If you've seen it, your reviews here

[ゴジラ]

300 made me want to rip out my eyes because I doubt I will ever see something so gorgeous again...Ghost Rider made me want to gouge out my eyes so I would never have to see it again.

I cannot comment on Ghost Rider,but 300 is a orgasm for the senses.It took God 7 days to make the world.It would have taken Leonidas 1 second.

 

[dawhistleblower]

totally agree on ghost rider!!!

how god awful!

 

[Agentsands77]

I feel it was necessary though. In the book, the Queen was nothing more than an after-thought. In the movie, she actually does have a role. Not to mention Leonidas' dying words hold much more weight because we see how strong his wife is.

The Queen didn't need to be more than an after-thought, if you ask me. The story is about the battle itself - it's about the heroes there. I don't particularly care about the background red tape. And since I didn't really develop any emotional attachment to her character even with the additional story material, I didn't think it helped any. In fact, I thought her scenes brought the film to halt and killed the energy the film had built up.

And frankly, I thought taking Leonidas' inner monologue from the graphic novel and making it dialogue was a big mistake. It sounded silly spoken like that (on the whole, I felt the narration was distracting in the film - such narration works in a graphic novel, but it was entirely unnecessary in a lot of sequences).

 

[Agentsands77]

The movie was almost note for note faithful to the GN

Yeah, and that was probably one of the film's biggest problems. Frank Miller's dialogue/narration barely works on the page - it certainly doesn't work when spoken aloud.

The issue with 300 is that it made the wrong choices in deviating from the graphic novel and in being faithful to the novel. It was too faithful in some places, and in others, deviated in a way that the deviation failed to improve upon the source material.

 

[Mr. Socko]

And frankly, I thought taking Leonidas' inner monologue from the graphic novel and making it dialogue was a big mistake. It sounded silly spoken like that (on the whole, I felt the narration was distracting in the film - such narration works in a graphic novel, but it was entirely unnecessary in a lot of sequences).

Like in Sin City?

 

[Agentsands77]

Like in Sin City?

Yes, although it works better in SIN CITY because such narration is a staple of the film noir genre.

 

[Nivek]

And this is a Legend being told, in epic Conan The Barbarian style.

 

[Agentsands77]

And this is a Legend being told, in epic Conan The Barbarian style.

Granted. But the narration style (i.e. using the present tense) makes little sense for an oral storyteller. Frank Miller did not write his narration for 300 as dialogue for a storyteller - while there are segments of 300 that are storytelling, the narrator is not any character, and a lot of the narration is standard Frank Miller inner monologue.

Secondly, it's overused. There's too much of it. You could still cut down on it a bit and get the idea across that it's a story being told. In some scenes, the narration adds something (the oracle scene, for example). In others, it's just plain redundant.

 

[Mr. Socko]

I loved the one liners.

 

[Spade]

****

She was raped by Theron, you heartless *** hole.

I hope you edit your post, Gunblade. Dont let some shmuck get you banned because of his insensitivite Sepia-toned sexist post. "She wanted it" types, gotta love 'em.

...

When the heck did I say she wanted it?! I'm not being cold. I'm just saying that for the inclusion of the rape sequence it just lead up to one cool moment. So much more could have been done with her character considering that this is one of the few Spartan women we see, and stereotypically the only time she's given a plot-driven moment it is preceding some degrading moment.

Seriously. If you two could actually read instead of going 2 lines into my post and conceiving your own little reality with my words taken out of context, you'd be much better off. I haven't said a sexist thing. I'm just saying it's the usual character development of women that makes Miller's version of Gorgo better off in that there is less of a waste of time. She's two-dimensional with little development, like the women and children of Sparta. Sorry this irks you.

 

[pickleweed]

I bet you avoid Gym's because all those guys working out is "gay" too, same with working in sports teams, and working in fire and police deparments, working in the military, ect. A bunch of guys working side by side is gay, especially if they are hot looking and make you question what you think is attractive.

Gimme a break, there is really no Homosexual underpinnings or no "gay" scenes in 300. Whats lame is people jumping on this shallow critism bandwagon. I know I'm dissapointed at the number of people complaining about it or coming up with explanations on why they think it's gay, to them.

"Overtly Sexualized Violence" ...yeah...

please, im not the homophobe here. it doesnt have homosexual underpinnings because 300 guys are in speedos. its because of the innuendo between some of the spartans alongside with xerxes androgyny and the resultant tension between he and lionidas during their initial encounter. thats undeniable. it was purposefully placed and executed. does that make it gay? no. does it make sexually charged? yes.

same for the way the violence is portrayed. these men live for battle. there were numerous innuendo between the sexual penetration and the violent. the way the film was shot, there are many sexually suggestive shots, again connecting the two.

dont put words in my mouth. learn to read, and stop being so defensive of the movie you enjoy possibly being gay or sexual.

 

[Nivek]

Um, it's not really Gay though, thats the funny part. The people who keep bringing this crap up are the ones obviously with the hang ups. Stabbing people = sex... to guys like Jeffrey Dahmer. So obviously 99% of anyone else watching is is going to see a violent, bloody battle between two cultures, you apparently see some sexual projection thats not really there.

Like it for your own reasons, I guess.

 

[C. Lee]

****

She was raped by Theron, you heartless ass hole.

Please remember....you can disagree and argue without calling people names.

...

When the heck did I say she wanted it?! I'm not being cold. I'm just saying that for the inclusion of the rape sequence it just lead up to one cool moment. So much more could have been done with her character considering that this is one of the few Spartan women we see, and stereotypically the only time she's given a plot-driven moment it is preceding some degrading moment.

Seriously. If you two could actually read instead of going 2 lines into my post and conceiving your own little reality with my words taken out of context, you'd be much better off. I haven't said a sexist thing. I'm just saying it's the usual character development of women that makes Miller's version of Gorgo better off in that there is less of a waste of time. She's two-dimensional with little development, like the women and children of Sparta. Sorry this irks you.

In your original post....you made no mention of the female character being "raped".....but rather, referred to her as "sleeping" with others......this can be construed as you comparing a violent degrading act to a mutually consented to and mutually enjoyable act of love. It may have been an unintentional miswording, or an intentional expression of insensitivity.....in either event, people questioning your statement for a clarification is acceptable.

 

[green]

Um, it's not really Gay though, thats the funny part. The people who keep bringing this crap up are the ones obviously with the hang ups. Stabbing people = sex... to guys like Jeffrey Dahmer. So obviously 99% of anyone else watching is is going to see a violent, bloody battle between two cultures, you apparently see some sexual projection thats not really there.

Like it for your own reasons, I guess.

Actually Nivek there is definately some homosexual undertones at times. The battles and stabbing is ridiculous but Snyder even admits to it. He used it for effect though IMO not to promote or degrade.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20014479,00.html

But movies become what their audiences make of them, whatever a director might intend. Which brings us to one more wild card in the 300 launch: the gay factor. While Queen Gorgo's topless interlude will get the hormones of adolescent males firing, it's hard to predict what they'll make of Xerxes, the eight-foot-tall Persian conqueror who looks like a glam-rock refugee. He's played as a fey, sexually ambiguous figure by Brazilian-born actor Rodrigo Santoro (currently an ill-received new character on Lost). ''He's this giant,'' says Santoro of Xerxes, ''who believes he's a god. He's very manly, but at the same time has a feminine side.'' And why is that? ''Because, being a god, he's allowed to have every quality.'' The scenes of a bejeweled, long-fingernailed Xerxes offering King Leonidas peace in exchange for ''submission'' have a decidedly sexual undertone. Snyder says that's not accidental, that it's intended to make young straight males in the audience uncomfortable: ''What's more scary to a 20-year-old boy than a giant god-king who wants to have his way with you?''

 

[THE MR. TERRIFIC]

One of the best movies of the year!

 

[dawhistleblower]

The Queen didn't need to be more than an after-thought, if you ask me. The story is about the battle itself - it's about the heroes there. I don't particularly care about the background red tape. And since I didn't really develop any emotional attachment to her character even with the additional story material, I didn't think it helped any. In fact, I thought her scenes brought the film to halt and killed the energy the film had built up.

And frankly, I thought taking Leonidas' inner monologue from the graphic novel and making it dialogue was a big mistake. It sounded silly spoken like that (on the whole, I felt the narration was distracting in the film - such narration works in a graphic novel, but it was entirely unnecessary in a lot of sequences).

completely disagree with you on every point you made in this post. First off... the queens scenes were amazing and have got a THUNDEROUS applause all THREE times that i have went to see it... so whether you like it or not it is one of the TURNING (BIG) MOMENTS in the movie.


2nd... the dialog being changed and even put into the words of the story teller was great! And since Frank Miller was there the whole time helping with everything from production to actual added scenes in the scripting... i think he has every right to alter his own works!!

 

[Nivek]

Actually Nivek there is definately some homosexual undertones at times. The battles and stabbing is ridiculous but Snyder even admits to it. He used it for effect though IMO not to promote or degrade.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20014479,00.html

It's obvious Xerxes was portrayed as being kinda ambiguious, but thats not the same thing as gay. "Ooh, he put his hands on Leonidas sholders, OMFG so GHEY" type comment get blown over to me as much as the people fixated on Bryan Singer slipping in Gay themes into his work.

As far as the quote you posted, it's about Xerxes, not about symbolism of the "stabbing". Theres nothing quoted from the production crew about Spartans having homosexual over or undertones. It seems like something that a few confused people fixated on and wont drop.

Really, outside of internet message boards and the occasional review, has anyone really heard all this gay talk about 300? everyone i know out here in the real world either thought it was a Awesome battle Movie, or thought it was too cartoonish. When i brought up the "Ghey" stuff that people talk about here, it just inspires laughter, even from the people who didn't like it. I really, really believe it just shows how ignorent and hung up some of you are.

 

[green]

It's obvious Xerxes was portrayed as being kinda ambiguious, but thats not the same thing as gay. "Ooh, he put his hands on Leonidas sholders, OMFG so GHEY" type comment get blown over to me as much as the people fixated on Bryan Singer slipping in Gay themes into his work.

As far as the quote you posted, it's about Xerxes, not about symbolism of the "stabbing". Theres nothing quoted from the production crew about Spartans having homosexual over or undertones. It seems like something that a few confused people fixated on and wont drop.

Really, outside of internet message boards and the occasional review, has anyone really heard all this gay talk about 300? everyone i know out here in the real world either thought it was a Awesome battle Movie, or thought it was too cartoonish. When i brought up the "Ghey" stuff that people talk about here, it just inspires laughter, even from the people who didn't like it. I really, really believe it just shows how ignorent and hung up some of you are.

Well for the most part I agree with you. The idea of homosexual symbolism in the stabbings is absurd and quite a stretch and I do think some people around here are reaching for things that arent there. But I also feel Snyder did play with some undertones here and there, and as a movie goer with my own opinion it's my call to make.
As for Singer, there is no denying he used the theme of acceptance. Bobby's coming out scene screams of it but again I dont think he used it to promote some pro gay agenda like some believe. It was simply to relate the character with the use of a current social issue lots of kids these days go thru.

 

[Manhunter]

I loved the one liners.

I was worried about the one liners, "Come and get them", seemed cheesy first time I read it.

Imagine my surprise to learn that Leonidas coined the phrase, and it's now the emblem of the Greek 1st Army Corps.

 

[Agentsands77]

completely disagree with you on every point you made in this post. First off... the queens scenes were amazing and have got a THUNDEROUS applause all THREE times that i have went to see it... so whether you like it or not it is one of the TURNING (BIG) MOMENTS in the movie.

Yeah, and Yoda's horrible fight scene in ATTACK OF THE CLONES got applause too. Doesn't mean it was good.

2nd... the dialog being changed and even put into the words of the story teller was great! And since Frank Miller was there the whole time helping with everything from production to actual added scenes in the scripting... i think he has every right to alter his own works!!

Frank Miller has the right, sure, but it doesn't mean he adapted his own work well.

 

[pickleweed]

It's obvious Xerxes was portrayed as being kinda ambiguious, but thats not the same thing as gay. "Ooh, he put his hands on Leonidas sholders, OMFG so GHEY" type comment get blown over to me as much as the people fixated on Bryan Singer slipping in Gay themes into his work.

As far as the quote you posted, it's about Xerxes, not about symbolism of the "stabbing". Theres nothing quoted from the production crew about Spartans having homosexual over or undertones. It seems like something that a few confused people fixated on and wont drop.

Really, outside of internet message boards and the occasional review, has anyone really heard all this gay talk about 300? everyone i know out here in the real world either thought it was a Awesome battle Movie, or thought it was too cartoonish. When i brought up the "Ghey" stuff that people talk about here, it just inspires laughter, even from the people who didn't like it. I really, really believe it just shows how ignorent and hung up some of you are.

so basically, youre disregarding opinions other than those of yourself, and those of your friends. thats an intelligent , wide ranging demographic.

and ill say again, learn to read. i didnt say the stabbing was gay, i said it was sexual. there is a difference whether you know it or not. and isnt it quaint that when you are blatantly proven wrong, you werent talking about xerxes...yeah.....

reading comprehension is a lost art.

 

[GSFOR]

so basically, youre disregarding opinions other than those of yourself, and those of your friends. thats an intelligent , wide ranging demographic.

and ill say again, learn to read. i didnt say the stabbing was gay, i said it was sexual. there is a difference whether you know it or not. and isnt it quaint that when you are blatantly proven wrong, you werent talking about xerxes...yeah.....

reading comprehension is a lost art.

Seems to me like you're a hypocrit. How can sexual stabbing between the same sex not be gay. That's like letting another man grind on your ass, and all you can say is ,It's not gay it's just sexual in nature. To tell you the truth I didn't see any of that gay stuff going on at first, however after seing it a couple of times, you people are ruining the experience for me. I got a gay video for you, check out micheal jackson "beat it" a bunch of guys holding hands and dancing... Seems kinda funny that nobody notice the sexual tensions between the dancers and micheal jackson.Give me a break, stop looking for all these extras that we really don't need.

 

[Nivek]

LOL! Thanks for pointing that out.

It's funny, he tries to shift gears and make me look foolish, then says something like men stabbing each other is sexual. the only time I took sexual innuendo in the violence was when

Spoiler

gorgo guts Theron repeating the same words he used when he defiled her

. As far as ALL the other stabbing being sexual, I guess it's in the eye of the beholder.

 

[mrvlknight21]

The movie was almost note for note faithful to the GN (without being as ham fisted as Sin City), and if the Gorgo addition and the Stumblios ommission turned you off, sheesh man... sounds like you are reaching for stuff to not like. To eash their own.

You have a point. When I have read a book and the movie is off, I become very critical. Yes, it was a very close interpretation, I wont argue that. I also will agree that the Queen's extra role/scenes may have given the movie a little more meat. I didnt say I was turned off (except the scene w/ Gorgo left a bad taste), just a little disappointed. It was a good movie, no doubt.

 

[juarez]

The director states in his interview with Entertainment Weekly that he purposefully portrayed Xerxes as sexually ambiguous in order to scare young straight men in the audience with the thought of him "having his way with them". He admits that the homosexual undertones are intended to make straight males uncomfortable.
Equating homosexuality with deviance and villainy is homophobic and insulting. Xerxes is obviously intended as the evil feminised opposite of the Spartans' hyper-masculine heterosexuality.
It would be one thing if the film had balanced out Xerxes with heroic gay Spartans, but instead it erases what really existed, - Spartans who has same-sex lovers,- and depicts something that didn't exist, - a feminised, predatory gay stereotype.
How usual for bigoted Hollywood.