Not when you continue to 'generally' define them as this.. I don't see what you've "simplified" there.. it's almost an exact quote from your first post. It's misleading praise.. I just said this.. It certaintly does.. But, if the majority of reviewers, specifically those that enjoyed the movie and have nothing but good things to say about it ,speak of "zero plot, zero story".. I'm inclined to believe them. Why would they incorrectly slight a movie they enjoyed? I have no problem with people enjoying this movie and praising it for what it is. There's plenty of it in this thread but, I pinpointed yours for the reasons I've already provided you with.. twice. Move on?
Interesting... I probably shouldn't even bother, because I think you've got issues beyond just a movie, not too mention you're probably just trying to start internet message board debates, but I do find this a little fascinating. And since you've decided there is a great injustice with my praise in particular, let's see if we can understand each other here. From what I'm able to gather, you seem to have a problem with the idea that the positives of this movie are anything other/beyond 'highly stylized' and 'good action'. Is this correct? You seem to think that my friends - again, even though you don't know them - only liked it because of the generalizations you've given. The idea that someone out there may have found something else they enjoyed - something of the story or plot, which is obviously two things you keep harping on - seems 'misleading' to you. And this is all based, of course, on things you've only read and heard. You have not seen the movie yourself. Is this correct? I've got no problem with differing opinions on a movie... that's what makes the world go 'round. I do have a problem with you singling mine out, trying to discredit it as 'misleading' by trying to tell me something about people I know and you do not. And if that's all you're offering here, and what I've asked above is pretty much the case...then yeah, you probably should move on. There's nothing I can do for you.
i saw it and thought it was really good. i can't really be disappointed that it wasn't as good as gladiator b/c it was never going to have that emotional impact that gladiator did. it promised to be an asskickingfest and an asskickingfest it was. i think that commander's son and his friend killed about 30 people in a 60 second period at one point. i don't really see the need for character development or a story. some persians showed up to conquer greece, and some greeks went out to stop them. really nothing more need be said. and not only would any character development have taken away from asskicking time, it would have felt forced, as if the director was only doing it b/c that's what you're supposed to do, not b/c it was needed. but that's just my opinion. visually, it was amazing. great to look at from start to finish. some hotter women for the nudity would've been good, but that's a minor complaint. apparently it took in $27.8 million on friday alone which means it should post a huge number for the weekend. that's amazing for this time of year and better than i would've thought it would do (though with a solid line for a 9:50 showing tonight i guess i can see how it did so well). and i have no idea what Rokkit and Hmm are arguing about.
Well, if you read one of my previous comments, you'll see that my Art History teacher made the entire class watch it for a grade, because we're supposed to write a report on what we learned from it. Obviously, since it wasn't historically accurate and the teacher didn't know any better, I'm curious to know what he'll have to say about the assignment. Long story short, I had to watch it anyway. That being said, I watch everything and might have given it a chance. I gave Sin City a chance even though I was bored to tears after the first ten minutes. I don't feel it would be right for me to negatively criticize a movie if I, myself, haven't seen it.
You know, this makes me wonder... If someone went extreme and completely made a pointless movie with nothing but sex and things exploding and three lines of dialogue, how much money would it gross on a weekend and how many people would say it was " so awesome cause of the style! " I'd say it takes in $20 million in opening week.
Most flagrant form of false advertising since I went to Stoner's Pot Palace. I counted no more than 174 of the 300 dying. Honestly, if you're going to call a movie "300", you should have a small counter on the bottom corner. I knoe Jean Claude Van Damme wanted it that way.
Yes, clearly... I blindly and unfoundedly generalized the two women... and have the issues.. First you bring marketing into this.. now you're accusing me of having a problem with 'the idea' of this movie being more than what 99% of the positive reviewers in this very thread have most admittedly said it to be.. ? When it's that unanimous, that's pretty much what the movie was meant to be. So you're running in circles, defending your review, which by most accounts, 99% of them, is inaccurate and most possibly goes against the director's/creators very own vision and direction. Based on... "Two women that normally don't like "dumb action movies" liked this one".. Do you know see what all that sounds like? And round and round we go.. What all this appears to be.. is a lack of communication... within your own brain.. So, blah blah blah.. let's drop it. Unreal.
Allow me to rephrase -- Is 300 just a big dumb popcorn (watchable) flick like Crank or is it trying to be a little deeper like Sin City? I guess a third option being is 300 an utter waste of time?
Just saw it in IMAX last night. A little underwhelming, but still a kick ass movie! And Hmmmmmm really needs to get some help.
This is one of the best movies I have ever seen. Spoiler The subplots weren't absolutely spellbinding, but the battle scenes are incredible and stunning. Even the bit of dark humor. "Theres no reason we can't be civil" hehehe. final 20 minutes of this movie were amazing. I was nearly moved to tears. Rivaled the ending of Gladiator in my mind, just captivating. It is definitely as good as Braveheart or Gladiator IMO. - finalsbound's masculine side.
That was one bad a$$ flick! Visually stunning and full of action. Those saying it is pointless killing with no plot haven't taken history lessons. I wrote a paper for my world history class in 04 over the "Persian Wars" and this flick focused on one of the many battles going on. It did a great job of ingraning the Spartan warrior mentality, their advanced (at that time) fighting style, the fact that women were held in such high respect, etc... I guess if you didn't learn this stuff in History or don't remember it, you don't catch alot of the little details. I thoroughly enjoyed it. If you're on the fence about whether to see it or not, I would say go see it.
Yay for 300! It took in about $70 mill over the weekend. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070311/film_nm/boxoffice_dc LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The blood-soaked ancient epic "300" slaughtered its foes at the weekend box office in North America, setting a new record for a March release by selling about $70 million worth of tickets, distributor Warner Bros. Pictures said on Sunday. The grim warrior tale stars Scottish actor Gerard Butler as Leonidas, king of the Spartans, who leads 300 of his warriors to glorious death at the Battle of Thermopylae against a massive Persian army commanded by the fey king Xerxes (Brazilian actor Rodrigo Santoro). Its achievement was all the more noteworthy given that the previous record-holder for the month, 2006's "Ice Age 2: The Meltdown," with $68 million, was a family-oriented cartoon, while "300" is an unabashedly gruesome spectacle with an "R" rating that prevents viewers under 17 attending without adult supervision. In fact, the opening for "300" ranks as the third-highest for an R-rated movie, behind "The Matrix Reloaded" ($91 million) and "The Passion of the Christ" ($83 million), said Warner Bros., a unit of Time Warner Inc. The film, budgeted in the mid-$60 million range, was directed by Zack Snyder ("Dawn of the Dead"), and based on the graphic novel by comic book writer Frank Miller ("Sin City"). It earned largely positive reviews, despite or because of its myriad decapitations and balletic battlefield carnage. The last few chart-toppers, incumbent champ "Wild Hogs," "Ghost Rider" and "Norbit" were slammed by the critics.
You decided why my friends liked it, though you don't know them. (such as pointing at another post mentioning 'abs' as 'more honest' as to why women would enjoy it - along with your ranting about slight love interests, etc.) All I told you is they don't normally like a 'zero plot zero character development action movie' like this is 'supposed' to be. I have not really detailed why they did but that hasn't stopped you from deciding why it was, why it must be, and why it couldn't be. Why you feel the need to do that, or why you felt you had to point it out to begin with (oh GOD his post is MISLEADING) I have no idea. So yeah, you've got issues. And yet if there is someone out there who liked it but does not like moves that generally are 'what the movie was meant to be', you are desperately trying to rationalize that (OH! It must be the abs the women liked!). I only brought up marketing because I thought you were talking in a general sense of women as a movie audience. I didn't actually think you were trying to tell me what the specific women I was with were thinking. Amazingly enough, you actually are. It's like you are determined that everyone must parrot back what you've read on reviews on the internet. (BUT ALL THE REVIEWS SAY SO!!!). People like movies for different reasons. Even if they aren't always what you read in reviews. And all this for a movie you haven't even seen. So yeah, you got issues. 'OH GOD he's not saying what the reviews all say!!! what do i do?!!?' I did not even really give a 'review'. You are so hell-bent in saying what little I typed is 'inaccurate' (it's an opinion) it is ridiculous. Also, let me know what Snyder's up to these days. You seem to know him pretty well. You can keep telling yourself that. If you can't understand what I've explained above, then I can't help you any further. I don't think anyone can. You probably should. But then again, you never should have singled me out as the focus for your issues (yeah, you've got 'em) with this movie to begin with, so I doubt you will.
