MovieChat Forums > 300 (2007) Discussion > Did Anyone Else Not Like This Movie?

Did Anyone Else Not Like This Movie?

posted 13 years ago by fishboy9530
61 replies | jump to latest

I personally found this movie annoying. I am perfectly fine with a movie that is based on an event and bends the truth a little, but 300 bent the truth to the point where I found it annoying. One of the main problems I had was the fact that at times the movie felt a little racist. 300 depicts the persian commanders as idiotic. Not even the dumbest commander would think of using elephants on a point as narrow as Thermapolyae. Also, the persians are depicted as being so uneffective that they could even conquer a village of orphans and nuns wihtout casualties in the thousands. I understand that the persian casualties in the actually Battle of Thermapolyae range between five to seven thousand, but in the movie tens of thousands, possibly even hundreds of thousands of persians are slaughtered. The second most annoying thing about the movie is that it completely ignores the fact that the three hundred spartans were accompanied by three thousand other Greek warriors. When those other Greek warriors had to retreat, the three hundres spartans hardly lasted an afternoon, let alone the serveral days in the film.
The first time I watched this movie, I thought it was way over-rated. It wasn't quite as good as everyone was saying, but was still a typical guy movie (And who doesn't love a good action). But after the second and third time, all of the lies in this movie really started to build.
I understand that 300 was a well made movie by a decent director, but I just didn't like 300 at all.

[–] schlob77 10 years ago

I found the movie to be entertaining but I sure as hell do not thing this is one of the greatest movies ever like so many fan boyz claim. Lots and lots of CGI, rather silly story, a bit racist, and the battle scenes rather stupid (I love how the Phalanx is talked about as this great defensive formation yet the movie shows non-stop single man to man combat (in slo-mo of course), the polar opposite of the phalanx)

[–] reservoir_cats_1989 10 years ago

there is a lot more to a movie than just the feeling of having it "liked" or "disliked", and being under impression of its strangely obvious and basic imperfections or "plain lies".

let's not treat this movie (or almost all others) as documentaries, as it wasn't the goal of the director.

the journey to learn why imperfections of various degrees were introduced in the movies may become apparent when you watch many more movies that are not "completely truthful" to facts or history (well, history isn't the same as facts, history is the surviving descriptions of what we consider facts, often ignoring bias of the person reporting and forgetting the lack of reports from those who also faced the same facts but their reports did not survive the test of time, or the mercy of their enemies, who forced their own version of "truth" or "facts"). let's not get too Cloud Atlassy about it, as it is not necessary.

it's important to recognize such circumstances to prepare oneself to be properly biased to watch material made to be biased.

re": the movie felt a little racist. 300 depicts the persian commanders as idiotic"

i wouldn't exactly call it racist. it's more of the fault of being complacent on the side of the commanders, being accustomed to winning easily because all previous opponents were easy to defeat using well exercised tactics. being Persian has nothing to do with it. any nationality can be idiotic, counting on easy defeat, and unexpectedly meeting deadly opposition.

this is not my particularly favorite movie, but i do recognize its strong points and like them. it's a totally different, complex reaction from a more seasoned viewer than dumbing down that reaction to "i liked it" or "i disliked it". because saying one of these 2 things is like answering a question "what is your most favorite song of all time?". if you have a specific answer, a band and a song, you simply haven't lived long enough.

[–] DC_Collins 9 years ago

a really weird movie.

It was a phenomenal success, which means that its very unreal depiction of war and history was greatly desired when it came out.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087239/

[–] OldSamVimes 9 years ago

It was idiotic.

Some of the action sequences were alright, but they got repetitive as well. The 'acting' flat out sucked and the dialogue seemed like someone in grade 8 wrote it.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] farhan-17811 9 years ago

*beep* this movie and its fans!
Isn't it racism to present 300 Greeks mass-murdering thousands of Persians as if they are worms?

I bet if the Iranis made a movie showing 300 Persians killing a single Jew, the world would be in a turmoil and you bloody Yanks would be like, 'O this is so racist, this is anti-semitism' and what not. well FUGK YOU AND FUGK YOUR DOUBLE-STANDARDS
I bet this movie was funded by the FUGKING Israelis who keep sniping pregnant Muslim women and infants and keep launching air-strikes on defenceless civillian population. I hope the Chinese and the Russians join forces some day to send you all Jewish pigs and infernal American piglets down to hell where you all belong and rid the world of American imperialism and Jewish plague. This world would truly be a much more peaceful place without your Hell-bound serpents in it.

[–] cubstml 9 years ago

A lot of people didn't like it, actually.

I like it a lot personally, but it's definitely not my type of movie per se.
It's a weird dumb movie that appeals to me. I will say that compared to many similar dumb movies this one is unique with it's visual style and direction.

It's very different and not for everyone.

"DID YOUR ASS GET ENOUGH WINGS?!"- Frylock


[–] lansdownehouse 9 years ago

Personally I found the overt homoeroticism of all those CGI enhanced semi-naked men a mite too confronting for comfort.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] John-Wick 9 years ago

It's based on a series of comic books, so I don't think accuracy was the film's goal. I personally enjoy it.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] vojkan087 9 years ago

Tracey Emin's modern art (master)piece My Bed was revolutionary back in 1999.

It was an unmade bed full of junk in and around it. It wasn't for everyone but for a type of people that is into so called modern art.

On repeated viewings, it 'loses steam', as it becomes apparent, even to those who managed not to notice it right away, that unmade bed full of junk around it isn't anything artsy, or revolutionary, just plan and simple, bed and junk.

But it had an impact on modern art, because numerous quasi artists now try to pass more and more literal junk as art, trash bins, bags of trash etc. It often gets mixed up with trash produced by visitors of this 'art piece' and thrown away with it. But you can still find those who are prepared to call it an art.

That is what your argument about this movie comes down to.

Yes, worthless movies are possible, and with Snyder, quite probable.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]