movie. But they were stunning. These scenes were incredibly beautifully choreographed. These scenes gave me the feeling of a choreographed dance of warriors. Beautiful to watch. Powerful, aesthetic and elegant. Yes, they were brutal (without a doubt–sometimes I had to hold my hand before my eyes – but only for a short moment because I didn't want to miss something) but they still were amazing. And all this slowing down and speeding up makes these scenes more tense more beautiful. And you can feel the adrenaline rush of the warriors.

And in between these scenes there were this modern phrases like "we are in for a wild night." Some could say they don't fit into this movie. I loved it. It's incredibly cool and they made me laugh sometimes. And that was great; it eased the tension. These sentences lightened the moment. The perfect pause before the action goes on again.

Gerard Butlers acting is absolutely powerful. It is full of passion, full of emotions (love, anger and so much more). You can see the fire burning inside of him, the sadness, the inner struggles, but also the dignity and the kindness of the King. (I guess these were the scenes I loved most–where I saw his dignity, kindness and love). His way of showing you his emotions through his eyes, I guess is stronger than ever. I love this – I love when actors are able to express so much only with their eyes without saying anything. And all these fantastic close-ups just made these scenes perfect! But it was not only Gerard Butlers acting, but the other actors also performed extremely well. A perfect team and I got the feeling that all the actors are chosen because of this ability to be a team. It would take too long to mention every single actor/actress. For me it was an incredible cast.

The sound was excellent, especially during the battle scenes. For example, when metal meets metal(it's hard to explain this for me – but when you see the movie you might know what I'm talking about). Not to forget the soundtrack. It makes the whole impression of this movie complete. Again full of power and then very emotional. I loved it.

This movie is more than an action movie for me. It's about love, camaraderie, the defending of what they love, of what they believe in. It's about the power not to give up but follow their destiny and to do what they think is the right thing to do. And it's also about the big love between the King and the Queen.

For me personally this movie is unique. It's a masterpiece of visual effects, color, sounds, soundtrack and the absolutely stunning performance of the actors. That's my own personal opinion. The opinion of a woman who already loved the powerful trailer, but wasn't sure if she would like the movie as well. Maybe you get the feeling that I'm praising this movie too much. But I can't help myself. That's exactly what I'm feeling, what I'm thinking. And believe me, if I thought differently, I wouldn't bother to write anything about it. And I'm definitely longing to see this movie again.

Even now as I'm writing this, I can feel the same emotions as I felt during the watching of 300. It just blew me away. After the movie there were standing ovations !!! What a great evening! What an amazing movie!

Legendary

[osemaboualii · 10/10 · 7 March 2022]

Such an amazing piece of art that inspired me, ii consider 300 one od the best movies that I've ever watched in my whole life, i wish time goes back and re watch it like i never did...

Fantastic comic novel brought to screen

[kowgraphics · 24 December 2006]

I recently saw 300 as the last movie of a 24 hour film festival and Zack Snyder, the director showed up for a Q&A. The movie was 99% completed and was evident in the some of the CGI. Still, the movie was visually stunning..from the battle scenes (especially the one with the rhino) to the physiques of the Spartans. In fact, the Spartan abs were so defined that I thought they were part of the CGI until someone asked the director about it.

Snyder kept the movie adaptation close to the comic book but added a subplot of King Leonides wife trying to get political support to send more troops to aid the battle. Gerard Butler did a great job as the king and had the screen presence to make you believe that he could really rally 300 of his best soldiers to fight till death against an overwhelming Persian army. Queen Gorgo was depicted as a strong character and the King loved and respected her which the women audience will appreciate. And the pace of the movie is pretty fast. It was over before I knew it, and I had been up all night! Highly recommend it.

Cute Guys Those 300

[ptmcq05 · 6/10 · 25 March 2007]

A feast for the eyes but not the senses. Well, maybe some pornographic thought may have crossed somebody's mind, not mine I swear, but I could sense the steam mixed with the giggles rising all around me. A historical comic book, blatant, ambitious and silly, very silly. I was so aware of the elaborate graphics that the Spartan's predicament became kind of irrelevant. The experience is so far removed from the actually idea of "feelings" that the death of a son in front of a father will not make you flinch. The violence is so cartoonish that it will not disturb, not even the most sensible spirits. If you're in the mood for a festival of pictorial sequences filled with hard, shiny male bodies, you're in for a treat.

An Epic Film

[walken_on_sunshine · 10/10 · 23 January 2007]

After seeing a 99% complete 300 at a 24 hour film festival i was amazed by the accuracy and beauty before my eyes.This film is an adaptation of Frank Miller's (Sin City) graphic novel 300 and wow is it ever accurate.I am very glad to see two magnificent pieces of Frank Millers art Sin City, and 300 have successfully transferred over to the big screen without losing anything in between.Visually the film drops you off your feet and it's not even completed yet so when this eventually debuts in the theaters it will have double the impact on me as i plan on seeing this again.The mix of live action and CGI creates beautiful landscapes, gorgeous backrounds, and amazing dimension to the characters.The film's dialog is pretty much exactly the same as it is in the graphic novel much like how most of the dialog in Robert Rodriguez' Sin City was taken directly from Frank Millers graphic novel.Personally i think that 300 is the best film of it's kind.It's got a faster pace than Lord Of The Rings, is more accurate than Troy, more compelling than Tristan and Isolde, and more violent than Gladiator.This movie so far deserves the academy award for best picture and without a doubt deserves the academy award for best cinematography for the originality and sheer beauty put into it's visuals.The battles are well filmed and action packed so for those of you who want gore and violence you'll get it and you'll be satisfied.Overall this is a movie of epic proportions and deserves a lot of recognition for it's originality,visual beauty, and it's accurate portrayal of it's original source.

Masterpiece in cinematography

[crabuk · 7/10 · 24 April 2020]

Amazing plot - no Character development - no Believability -no Historical accuracy - no

What is does delivery is an atmosphere and visual excellence that still stands up today. The acting is first rate. Action scenes unparalleled and tension in abundance.

Gladiator it is not.....but get the blue ray, turn off the lights, turn on the sound bar and emerse yourself in it

Awesome, breath-taking film.

[FilmWeekUK · 9/10 · 15 February 2007]

I somehow missed the hype on this one, and the trailer really didn't excite me, but I got a chance to see an advance screening and the other reviewer here who said "It blew me away" hit the nail right on the head.

I generally hate going to the cinema - preferring to wait until the DVD or HD-DVD are available because I'm fed up of shoddy prints, poor sound systems, ignorant members of the public with their ringing phones, late arrivals, noisy popcorn etc. My home system is so much better. But not for this movie! It needs to be seen on the big screen (preferably an Imax - I'm hoping to catch it a second time on IMAX) with a good sound system. The images are consistently breath-taking, the sound is staggeringly good and note-perfect throughout, and Gerard Butler is barely recognisable as the guy from "Dear Frankie" (a great, under-rated movie) and "Phantom of the Opera".

Highly recommended. I've given it a 9, and I don't think I've given a movie that high a score for over a year (and I average about 6 movies a week). This makes "Gladiator" look like a cheap kid's cartoon.

The ultimate, raw fanboy-fodder

[Flagrant-Baronessa · 7/10 · 21 March 2007]

The experience of watching "300" is much like unravelling a candy box of action goodies, glazed in pure testosterone. Certainly fanboys will hungrily lap it up – and although it is neither a very nutritious nor lasting meal, it'll give you a high of cheap thrills and gore galore for a solid and surprisingly swift 2 hours of runtime. I got to see the film at a preview in Paris and the demographic make-up of the theatre was some 98% men, 1.9% their girlfriends – and me.

Storywise, "300" does not throw the net wide: it narrowly zooms in on the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 B.C. as led by Spartan king Leonidas (Gerard Butler) and his 300 elite soldiers against 1 million Persians led by Persian God-King Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro). Much has been sacrificed to pursue this sliced-down-to-the-bare-essentials trajectory, but the story is diluted by the dutiful formula ingredients of father-son relations, talkative politics and amour. These are all pitiful story lines woven together by the core battle – what we really wish to see. However, I will concede that they are highly necessary in the film in providing relief in between the epic attacks.

There is always a crux with primarily visual-driven films, and in "300" this problem is reality. Forget the actual events at Thermopylae – this is trivial to the story the film wishes to tell – the problem is that it lacks authenticity visually and dramatically. Owing to the narrow cleft by the beach in which all of the battle takes place, dramatic scenery is sparse by nature (unlike, for example, LOTR where landscape alone provided visual stimuli). To compensate for this, post-production has gone absolutely overboard with a throbbing CGI-overdose to fit Frank Miller's graphic novel format – even the sky is so über-stylized with sepia-tinted shades and shadowy contrasts that the cumulative effect is special effects gaping, swallowing and ultimately drowning "300". In the end, there is only a tiny shred of reality left, so distant that you need binoculars to make it out, and this is expected to ground the whole spectacle. Needless to say, this proves a wholly impossible task for director Zack Snyder.

When you couple this visual fantasy with antique, readily-molded speech dialogue, there is regrettably even less authenticity left. Everything feels unbelievably staged, from Lena Headley's impossibly rehearsed counsel to her husband to Gerard Butler's rallying tagline cries. It should however be noted that nearly all of the the cast perform well in their respective parts. Headley in fact finds a surprisingly firm footing in a character that is largely at the mercy of an underwritten nature. The damsel in distress? The tough-chick? The aloof queen? A concerned mother? A loving wife? She locates them all and merges them together in the character of Queen Gorgo. Gerard Butler manages to weave together good screams, nice abs, a fair authoritative presence and not much else into a performance. The most huh-eliciting actor's presence is by far David Wenham who may look amazingly good, but provides silly narration that is altogether incongruous to the steaming macho vibe of the rest of the film. Most of the time he sounds like a hobbled little magician, selling trinkets in the bazaar. The rest are something of one-dimensional goons, but the eerie, puzzling performance by Rodrigo Santoro deserves credit, resonating with Lawrence of Arabia undertones but blown so far out of proportion the whole affair becomes a theatric affair.

In spite of the aforementioned problems, "300" basically achieves what it set out to do. It is, in effect, an extended version of its adrenaline-pumping trailer, fit for fanboy worship and art-house cinema mockery. You have to admire the blatantly homo-erotic parade of well-oiled six packs, the dramatic symmetry in the epic battle visuals and the goose-bumps inducing scope of the spectacle. One of my favourite parts of The Lord of the Rings trilogy was the massive attack of the oliphants on Gondor, and "300" offers similar but even more OTT extracts with Persian invaders, who bear an eerie resemblance to the south Mordor recruits from the saga.

7.5 out of 10

Much worse than the trailer

[EdWont · 3/10 · 10 March 2007]

In a word: disappointment.

I was one of the fanboys who loved the graphic novel, and watched the trailer on repeat for months. I'm half Greek and love action and comics, so I was superbly amped. Sadly, the movie fell so short of the mark that I was immediately reminded of how I felt after watching Star Wars: Episode I for the first time. I left it thinking, "I liked it? It was good? Right?" But I knew that it wasn't. Here are some of the ups and downs.

Let's start with what's good in the feature. The battle scenes are spectacular. The choreography didn't hinge on speed as much as it relied on visually stunning, artistic brutality (it sounds like an oxymoron, but it applies in this context). The timing during these scenes was unique, too. The motion sped up and slowed down in a way that really complimented the film. Of course, the entire movie is a mindblowing visual experience: The art direction and cinematography were stunning. This is especially true of the costuming and "creature" effects. My favorite aspect of the art direction was this profound grittiness (manifested in the dirt, bloodshed, contrast, and other details that were brought forth because of the filming technique) that almost became a character in itself, contributing to the harshness of the plot. All these things were simply standout.

Now, for the reasons I gave this film 3 out of 10 stars. The plot aspect of this film was practically nonexistent. In terms of character development, not only was it predictable, but almost tragic that they didn't pursue other avenues. I especially mean this when referring to the Queen Gorgo subplot that wasn't bound by Miller's original concept. There were a variety of plot holes including, but not limited to, the end of Gorgo's subplot in which it's revealed that a traitor was carrying evidence of his crimes on him for what we can assume was the entire movie, when there's no plausible reason as to why he'd be carrying the evidence. Given the precious little plot in the film, it's sad to say that any plot holes exist. The acting was pretty terrible, spare the less demanding guttural shouting of the Spartan warriors, but I can't really fault the actors given that the writing was so, so painfully bland. Even when there was a "rallying, morale boosting" speech, as is a staple for these films, it was so upsettingly cliché' that I found it agitating to watch. What was most troubling was that the entire movie was seasoned in an all-to-blatant hyper-nationalism. It was hard to enjoy this film without examining it from a modern context because of the frequent use of the word "freedom." It was being thrown around like it was conservative talk radio. At one point one of the characters even said, "freedom isn't free." I have no problem if filmmakers wish to make patriotism a theme in their film (indeed, the historic events lend nicely to such a theme). However, they did it so straight-forwardly that it dumbed the movie down a great deal. And yes, the Spartans founded the term "laconic" but they were at least witty. Had it been more subtle or brought about in a more refined way (as opposed to the hero simply spouting about freedom and its virtues repeatedly throughout the film) then it probably would've contributed a great deal to the movie.

All in all, this has a lot to offer in terms of eye-candy. But, it has so little substance that it's aggravating to watch. Something didn't click, and it's apparent. It feels like they could've done more with it. That's why it's aggravating. That's why it's a disappointment.

Stupendous movie making!! A masterpiece!!!

[resq446 · 10/10 · 12 February 2007]

'300' is a totally riveting masterpiece of film making. Zack Snyder, inspired by the graphic novel, has brought a 2487 year-old news story to life with people you really care about who are faced with choices between compromise and war that are all too familiar today.

The breath-taking CGI images are flawlessly integrated with the live action. All the actors are excellent in their roles, and Butler IS Leonidas.

The sound design is excellent. The score was recorded by the London Phil with a full chorus and is beautiful to listen to, but is very reminiscent of 'Gladiator' which detracts from the otherwise total originality of the film.

This movie integrates the potentials of film-making and story-telling in a wonderful new way that is the best of both entertainment and artistic achievement.

Standing ovation at the Berlinale Film Festival

[overburned · 10/10 · 16 February 2007]

I was one of the 1700 lucky viewers to get a ticket to the world premiere of 300. Zack Snyder has done a great job adapting the work of Frank Miller to the movie format! I've never experienced a screening that had to be interrupted because of spontaneous applause by the crowd! The special effects are quite good. The colors are hard to describe. Don't expect the b/w colored style as in Sin City. The colors are soft / Grey / well antique. As a viewer you have the impression of being in the middle of the battles. Well it's maybe not a truthful interpretation of the historical facts, and the same applies to the interpretation of Frank Millers novel. But the story worked for me. Lena Headey (as Queen Gorgo) was in my opinion the best actor/actress in this movie, she really fits 100%.

300 Watch it, make up your own mind

[thewayforward10 · 8/10 · 16 May 2007]

Really enjoyed it.

My only regret is I saw it at a non IMAX Cinema.

Don't get caught up in all the anti hype. Enjoy it for what it is which is a good tale, great action scenes, (if not a little over done), great war film acting and above all, a moral tale for today's age.

As for the historical angle and the comparison against the old film, try to enjoy this one as a modern updated version not unknown for its up to date (and cgi'd) feel.

Its the sort of film which made me want to find out about the Spartans and this particular period. Sad of me? Maybe, but I don't mind, it was great fun.

Enjoy, I certainly did.

Always catching the coat-tails of...

[Deoglood · 10/10 · 9 June 2007]

...Wonderful productions, I wonder how much I've been influenced by exposure to the various thumbs of armchair critics. However, there can be little influence from naysayers about this film because I am a true fan of the sword and sandal classics.

In retrospect, one wouldn't be surprised that the entire film was shot on green-screen sets, but it was so masterfully (or at least distractedly) done that you don't think about the dramatic skies and wheat fields as piped in. In fact, the entire cg aspect was transparent, which even the Matrix and the Lord of the Rings series had not managed to do completely.

The stylization of the effects, such as the radiant glow, deepened shadows, and slow motion sequences, seemed to emphasize the movie's illustrated roots, and though sometimes I found myself wishing I could see clearer, I always found deep satisfaction and immersion in the storyline. I think without the effects the plot would have required more elaboration, and turning a piece of art into another 'Gladiator' look-alike.

This movie is going on my keeper list, as I found it very comforting to watch, inspiring, and I will never tire of looking at (finally) scantily clad men, especially Gerard. The kingly figure of Leonidas, cloaked in red as is his Spartiate warriors, reminds me of the warrior class and king from George Nader's sci-fi book 'Chrome'. Romantically idealized, the simplistic portrayal of virtue and honor are purely portrayed by a directly stylized hero.

Of course, the villain was just as idealized, and therein is the complaint. Nobody likes a baddie without explanation, and perhaps the studio thought that being a Persian god was explanation enough. I would have enjoyed a much more developed Xerxes, but Ru Paul did a great job on the part. Just kidding. Rodrigo Santoro was superb, as big and evil as the comic portrays, and he does a good job overwhelming the much smaller king of Spartans.

The acting was good, and the script solid enough, all in all earning a rating of an 8, but as promised, tanned and bearded men with valor earns it a 10. We need more movies like this.

Thrilling blood-fest

[rogerdarlington · 30 March 2007]

The 480 BC Battle of Thermopylae is the stuff of military legend when, in popular lore, a mere 300 Spartans commanded by King Leonidas held off a Persian force led by Xerxes the Great that Herodotus claimed as 2.6 million. In truth, the Spartans were backed by a mixed force of almost 7,000, while there are enormous variations in modern estimates of the multi-ethnic Persian army, but somewhere between 100,000-200,000 seems realistic. Whatever the actual figures, the odds against the Spartans were terrible, death was inevitable, and their honour secure.

The story was first told on film in 1962 when director Rudolph Maté went to Greece and shot a worthy, but conventional and surprisingly leaden, version entitled "The 300 Spartans", starring American Richard Egan as King Leonidas and the British David Farrar as Xerxes. "300" takes the same basic narrative and presents it in an utterly different style in a blood-fest when "The Wild Bunch" meets "Kill Bill" and the visuals are like nothing except "Sin City". This time the director is Zack Snyder, known for his music videos, and the location is a studio set in Montreal with green backgrounds later filled by superb computer-generated graphics and the whole storybook style is based on the graphic novel by co-producer Frank Miller. Both versions use the legendary exchange: "When we attack today, our arrows will blot out the sun!" "Good; then we will fight in the shade." But only "300" has such fun lines as: "Spartans! Enjoy your breakfast, for tonight we dine in Hell!"

Ever since its first public showing at the Berlin Film Festival, most critics have mauled "300" and it presents an easy target for those wanting something more cerebral: there is virtually no plot or characterisation, the script is sparse and bland, much of the acting is exaggerated and over-loud, when it is not homo-erotic it is oddly camp, and the whole thing is stereotypical when it is not outright xenophobic and politically incorrect. And yet, as entertainment, it has much to offer: the sepia-tinged visuals are absolutely stunning and the fight sequences viscerally exciting. I was fortunate enough to see it in IMAX and I regularly felt blood-splattered and exhausted and quite ready to leap into the action.

There are no big names in the cast list which helps the sense of history but does not raise the thespian talent quotient. Gerard Butler plays King Leonidas with a Scottish accent, while the Brazilian Rodrigo Santoro is a version of Xerxes bejewelled with ethnic metalwork. Most of the warriors are literally larger than life: the actors playing the Spartans reveal most of their bodies with digitally-enhanced muscles, while on Xerxes' side characters include a huge hunchback, a giant emissary and a claw-armed executioner as well the metal-masked Immortals. This is before we get on to an enormous raging rhino and bedecked elephants. Truly this is a battle with a circus-like cast. The love interest comes from the feisty wife of Leonidas, Queen Gorgo, portrayed by the alluring British actress Lena Headey. There is even a scene in a rippling corn field borrowed from "Gladiator".

At the end of the day, what makes the movie are the thrilling fight sequences with encounters in which the film is slowed down and then speeded up to give a video-game quality that is unlike anything you have previously seen on the big screen. Whem a sword slashes or a spear lungs or an arrow whistles, you really feel and hear it. At times, it is as if a picture by Hieronymus Bosch had come to life.

Somewhat entertaining folkloric celebration of the ongoing war against tyranny featuring animated Greek statues

[mstomaso · 6/10 · 1 May 2007]

The 300 is an entertaining CGI and live action bloodbath with a lot of good messages which are, unfortunately couched in an endless stream of clichés. The script is, however, its weakest point, and is actually somewhat superfluous.

What you will take away from this film is really up to you. If you choose to be offended by ancient Spartan morality because it runs against your contemporary concerns, that's your choice. If you choose to see this as patriotic or nationalistic glorification of the military and organized, sanctioned murder - well perhaps that says more about you than it does about this film. If you choose to see it as an example of the potential of people who believe in themselves and in the value of their own lives because of a sense of freedom or a delusion of freedom, is, again, your choice. If you believe that bringing up embarrassing moments in a culture's heritage or telling a story from only one side (i.e. the side we know about) is unfair, well, then you should avoid history and stick with fantasy.

Interpret as you wish - the basics of this story - including the motives of Leonides and others - are true to the history that has been passed down. It should be no surprise that racism, nationalism, homophobia and other unfortunate and irrational cultural notions have a deep lineage in human heritage. To argue that films should not attempt to depict these things would be to deny their existence - and would do nothing to fight against them.

The 300 recounts a piece of ancient Greek history, as retold (and greatly embellished) by thousands of generations of Europeans - most recently Frank Miller in a graphic novel. I do not wish to take anything away from this story. It really is a great one. Three hundred Spartans and Arcadians really did take on several hundred thousand Persians from Xerxes armies in 480 BC at Thermopylae. And they really did scare the hell out of the Persians. Of course, most of the details depicted in this version of the story (and there have been many films about this battle before),are made up.

The film succeeds in making visible the main points - both metaphorical and philosophical, that must be taken away from the mythic story of the defense of Thermopylae. The Spartan level of defiance, commitment to the value of their lives over and above their lives themselves, Greek views of Xerxes and the Persians (source of much folklore) and the tremendous debt Sparta accrued from the rest of Greece.

The excellent visuals - which include exaggerated deformities, African animals trussed up to appear as demonic monsters, and a variety of other bent truths - really bring home the mythic quality of the story (this is incidentally characteristic of Miller's art as well),and well suggest how many of the Greeks actually viewed the wonders of Xerxes vast host.

The acting is good for what it is - a simple, very violent and graphic tale. The directing is OK, but the detailed, beautifully choreographed fight scenes (which take up about half of the screen time) use the same mixture of greatly detailed slow motion cuts and fast-paced close-in chaos that has become a Hollywood war film cliché in recent times. Although I have criticized the script as the worst element of this film, speaking is really only important in about 15 total minutes within the film. It is worth listening to every scene with Xerxes in it, the conversations between Leonides and Laerthes and Leonides and his captain, and Gorgo's speech in the senate chamber. Otherwise, the soundscape is mostly worthwhile only for the audio components of the battle. The musical component of the soundtrack is mostly good, but occasionally utilizes an inappropriate and frankly silly hard rock instrumentation.

Bottom line - if you enjoy action films featuring graphic violence and a lot of ripped guys dancing with swords, spears and shields, this is the film for you. If you want to get a general sense of the battle of Thermopylae, this is a good choice (however, don't think of it as a substitute for reading you textbook on ancient Greece). If you're looking for a great, realistic, war film this is pretty far off that mark and you might want to look into We Were Soldiers or The Great Escape instead.

This review was written by a professional archaeologist

Intensity, flair and passion. This is film is a beast.

[zell1290 · 9/10 · 28 March 2007]

The best way 300 can be described in a single sentence is 'The Lord of The Rings' filmed in the style of 'The Matrix.' It is a fantasy of epic proportions.

Reading some of the comments other users have left, many cite the film as being "pretentious", "offensive" and "badly directed", though I believe these people are wildly mislead.

The direction of the film is fantastic, capturing every essence of the brutally artistic vision of Frank Miller's comic. The fight scenes in particular are simply brilliant, full of adrenaline and beautifully filmed.

The cast, with a refreshing absence of Americans features not a single poor performance. Gerard Butler, the protagonist, has a particularly strong performance, belting out some quite fantastic one-liners, "We're in for one wild night." Some criticise the film for its portrayal of the Persians and the beasts used thereof, such as a Rhino and an Elephant, neither of which look anything like the real thing. What one has to remember is this film is seen through the eyes of the Spartans and not having seen these animals before, would have been incredibly frightening, the same with the representation of the Persians. Call it artistic license. And as for historical accuracy, this film does not even pretend to be so, this can be testified for by the lack of real information by the narrator. It is after all based on a comic-book.

Overall this film is easily one of the best fantasy epics of the last decade, if not THE best. It is difficult to fault to be honest, but I do feel that there is not enough background about some of the other more prominent of the 300, but that hardly detracts from the overall sheer brilliance of the film.

Absolute brilliance - 9/10

what 's all the fuss about?

[saniyababinski · 6/10 · 19 March 2007]

I guess I don't understand what all the fuss is about. I mean yes this was visually tantalizing, but for me that only goes so far. The story was severely lacking, so was the character development. I didn't really care about any of the characters even though some of the speeches were written well the story was pretty weak. I didn't like the basically pornographic sex scene randomly interjected. I thought it was random and completely unnecessary. I'm glad the queen was a strong character. It was good to see that the female opinion was respected by the people who really mattered. I also thought the dirty old diseased men and the young oracle girls was a little much. I guess if you are into graphic novel and the stylistic look of the film it's good but, as a whole it's not really a great movie. I'd give it a C.

Top class

[graemepollock-63436 · 10/10 · 12 August 2021]

Some amount of boring gimps writing these reviews the film is excellent coupled with great acting and visual effects.

Beautifully crafted film but just too "hollywood"...

[bofarr · 6/10 · 16 April 2007]

Yes, I know the fan boys (which I consider myself a member) will howl but I thought this film fell far short of what it could have been.

What I loved: Cinematography, fx, camera direction was incredible. This film was lovingly crafted and shot. I felt like I was not watching the actual battle but living someone's dream they had while listening to the narrator tell of these exploits. What I thought was very average: The dialog was groaningly bad at times but since it was comic book (excuuuuuuse me, graphic novel, ahem) dialog I could get around it. The ninja-like Persian Immortals were cheesy but I could understand since they were supposed to be from the east and this is a soldier's point of view we are hearing. What I thought was awful: David Wenham as Dilios (the narrator) was awful when on screen although not so bad when narrating, he used the "I'm a tough guy raspy voice" and just sounded like a skinny Australian using a tough guy raspy voice.

The historic inaccuracies are legion; Leonides tells his son the strength of the Spartans was the phalanx and then they spent all of 10 minutes actually using the tactic. The one edged swords were a Hollywood contrivance and the Spartans going into battle without their bronze cuirass' would just not have happened (and if a soldier was telling the story to an army he would have expounded on how the superior armor and technology made the Spartan's invincible but for being outnumbered 1000s to 1) Also the roughness of the workmanship of the helms and shields would not have been accepted in the militant society that Sparta was.

But by far the craziest and most grievous error was Leonides expounding on a "free Greece" and how all men should be free. The Spartans were some of the most vicious slavers in the history of man; they literally kept thousands of slaves! They used their slaves as assassination practice targets for their young soldiers among other practices. This is like making a movie about the American Civil War, having no black people in the plantation scenes and then Robert E Lee standing up and giving an abolitionist speech at Appomattox. This glossing over of history was just a terrible disservice to the thousands of innocent human beings who were killed and oppressed by the Spartans.

A terrible mess

[eilidh-6 · 1/10 · 11 March 2007]

Seeing the enthusiastic comments here, I was almost wondering whether they were meant for the same film I saw. Unfortunately, there is no doubt it is the same.

Never mind the fact I am writing from Greece, and that I might be in any way biased: I didn't go to the cinema expecting to see a historically accurate film, and I never let this fact bother me in the very least. I knew it was based on a comic, and I thought I'd see a decent enough epic film. I am not hard to please when it comes to films, but honestly -- I don't think I've seen such bad directing before. Terrible overuse of slow-motion sequences, some of the most awkward posing and set-up regarding the actors, an absolutely pretentious use of colour and lightning, incredibly bad costume choices (uniform leather thongs -- give me a break) resulting in multiple layers of kitsch. There was undoubtedly some eye-candy: but it was stacked so sloppily together it ended up being unpleasant.

Add to this mess some of the cheesiest lines and concepts, and there you have it -- I would call it a complete waste of time, but in some sense it is so bad it is almost worth seeing. Flying severed limbs in the battle scenes may even bring in a good laugh -- just as most of the dialogue does.