Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025

    This...Is...Spartaaaaaaa!!!!

    Okay, saw 300 last night. Gotta admit, I went in half excited, half expecting this movie to completely disappoint after all the hype it received.

    I'm no scholar of film methodology, but that was one fun pop-corn munchin' movie to watch from beginning to end. The eye candy was just incredible, way better than the CGI stuff from Lord of the Rings. I think I like CGI, usually way better than a lot of alternatives (I think self-professed movie buffs criticize it too much). It's way less revealing when its used properly, though I admit sometimes it's just not appropriate, or is too overdone. Not so here.

    There was a likeable hero with some well timed humour, an obvious bad guy you just wanted to hate, and enough sub plots along the way to keep the story mildly engaging. And the fight scenes and other emotional spots were very nicely integrated with a fitting musical score that I really enjoyed (Tyler Bates, bravo).

    100% predictable movie (who doesn't know the story) but it worked so well because it was kept soooo simple. I haven't had that much fun in the theater since "Shaun of the Dead".

    Heard a lot of people talking about in on the way in and way out, nobody complained. Nice to hear for a change.

  2. #2
    Sgt. At Arms Worf101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Troy, New York
    Posts
    4,288

    Hmmmm....

    Sounds.... GLORIOUS!!!!

    As my namesake said in "The Siege of AR-558"
    "This was a great victory. Worthy of story and song."

    My son saw it on Sat with a school chum, he said it was "glorious". No actually he said it was pretty good. I can't wait to see it on the biggie.

    Da Worfster

  3. #3
    Suspended PeruvianSkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,373

    Cgi ...

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Okay, saw 300 last night. Gotta admit, I went in half excited, half expecting this movie to completely disappoint after all the hype it received.

    I'm no scholar of film methodology, but that was one fun pop-corn munchin' movie to watch from beginning to end. The eye candy was just incredible, way better than the CGI stuff from Lord of the Rings. I think I like CGI, usually way better than a lot of alternatives (I think self-professed movie buffs criticize it too much). It's way less revealing when its used properly, though I admit sometimes it's just not appropriate, or is too overdone. Not so here.

    There was a likeable hero with some well timed humour, an obvious bad guy you just wanted to hate, and enough sub plots along the way to keep the story mildly engaging. And the fight scenes and other emotional spots were very nicely integrated with a fitting musical score that I really enjoyed (Tyler Bates, bravo).

    100% predictable movie (who doesn't know the story) but it worked so well because it was kept soooo simple. I haven't had that much fun in the theater since "Shaun of the Dead".

    Heard a lot of people talking about in on the way in and way out, nobody complained. Nice to hear for a change.
    The problem with CGI is the fact that it dates poorly and looks fake. Sure, models and other methods look gimmicky at times, but the CGI stuff definitely looks worse. You said that this looks better than LOTR, well that is interesting because everyone thought that it was a milestone in CGI, but look at how quickly that has aged. Also, most people were not happy with the digital Yoda that recently appeared and there is no way anyone can think that the CGI Yoda looks better or more realistic.

  4. #4
    Mutant from table 9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,205
    Quote Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
    Also, most people were not happy with the digital Yoda that recently appeared and there is no way anyone can think that the CGI Yoda looks better or more realistic.
    I just watched a little Jedi this weekend and was surprised at how good latex rubber yoda looked. Didn't Frank Oz do those puppets? Yoda is the perfect example of using CGI to fix something that wasn't broken. Slow Yoda looked good in puppet form. Fast Yoda still could have been done with CGI, but the slow close ups done with the puppet.

    On the other hand, 300 and its ilk like Sin City and Sky Captain (apparently I'm the only person who liked Sky Captain), may fair better over the long haul since they are supposed to be highly stylized and comic booky.
    ______________________
    Joyce Summers: "You've got really great albums!"
    Rupert "Ripper" Giles: "Yeah... they're okay..."


    "Tha H-Dog listens easy, always has, always will." - Herbert Kornfeld (R.I.P.)

    "I lick the mothra moniters because they pump up the base!!" - Dusty Beiber

  5. #5
    Sgt. At Arms Worf101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Troy, New York
    Posts
    4,288

    Errrrr....

    Quote Originally Posted by SlumpBuster
    I
    On the other hand, 300 and its ilk like Sin City and Sky Captain (apparently I'm the only person who liked Sky Captain), may fair better over the long haul since they are supposed to be highly stylized and comic booky.
    You are NOT the only person who liked Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. That movie was good, but had they cast it right and played it a bit more tongue and cheek it could've been FANTASTIC"!!! Had they played it more "Raiders" and less Jude Law they'da had hit. I think Russel Crowe or other's could've killed that role.

    Da Worfster

  6. #6
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Worf101
    That movie was good, but had they cast it right and played it a bit more tongue and cheek it could've been FANTASTIC"!!!
    More?!?!? Like PS said, it was highly stylized, and I think intentionally comic-book-y, and quite frankly I thought it worked quite well as it was.

    I like the highly stylized nature of films like that, but just didn't like the movie that much.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  7. #7
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Loved Sky Captain...as for CGI - I agree on the Yoda - it changed the texture of the rubbery little alien we all loved. That's bad use - Yoda became "different". Some CGI is kinda goofy, like the Mummy movies etc, it works but is a bit obvious. The problem is there isn't a better alternative that captures the scope of so many marching soldiers as well. Special effects usually reveal themselves if you look hard enough - that's the downside of CGI, it's so good we're almost challenged by it.

    As for dating poorly and looking fake - I find just the opposite. It looks less fake than a lot of puppetry and scale models, and ages fine. It's only flaw is the bar continues to be raised as it improves, which leads us to compare the SOTA with the dated stuff. But if you compare bad CGI to bad puppetry, and good CGI to good puppetry, there's no comparison. IMO, the best use of CGI is to enhance models and landscapes, rather than to create them all from scratch, which is the impression I got from 300.

    Most of the time, I dont' even notice or think about CGI while I watch a show. If I am, I'm missing the point of the movie in the first place.

  8. #8
    Close 'n PlayŽ user Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Highway 6, between Tonopah and Ely
    Posts
    2,318
    I think 300 may end up being a rental for me. Just went to Zodiac (excellent in many ways) and while I didn't have a bad time, I just realized that movies are just better at home.

    As SlumpBuster said, the difference with this, Sin City and Sky Captain is that the CGI isn't trying to look 100% real like SW or LOTR does. The stylization saves it because it's not supposed to look real.

    I liked Sky Captain ok. Law was miscast and Paltrow was really miscast. I loved the excessively butch Angelina Jolie though. She really had fun with it. I liked the movie's overall look. Cool industrial design. Sin City too. Loved the look of that. One of the most strikingly art directed movies of the last 20 years. Radically different than any semi-animated movie that came before it.

    I liked the way the analog Yoda moved, he just hopped around in a very hokey fakeyfake way all through Emipire. Hilarious. Watch the way his ears wiggle in a very rubbery way. The CGI face in the newer movies is more expressive (arguably the best actor in all 3 prequels) and realistic, but I miss the little, obviously rubber version of the guy.

  9. #9
    Feel the Tempo eisforelectronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    640
    300 could have used one or two more battle scenes. A little more blood would have been nice and I wish the Spartans could have been made to appear a little bit more manly. There were spaces between the arrows, which I hope they fix with the DVD. Lastly, Xerxes was just too small. Who could believe a man that tiny could get anyone to follow him. I guess I liked okay though.
    Audio Physic Avanti IV w/upgraded mids and crossover
    Emotiva UMC-1
    Emotiva XPA-3
    Peachtree Audio iNova
    Rega Brio-R
    Rega RP-1
    Sony PS3
    BAT VK-D5se
    Totem Acoustic Dreamcatchers

  10. #10
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by eisforelectronic
    300 could have used one or two more battle scenes. A little more blood would have been nice and I wish the Spartans could have been made to appear a little bit more manly. There were spaces between the arrows, which I hope they fix with the DVD. Lastly, Xerxes was just too small. Who could believe a man that tiny could get anyone to follow him. I guess I liked okay though.
    And they say sarcasm doesn't convey on the Internet...
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  11. #11
    Suspended PeruvianSkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,373

    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by eisforelectronic
    300 could have used one or two more battle scenes. A little more blood would have been nice and I wish the Spartans could have been made to appear a little bit more manly. There were spaces between the arrows, which I hope they fix with the DVD. Lastly, Xerxes was just too small. Who could believe a man that tiny could get anyone to follow him. I guess I liked okay though.
    Xerxes was way way way too small and did not have enough jewelry to look like a king. There were only a few battle scenes, not enough blood, and I think at least 5 more decapitations would have been just about right. I could have also gone for a few more close-up beard shots and there were just not enough enemies to make it look like millions. There should have been a few more morale speeches as well and it could have been better with a few more lines about how great Spartans are. All those things aside it was a good movie.

  12. #12
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy
    I think 300 may end up being a rental for me...As SlumpBuster said, the difference with this, Sin City and Sky Captain is that the CGI isn't trying to look 100% real like SW or LOTR does. The stylization saves it because it's not supposed to look real...
    300 is also highly stylized. Just in case you didn't know that already. I was watching some interviews with Zack Snyder (the director), and he was going on and on about how he kept going back to the Frank Miller comic for his storyboards. His guys would say, yeah, I know what we're going for, but how's it really going to look? And he would say, no, you don't understand, I want it to look exactly like this. And from what I've seen from the previews and all the "makings ofs" and such (there's also a "300 seconds from 300" clip somewhere), he succeeded.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  13. #13
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Okay, saw 300 last night. Gotta admit, I went in half excited, half expecting this movie to completely disappoint after all the hype it received.
    ...
    There was a likeable hero with some well timed humour, an obvious bad guy you just wanted to hate, and enough sub plots along the way to keep the story mildly engaging. And the fight scenes and other emotional spots were very nicely integrated with a fitting musical score that I really enjoyed (Tyler Bates, bravo).

    100% predictable movie (who doesn't know the story) but it worked so well because it was kept soooo simple. I haven't had that much fun in the theater since "Shaun of the Dead".

    Heard a lot of people talking about in on the way in and way out, nobody complained. Nice to hear for a change.
    I saw 300 last night with my wife and daughter. I think we were all entertained, but ... there just wasn't a lot of plot or character plausibility. Yes, I know, that wasn't what it was all about, but there wasn't enough of the other stuff to compensate.

    I like "historical accuracy". So for example, Peter Jackson's changes to the Tolkien's LoTR story seem gratuitous and irritated me. I saw enough six-packs there to want to puke; the fact is that Greek phalanx soldiers were heavily armoured and wore breast plates. Xerxes of 300 is a ridiculous "effect" character far beyond and beneath a caricature of the historical figure. This film didn't provide the sort of internal consistency the would compansate for this sort of thing.

    I liked the stylized scenery and skies, but I'm jaded I suppose when it come to special effects and CGI. When they are they are the whole point of the exercise I'm bored.

  14. #14
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    I saw 300 last night with my wife and daughter. I think we were all entertained, but ... there just wasn't a lot of plot or character plausibility. Yes, I know, that wasn't what it was all about, but there wasn't enough of the other stuff to compensate.

    I like "historical accuracy". So for example, Peter Jackson's changes to the Tolkien's LoTR story seem gratuitous and irritated me. I saw enough six-packs there to want to puke; the fact is that Greek phalanx soldiers were heavily armoured and wore breast plates. Xerxes of 300 is a ridiculous "effect" character far beyond and beneath a caricature of the historical figure. This film didn't provide the sort of internal consistency the would compansate for this sort of thing.

    I liked the stylized scenery and skies, but I'm jaded I suppose when it come to special effects and CGI. When they are they are the whole point of the exercise I'm bored.
    Sorry you didn't like it... can't please everyone.
    Historical accuracy, yeah no kidding. From what I've read of histrocity on the battle of Thermopylae, there's very little historical accuracy in any version of this tale, which is rooted more in survivor biased legend...if we can believe 300 spartans slaughtered tens of thousands, we can overlook the odd six pack. It's a pretty movie, not a fact based documentary, that's for sure. I have a feeling the movie is the much better story.

    But it was still AWESOME!!!!

  15. #15
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Truth stranger than fiction

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Sorry you didn't like it... can't please everyone.
    Historical accuracy, yeah no kidding. From what I've read of histrocity on the battle of Thermopylae, there's very little historical accuracy in any version of this tale, which is rooted more in survivor biased legend...if we can believe 300 spartans slaughtered tens of thousands, we can overlook the odd six pack. It's a pretty movie, not a fact based documentary, that's for sure. I have a feeling the movie is the much better story.

    But it was still AWESOME!!!!
    Herodotus was known for garnishing his histories, but I can't help but feel the real history is more interesting than this. Read Herodotus' account ...
    http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/p...hermopylae.htm

    Xerxes was the George W. of his time, trying to avenge his father, Darius' defeat at Marathon. Darius was the greater ruler for certain; in the George Sr. vs. Jr., the two are closer.

    I don't say I didn't enjoy the movie for what it was, only that I was a little disappointed. Either way, a great film it is not.
    Last edited by Feanor; 03-14-2007 at 05:24 AM.

  16. #16
    Kam
    Kam is offline
    filet - o - fish Kam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,770
    just saw this last night and i enjoyed it, just some good visual entertainment. and they followed the sin city blueprint to a T as far as using the comic as the storyboard, it looked exactly like the graphic novel. i'll see if i can find some screenshot comparions.

    and just goes to show you, no matter what age you're in, tall people are idolized.

    edit: here ya go!

    http://the300.ytmnd.com/

    just let it play, it scrolls through the shots at an even pace.

    pretty cool.
    /create

  17. #17
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    Xerxes was the George W. of his time, trying to avenge his father, Darius' defeat at Marathon. Darius was the greater ruler for certain; in the George Sr. vs. Jr., the two are closer.

    I don't say I didn't enjoy the movie for what it was, only that I was a little disappointed. Either way, a great film it is not.
    Great film? Who said that? Nobody should confuse this with Spartacus...or even Gladiator for that matter. Great film? Hell no! Bloodlustingly fun, hell yeah! (I did rank it right up there with "Shaun of the Dead", afterall - one of my favs, but not a "great" film.).

    Minor SPOILER ALERT!!!
    Interesting to compare Bush family to Xerxes...the one beef I did have with the movie was the few spats about "Freedom" vs Slavery and Tyranny etc during at least one speech..A little to forced for my liking. I'm getting damn sick of the political messages artists are incorporating into their works, trying to be a bit edgy, when the damn messages are so "safe" and popular and anything but edgy. I don't remember exactly what was said, there were a few lines in there that just struck us as blatant political commentary...I go to movies to get away from the real world. Oh well.
    END SPOILER ALERT!!!

  18. #18
    Oldest join date recoveryone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,435
    The wife and I sneeked in and sat a spell and watched this film. I was very satisfied with what I felt was a motivating battle cry flick. Show this movie to a football team before a game and just sit back and watch the mayhem on the gridiron. During my day we watched the wild bunch before a playoff game. This movie ranks up there with Remember the Titans.
    HT
    Pioneer Elite SC lx502
    Pioneer Elite N50
    Pioneer Cassette CTM66R
    Pioneer Elite BDP 85FD

    Vizio P series 2160p
    Panamax 5300 EX

  19. #19
    Sgt. At Arms Worf101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Troy, New York
    Posts
    4,288

    Interesting take Recovery One...

    Yeah, I could see this being shown in locker rooms, flight decks, ready rooms and anywhere men and women are preparing for 'battle". As for "historical accuracy", I found it far more accurate than say "Charge of the Light Brigade", "Battle of the Bulge", "Pearl" or a thousand other movies I could mention that play fast and loose with the facts. Was it fun, yes, was it exciting hell yeah, was it entertaining mega hell yeah!!!

    As for the politics of it all? Well people are all over the map on this one. Some say the Persians were the Bush boys, some say the 300 Spartans are our troops in Iraq, betrayed by Quislings at home. I don't pay either much thought... Sometimes a movie is just a movie.

    Da Worfster

  20. #20
    Oldest join date recoveryone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,435
    You hit the nail on the head Worf, sometimes its just that, a movie.
    HT
    Pioneer Elite SC lx502
    Pioneer Elite N50
    Pioneer Cassette CTM66R
    Pioneer Elite BDP 85FD

    Vizio P series 2160p
    Panamax 5300 EX

  21. #21
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    halifax,nova scotia,canada
    Posts
    1,083
    Saw it this afternoon at my local IMAX theatre.Sure it is a little short on story and maybe not historically accurate but it was a lot of fun.Even looking at the huge IMAX screen i thought the cgi was very good.To enjoy a movie such as this you need to accept the cgi and not think about it,sort of accepting that a man can fly when watching Superman movies.If you did not it would be a waste of a couple of hours.
    bill

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •