Jump to content
IGNORED

300: Rise of an Empire - Due March 2014: Was 300 Thread


Links
 Share

Recommended Posts

Personally, I cant shake the feeling its going to be yet another 'Alexander-Troy-Kingdom of heaven' rubbish title, and it probably will to considering the director was responsible for the Dawn of the dead remake. You can tell from the trailer, its ANOTHER movie that has the wheat fields scene :(

This looks nothing like "Alexander-Troy-Kingdom of heaven." Completely different style. And judging from 2 or 3 shots of weird characters and the fact that it is based on a comic, there's probably an almost fantasy element to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KoH is NOTHING like Troy or Alexander, it's about 1 million times better. It certainly wasn't a crowd pleaser to my mind - in fact, I'm not sure why Gladiator had the success it did. Obviously it's a great film (well, not everyone agrees with that!) but it's not your archetypal blockbuster. KoH was even slower and more historical. I think it's superior personally but again I seem to be in a tiny minority there. KoH's great.

Troy by comparison is fast-paced and has Brad Pitt doing superhero moves to please the crowd. Alexander's just wank. They're both a world away from the kind of grainy historical lushness of Gladiator or KoH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when was Alexander (or Kingdom of Heaven for that matter) a 'crowd pleaser'? Alexander didn't please anyone.

I don't get what your point is unless you're just saying 'it has historical battles in it', because it's taking a totally different, ultra violent and fantasical approach to anthing else we've seen lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when was Alexander (or Kingdom of Heaven for that matter) a 'crowd pleaser'? Alexander didn't please anyone.

I don't get what your point is unless you're just saying 'it has historical battles in it', because it's taking a totally different, ultra violent and fantasical approach to anthing else we've seen lately.

Indeed.

And what's wrong with pleasing crowds in the first place? Isn't that why most people go to the cinema?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much what everyone else has said, trailer looks simply awesome, can't wait!

I found Kingdom of Heaven a bit dull to be honest, are you talking about the director's cut Paradigm? Cause I've heard that's much better than the regular version.

Troy is shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was fantastic at the cinema (saw Gladiator at the cinema too) and love the DVD. I just found it... more tangible than Gladiator. I thought the battle scenes were properly epic, it felt far more realistic than a CGI mess you'd get with a lower budget production. Salahadin was quality, as were the Knights. Start of the movie was wonderfully atmospheric, as was the forest scene. Liam Neeson's terrific and I even liked Orlando Bloom and I don't think he can act for toffee. Whatever Scott did he made him act and manage to look the part. Fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 - Frank Miller's a prick

2 - 300 hurts my brain - the daftness I can take (monstrous characters, overblown action etc.) but the sexism (as in all FM novels) and 'message' (fighting for freedom against the foreigns, just like the US!!!111 Oh, forget about those dirty Helots, eh...) piss me off no end.

3 - the film will probably be awesome.

See also: Sin City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes those movies were crowd pleasers in the sense that they all went box office despite being utter shit.

The movies were shit yet the crowds loved them.

The box office has already been mentioned but KoH in particular received mediocre reviews and that was easily the pick of the three.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reviews has nothing to do with sales figures.

Yeah but you said the movies were shit and yet they were crowd pleasers. Critics are part of the crowd too. None of them received particularly good reviews and, given the content of KoH in particular, is a bit indicative of how much it may well have been liked by the audience at large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The thousand nations of the PERSIAN Empire descend upon YOU! Our arrows will BLOT OUT the SUN!"

"Then we will fight in the shade."

Fuck. Yeah.

This.

It's amazing how lines that would sound like the cheesiest thing in the world if I said them sound as cool as fuck in the trailer.

And fuck me, does it look pretty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This.

It's amazing how lines that would sound like the cheesiest thing in the world if I said them sound as cool as fuck in the trailer.

And fuck me, does it look pretty!

s

Hell yeah, that and the lines

"this is madness"

"this is sparta"

*kick*

Saw the trailer, read the novel, and now I NEED to see the movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This looked pretty nice visually and thematically but the dialogue in the trailer was awful. Like cubeadvance, I too found the king yelling "Sparta!" all the time a bit annoying. And that "Give them nothing but take from them everything!" line was horribly long winded, especially the way the actor accentuated particular words.

Also, I got the underlying "West vs East" undertone. This is barely historically accurate, beyond the basic plot. Should be fun though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 - 300 hurts my brain - the daftness I can take (monstrous characters, overblown action etc.) but the sexism (as in all FM novels) and 'message' (fighting for freedom against the foreigns, just like the US!!!111 Oh, forget about those dirty Helots, eh...) piss me off no end.

In fairness to FM, feminism wasn't particularly big in Ancient Greece, and to make some kind of decent fist punching narrative with this kind of story requires you to build it up in such a fashion. See: Braveheart. This was written before 11 Sep 2001, so I don't think that criticism stands.

"The thousand nations of the PERSIAN Empire descend upon YOU! Our arrows will BLOT OUT the SUN!"

"Then we will fight in the shade."

Fuck. Yeah.

The best thing is, that's straight out of the history (myth?) rather than being an invention of the film. It's in the 1962 version of the story too.

Graphic novel is great. Worried that the trailer hints at overly fantastical bits, as the graphic novel was fairly straight laced about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not actually from 'With Teeth', the album it's from is called 'The Fragile Left'. Track's called 'Just Like You Imagined' and it's really good stuff, basically a 3-minute version of what you hear in the trailer.

Thanks for that Blunted and YellowSamuel. Going to track it down now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fairness to FM, feminism wasn't particularly big in Ancient Greece, and to make some kind of decent fist punching narrative with this kind of story requires you to build it up in such a fashion. See: Braveheart. This was written before 11 Sep 2001, so I don't think that criticism stands.

Oh, I was complaining about his portrayal of women as sexy whores/ugly evil peoples/combinations of the above, rather than the heroic men/demure women thingy. As a student of Classics I'd like to think I know a little about the societies that prevailed at the time :)

And even if I wasn't - Sin City?

Braveheart's also a piece of rabble-rousing rubbish, but it has slightly more basis in fact than this: the Scots were fighting for a more free society. Ish. The Spartans were fighting to save their collective arses. It's possible to make a good film and not warp the protagonists in a way to make them easily associated with a modern ideal of your own civilisation. Just as its possible to make a film in which the antagonists are Persians without turning them into walking Eastern stereotypes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Braveheart's also a piece of rabble-rousing rubbish, but it has slightly more basis in fact than this: the Scots were fighting for a more free society. Ish.

But the important point is this: they were kicking English arse.

The Spartans were fighting to save their collective arses. It's possible to make a good film and not warp the protagonists in a way to make them easily associated with a modern ideal of your own civilisation. Just as its possible to make a film in which the antagonists are Persians without turning them into walking Eastern stereotypes.

It is, but it's based on the comic book and that was the route it goes down. I quite like it, and didn't mind he'd obviously twisted it a bit because it is bloody good. I didn't actually see the whole Eastern stereotype bit, and to be honest, I'm still struggling to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is, but it's based on the comic book and that was the route it goes down. I quite like it, and didn't mind he'd obviously twisted it a bit because it is bloody good. I didn't actually see the whole Eastern stereotype bit, and to be honest, I'm still struggling to see it.

I know, that's why I'm complaining about Miller himself - I don't blame the filmmakers for staying true to the comic, just the comic writer.

As for the Eastern stereotype, I think I reached for the wrong term. Villainous stereotypes would be the fairer term, with each flavoured by his culture - Xerxes as an earringed bald man? Ephialtes as a... thing? Ooh, they must be evil.

I guess I'm mainly bothered because at least with Sin City Miller's making his own world as he likes. With 300, he's taking a (heavily mythologised) event and corrupting it in the most simplistic ways, relying even more on stereotype and cliche than Greek tellings of the event. And that takes some doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, that's why I'm complaining about Miller himself - I don't blame the filmmakers for staying true to the comic, just the comic writer.

As for the Eastern stereotype, I think I reached for the wrong term. Villainous stereotypes would be the fairer term, with each flavoured by his culture - Xerxes as an earringed bald man? Ephialtes as a... thing? Ooh, they must be evil.

I guess I'm mainly bothered because at least with Sin City Miller's making his own world as he likes. With 300, he's taking a (heavily mythologised) event and corrupting it in the most simplistic ways, relying even more on stereotype and cliche than Greek tellings of the event. And that takes some doing.

Personally I don't have a problem with Miller's portrayal of the events. Quite honestly, almost every we read from that period of history is open to huge speculation and debate, so why not let Miller have a go?

What I do have huge problems with is that Miller's dialogue just doesn't work properly in film form. It only just works in the comics, but I can forgive him that because I love the stories and the artwork.

I found Sin City almost unbearably cringeworthy in places, despite it looking quite fantastic. The trailer for 300 looks like they're going to do pretty much the same thing...

Actually, I don't think Frank can do dialogue at all - Robocop 2 has utterly dire stuff going on. However, I love the film! He's a very, very lucky man if you ask me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.