is this movie good?


wat would u rate this movie and how would u compare it to 300?

reply

For a product of its time, Yes! And far, far better than that stupid "ALexander" of Oliver Stone a few years ago. (Will see "300" this weekend.)

reply

I just watched this movie to compare it to the new 300 movie, and I was so bored through out the whole movie I was waiting for it to get better, but it never did. Here's my list of things wrong with this movie


1- This was such a soap opera, I thought I was watching a chick flick, this was more about the love stories involved with the two main spartans that they show the whole movie, then about the actual war.

2- They didn't show any action for more than an hour into the movie, And when they did, the fighting was so sloppy,
In the new 300 they showed why the spartans were such great warriors, in this one, it felt like it was just 300 regular guys, fighting with no style or technique.

3- The thing that annoyed me the most was the everybody talked as if they were in some kind of Shakespeare play, the dialogue was so unrealistic, the whole movie felt like a play, and what's even worse was that there was so much dialogue that it was tiring

4- This movie had absolutely zero style, it was shot like a TV, only your basic LS MS and CU, were used through out the whole movie. It's definitely not a beautiful looking movie.

5- The guys they picked to star in this movie were so soft looking, there is no way spartans could have have looked this soft.

reply

It's utterly IGNORANT of you to compare the two movies, particularly in regards to the fighting. One as made in 1962, the other in 2006. What you consider fighting "style" in "300" was largely CG and wire work, genius. In 300 Spartans, it was much more realistic to what the Spartans had to deal with. Led by Leonidas, the Spartans became great warriors because they were driven by their heart and loyalty to their country, not due to come predisposed physical prowess. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF HERODOTUS STORY (oh, since you probably don't know, that's the Greek historian who recorded the Spartan fight at Thermopylae)

Additionally, do a bit of research on the Spartans, and Greeks in general. There's a reason people liken the beautiful to looking like "Greek gods." The Greeks are and were gorgeous, and yes, you can be both beautiful and powerful.

Please, go watch a few more movies before you share your elementary and limited opinions.

reply

[deleted]

I like them both, 300 for its over the top effects and crazy monster guys, more like Lord of the Rings than an historical epic.

This one because of its realism, the armour, weapons, chariots etc were of realistic design, the people were all real people no cgi, a film that tried to give a more real historic view of the event.

Cry God for Harry, England and St George

reply

It's an interesting, but by no means a great movie (Spartacus is).

The acting is horrible and the movie is (even for the period) rather slow-paced. On the plus-side the fighting sequences are not bad and the spartans looks dazzling in their red outfits.

If you're into sword and sandals, see the movie.

reply

This is a B movie with a lot of talking and little action.

Its that man again!!

reply

I have to second that. The movie is way too much talking, the action is of course not on Level of Ben Hur, but no one expected that for the budget. Its typical movie like any other one which came out from Italy at the time. I also disliked Moore in Romulus and the Sabines, but that movie had at least some fun moments and Moore had some charm. Richard Egan is kind of a Sam Worthington of that time.
You also notice that Mate mostly directed Western back then, it has more a feel of a static b/w Hollywood Western. Wouldnt recommend it anymore, the Miller 300 is over the top and has its own mistakes, but at least its entertaining.

reply

It was decent enough 6.5/10

reply

agreed

reply

I saw this movie today. Nice to see hundreds of marching troops knowing that they're real not CGI. I last saw this movie when I was at school in it's roadshow release. It's a good movie. I keep thing of "Meet the Spartans"

reply

I don't rate either of them very highly. 300 Spartans is moderately historically accurate... for the time... But it has almost no feel for the very alien culture of the Spartans. I have, disparagingly, referred to it as The 300 Americans.

300 is a mad cartoon, which apparently takes place in some other dimension of reality. I have never been able to sit straight through it but I suppose that, by now, I have seen most of it. I dislike it more than The 300 Spartans, but comparing the two is fairly hopeless. At least 300 could be seen as a fever dream based on a legend several steps removed from history so I can understand some people enjoying it.

reply