So "300" is only at 60% on RottenTomatoes.com

[crystal]

Originally posted by: yankeesfan
I was really looking forward to this movie until I saw this clip: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0lW9gw5TwxE

Now I'm considering skipping it.

If the whole movie fight scenes are like that, I will skipping it. And people complains wire-fu is bad. Maybe get it when it come out in dvd.

 

[Miramonti]

Looks like a typical Hollywood trailer trash movie.

Nice trailer, but the movie is trash.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
Yeah, that deffinitely was NOT what they wore back in the day. Maybe for working out or training, but in real battle you wear ARMOR, every depiction of greek phalanxes I have ever seen had the people fully clothed and wearing armor. That is jsut one of a hundred things which are completely inaccuracte about this movie. I know its not even based off the historical even so its doesn't matter, but please don't use historical accuracy to justify anything that happens in this movie becasue odds are your wrong.

EDIT: not somoene is prolly gonna try to say that clip where the sword cut right threw people with no problem is accurate too?

through

Also, this movie really, really looks like more hype than substance.

 

[50cent1228]

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
The whole thing looks gay to me.. Not that there's anything wrong with that..

Possibly nowhere outside of gay porn have so many broad shoulders, bulging biceps and ripped torsos been seen onscreen as in "300," a fact that will generate a certain bonus audience of its own; it's not even certain Steve Reeves, the original "Hercules," would have made the grade here.

The Brokeback Mountain of 2007? Consider me there!

you have 2 to be there, i mean the movie was based on you

 

[DougK62]

 

[purbeast0]

meh i'm going to see it regardless of ANY reviews I read on it.

 

[slackerinabox]

Originally posted by: 50cent1228

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
The whole thing looks gay to me.. Not that there's anything wrong with that..

Possibly nowhere outside of gay porn have so many broad shoulders, bulging biceps and ripped torsos been seen onscreen as in "300," a fact that will generate a certain bonus audience of its own; it's not even certain Steve Reeves, the original "Hercules," would have made the grade here.

The Brokeback Mountain of 2007? Consider me there!

you have 2 to be there, i mean the movie was based on you

I will be there, if only you promise to hold my hands through it.

 

[eleison]

ahh man.. now you guys are ruining the movie for me.... Ever time that I see this movie, I'll probably be thinking: "geeze, yea.. there sure is a lot of man flesh here.... I bet a whole lot of gays are sure liking this.." which will ultimately ruin my experience since I expected a "he-man" type of movie...

thanks a lot people

 

[RaiderJ]

Hello, it's a movie! Obviously the intent here is not a historical documentary, but a stylized depiction of an event.

For the movie, I think how they chose to dress the characters fits it perfectly. They look like badasses. If they were all wearing armor, they'd look like a Smith clone army.

And the gay comments? Sheesh. Would they have preferred fat guys in smocks?

 

[Nightfall]

Originally posted by: clamum
Here's what I say to those reviewers

Hahaha! Hillarious!

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: RaiderJ


For the movie, I think how they chose to dress the characters fits it perfectly. They look like badasses. .....

Or pissed off gay folks mad at being rejected from the village people.... Dammniit.. now everytime I see a still of the movie, I think: "why don't you freak'n nancy boys put on some clothes!!!!"

 

[shortspanishguy]

There is nothing gay about ripped half naked dudes spilling the blood of dark skinned folks.

 

[LordMorpheus]

Originally posted by: vr6
thats how they dressed back in the day. i don't know why they are complaining about that. did they expect chainmails or something?

They wore almost head-toe armor. Bronze plate, not chainmail, but the Spartans didn't fight in thongs.

 

[Qianglong]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
Yeah, that deffinitely was NOT what they wore back in the day. Maybe for working out or training, but in real battle you wear ARMOR, every depiction of greek phalanxes I have ever seen had the people fully clothed and wearing armor. That is jsut one of a hundred things which are completely inaccuracte about this movie. I know its not even based off the historical even so its doesn't matter, but please don't use historical accuracy to justify anything that happens in this movie becasue odds are your wrong.

EDIT: not somoene is prolly gonna try to say that clip where the sword cut right threw people with no problem is accurate too?

Yes, the greeks and the spartans wear bronze breast plate armor for the upper body. If you watch the Movie Alexander, its a better depiction of how the armour looks like in that time.

 

[eleison]

Come to think of it... has there every been a movie that had this much "man flesh"? Nothing really comes to mind right now. Its quite disconcerting.. :-(

 

[BD2003]

Although it still looks awesome, the concept of spartans fighting for freedom is just ridiculous to me.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: yowolabi
I'd much rather trust other movie-goers than movie critics.

I'd rather do that too, but the sad fact is that "other moviegoers" for the most part have really terrible taste. So instead I have to rely on critics or the very limited number of people in this world (2) whose opinion I actually CAN trust.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.

So what's your review?

...you not being a hater and all

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: Queasy
...amidst a rump-shaking orgy of disfigured lesbians.

hmmmm...

lol.................

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Qianglong

Originally posted by: BrownTown
Yeah, that deffinitely was NOT what they wore back in the day. Maybe for working out or training, but in real battle you wear ARMOR, every depiction of greek phalanxes I have ever seen had the people fully clothed and wearing armor. That is jsut one of a hundred things which are completely inaccuracte about this movie. I know its not even based off the historical even so its doesn't matter, but please don't use historical accuracy to justify anything that happens in this movie becasue odds are your wrong.

EDIT: not somoene is prolly gonna try to say that clip where the sword cut right threw people with no problem is accurate too?

Yes, the greeks and the spartans wear bronze breast plate armor for the upper body. If you watch the Movie Alexander, its a better depiction of how the armour looks like in that time.

yeap.

while the spartans where great warriors they still had armor. it amazes me people think they actually faught in nothing more then a loin cloth and a cape. really thats fricken silly.
and yes the movie is loosly based on historical fact (ok its based off a comic that is based of something that really happened (well kinda heh)).

but i still want to see the movie. the graphic novel was great!

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.

umm no.

 

[Greyd]

Believe it or not, alot of critics (assuming liberal) are criticisizing the film as being a pro-bush movie. Some even claim it to be a politically themed West vs East movie. It seems like lots of the hate is coming from there.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: waggy
yes the movie is loosly based on historical fact (ok its based off a comic that is based of something that really happened (well kinda heh)).

It's a movie based off a comic book that was inspired by a movie that was based off a historical event.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.

LOL at the fanboys popping out of the woodwork. Perhaps you should just laugh at the reviews instead of being angry at them.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.

It's true. Greek soldiers put a ton of effort into making themselves look nice right before a battle. It was their way of making sure they looked pretty when they died, since dying young was the best way to go (that was a soldier's opinion anyway).

The critics are basically bashing the movie for being historically accurate.

Edit: I did some research on what the Spartans may have looked like at the time, and here are the results

1) Spartan soldiers worked out naked
2) For battle, they wore nothing but a cloak, a helmet with a phallus protruding from the front, and assless leather chaps
3) They wore lipstick and mascara