User reviews

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.

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.

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.

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!

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!

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.

It's almost as if the writer and director made a challenge to themselves to see how many clichés they could fit in and scenes and plot devices they could carbon copy from braveheart, hero, lord of the rings, the patriot, gladiator, mortal combat and god knows how many other epic movies. It also loses points for including lines like "freedom isn't free" and having too many comparisons to the war on terror (with a pro war message).

The characters show one-dimensionality that is usually reserved for romantic comedies. The good guys are white. the bad guys are brown. Holocaust deniers have a better grip on historic events. It is a shoe in if the Oscars ever add the category "most homoerotic".

stylistically though, it was the bomb-digga.

'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.

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.

I recently watched 300 and thought it was absolute rubbish. The director did no research NONE what so ever and should just sit in the corner and stay there. Persian's were not and are not black. Get your facts right. And why is Xerxes a giant with piercings and tattoos? With a weird giant like voice? If Zack Snyder ever reads this, please comment on it so we can discuss. If you do not wish to discuss, I would just like to say that before you make another ridiculous film, do some research and get your facts straight. Maybe you won't seem so dumb then. Oh and I only gave it a rating of 1 because I wasn't able to rate it a zero.

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%.

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.

...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.

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.

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

I, personally, love the story of the 300 Spartans, it's really hard not to, so I was biased from the start. On one hand I want to point out the historical discrepancies and reference books and other films, you know: what they could have done better, changed, where they didn't need to fudge on history. But its unreasonable to judge a film about comic book visuals and video game violence based upon its historical relevance. That said it's not a bad movie. You get what you're looking for, amazing visuals, great landscapes, endless battles, homoeroticism, cheesy one-liners in the tradition of Die Hard. (I thought maybe they used up all the one-liners in the trailer, but was I wrong, there is a whole cache of them lined up for the audience.)

If all you're searching for is an engaging, mind numbing, gore filled two hours, this will surely do the trick. But if you're a sucker for a good story or solid acting you find this film a bit disappointing. The story of the 300 Spartans is spruced up a bit to be slightly more relevant for the modern, post 9/11 American audience. There are lots of politically induced soliloquies about freedom not being free and dying for your country. (Not that I'm attempting to pan the basic ideal here, that's another discussion entirely, but I think I might have heard these lines somewhere before…) There is also an overwhelming sense of the propagation of the east/west binary. The east, obviously being the Persian army, is portrayed as enslaving barbarians, exotic, an object of observation and curiosity, to be pondered but not participated in. This is a point of historical departure that feels phony and deliberate. Truly at this point in time there is a sort of binary, but the Spartans are portrayed with American values and the Persians with no values but the hope of becoming gods in their own right. A concept that really has no place being perpetuated at any time. I'm not saying don't see this, or trying to condone censorship, but merely pointing out that this is a symptom of America's post 9/11 terror hysteria. The film is fun, and incredibly well shot. But the plot is problematic, at best, and is the kind fake "independent" film that Hollywood is beginning to churn out at a rapid pace to consume the growing video game/comic book demographic of film-goers that Tarantino has bred to believe that good films contain breasts and unrealistic amounts of blood. (not that it's always bad, I still love Oldboy and there is nothing there but senseless, gratuitous violence, it's just poorly done in 300)

Hearing that 300 is based upon a " graphic novel " which is a pseudo intellectual phrase used to describe a comic book I didn't go out of my way to watch this because the present Hollywood movie making factory spends too much time and money bringing these type of stories to the screen . Also I was very unimpressed with director Zack Snyder's previous film the remake of DAWN OF THE DEAD which is a pale imitation of a superior movie . Sometimes prejudice can get in the way of judging a film of its own merits because 300 is one of the more memorable movie moments from last year and one that seems unforgivably ignored at the more prestigious film award ceremonies

Being based upon a comic book you could say in all honesty that the visuals mirror those of a graphic novel , but I would claim it goes far , far beyond that and say it's like watching a painting come to life . The battle scenes are entirely different from those seen in LORD OF THE RINGS or KINGDOM OF HEAVEN but are no less impressive and some of the battle sequences , most notably the ones featuring the immortals are terrifying . Did I say this film is like a painting come to life ? In some sequences it looks like a nightmare come to life and this stylish formalist type of cinema will send a chill down your spine . This is cinema strictly for adults only

Fans of ancient history and classical studies will find a lot to criticise because it's not an accurate depiction of ancient Greece but you should always make the legend according to John Ford . Unfortunately by concentrating on the visuals there's other aspects lacking . The Spartans don't really come across as real characters from ancient times , more of a crowd of wise cracking macho cyphers and let's be honest here , with the exception of voice over the dialogue is rather poor . It often reminded me of something present day Scottish folk hero John Smeaton might say : " Dinnae come tae Sparta , we'll set aboot ya up here "

But despite these very noticeable flaws this is a truly memorable movie down to the jaw dropping visuals and it's the visuals the film will be rightly remembered for . It's a pity that the Oscar voters have ignored 300 because certainly make up , cinematography , editing and possibly best supporting actor for Andrew Tiernan as Ephialtes should have been nominated at least and this film will be highly regarded in years to come