I couldn’t believe how packed the theater was. I haven’t seen that many people in line to see a movie since Return of the King.
This movie is nowhere near Gladiator and Braveheart. It doesn’t ever grip you emotionally the way those two do. It gets close, but nobody has their wife and son killed, so the revenge aspect isn’t there.
300 can be used in lieu of HRT or steroid cycles, I’m convinced. After the movie, it took about 24 hours for me to calm down. I went to bed ready to kill, and woke up the same way. A must for before a football game or a tough lifting session.
Overall, it will entertain you and make you want to rip someone’s head off. A winner in my book.
[quote]Dedicated wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
mj_gk wrote:
F*********CKING SWEEEET! I saw it in IMAX at midnight Friday, and loved it. It is without a doubt, the epitome of manliness.
No it doesn’t, and no it isn’t.
Overblown, exaggerated, and it gave you no reason to give two fucks if Sparta burned. The only identifiable character was Leonidas- all the others were nameless.
Spartan freedom? Show us where it was… give us a reason to care that the persians were trying to overtake it. Some cool battle scenes, but the CGI kind of takes away from the feeling. The ending is cool, though, with the Spartans on the plains.
It was interesting, don’t get me wrong, but I’d have been alot happier if I’d seen it on HBO as opposed to paying ten bucks at a theater.
Gladiator, Braveheart, and Troy still kick this movie’s ass though.
Okay we get it. You are the young rebel who has a deep appreciation of history and literature. That being said this movie kicked Troy’s ass! If you can forgot the actual history, the fantasy parts, and wanting a long boring build up to make me cry for Sparta, and appreciate a good old Testosterone infused battle movie this is it.
King Leonidas was a complete and total badass warrior as were his men. This as far as movies go was head and shoulders above Troy. The only guy I liked in Troy incidently was Hector played by Eric Bana. I liked this more then Gladiator as well.
[quote]Steel Nation wrote:
General impressions:
2) This movie is nowhere near Gladiator and Braveheart. It doesn’t ever grip you emotionally the way those two do. It gets close, but nobody has their wife and son killed, so the revenge aspect isn’t there.
[/quote]
I guess you missed the Captain watching helplessly as his son’s head was chopped off by a Persian on horseback (one of the sickest scenes in the movie, BTW. And I mean that in a good way). My new T-movie liest:
I couldn’t believe how packed the theater was. I haven’t seen that many people in line to see a movie since Return of the King.
This movie is nowhere near Gladiator and Braveheart. It doesn’t ever grip you emotionally the way those two do. It gets close, but nobody has their wife and son killed, so the revenge aspect isn’t there.
300 can be used in lieu of HRT or steroid cycles, I’m convinced. After the movie, it took about 24 hours for me to calm down. I went to bed ready to kill, and woke up the same way. A must for before a football game or a tough lifting session.
Overall, it will entertain you and make you want to rip someone’s head off. A winner in my book.[/quote]
I agree. I didn’t leave me stunned like Gladiator, but I think it’s far better than Braveheart. Troy sucked. Eric Bana was great, Brad Pitt was good, Orlando Bloom makes me want to gouge my eyes out.
I’m going to have to agree with Irish here w/r/t Troy. I liked it and don’t see why everyone considers it such a metrosexual flick. I personally don’t think it was as good as Gladiator or Braveheart, but I thought it was pretty good. The fight scene between Achilles and Hector was great IMHO.
Brad Pitt is just one of those celebrities that alot of guys just want to hate on, I think he’s a damn good actor. I would however have to rank Patriot, Gladiator, and Braveheart above it though.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Brad Pitt is just one of those celebrities that alot of guys just want to hate on, I think he’s a damn good actor. I would however have to rank Patriot, Gladiator, and Braveheart above it though.[/quote]
Seems to me like the haters are too caught up by Brad’s good looks to realize he’s a damn good actor. And he’s the metrosexual?
Leonidas is pure intensity. When that guy roars, you can feel the testosterone churning in your guts. This movie was so needed in this day and age, as we approach the further pussification of America. This guy wont apologize for the way he is. You wont see this guy pick up the pink dumbbell. When the messenger replies, “this is crazy” and Leonidas retorts with “THIS IS SPARTA!” You knew this was one tough bastard you would walk down any dark alley with. Although I love Gladiator, this was pure aggression, pure intensity, and most important with relevance to this website, pure Testosterone. Cant wait to see it again and get the DVD. This should be a staple within any collection of war movies.
[quote]Panther1015 wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Brad Pitt is just one of those celebrities that alot of guys just want to hate on, I think he’s a damn good actor. I would however have to rank Patriot, Gladiator, and Braveheart above it though.
Seems to me like the haters are too caught up by Brad’s good looks to realize he’s a damn good actor. And he’s the metrosexual?[/quote]
Wow. Brad’s “good looks” (as you put it…NTTAWWT) are not why I dislike Troy. I do feel he was wrong for that part and thought so from the very first fight he was in with someone who actually did look like he could kill someone. It was the overall cast that made it suck along with the fact that it wasn’t exactly even a “guy movie”. That may be why so many women went to go see it. The killings were minimal and I don’t remember one memorable gory or graphic scene in any of the minutes that I could tolerate it before I turned it off. It was BORING.
Brad Pitt was great in Seven. He was great in Fight Club. I do not consider him a poor actor at all. However, whoever cast him for that part fucked up in my opinion.
Along those same lines, whoever cast the parts for 300 needs a fucking promotion.
That may hurt your feelings but I am sure you and that poster over your bed of him will get over it in time.
Definitely better than gladiator, everybody keeps saying well it didn’t grip you emotionally, nobody’s wife was killed etc but guess which movie was based on a actual events in history (albeit a little off) and which one wasn’t based on actual events in history at all?..that’s why it pushed it ahead of gladiator for me. Think about it this actually happened. Pick up the book or hell look at link someone already posted on this thread about the history on youtube (from the history channel has computer animations of the whole thing)
[quote]Mad Titan wrote:
Definitely better than gladiator, everybody keeps saying well it didn’t grip you emotionally, nobody’s wife was killed etc but guess which movie was based on a actual events in history (albeit a little off) and which one wasn’t based on actual events in history at all?..that’s why it pushed it ahead of gladiator for me. Think about it this actually happened. Pick up the book or hell look at link someone already posted on this thread about the history on youtube (from the history channel has computer animations of the whole thing)[/quote]
I just saw this movie on IMAX. That made the experience as intense as it gets without drugs. I was entertained, but at no point was I drawn into the movie like with a great movie.
Historical accuracy does nothing to make a good movie. Textbooks won’t make a bestsellers list, but a well written non-fiction book will. Development of the plot would have made this a great movie. Instead it was left as entertaining.
[quote]Panther1015 wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Brad Pitt is just one of those celebrities that alot of guys just want to hate on, I think he’s a damn good actor. I would however have to rank Patriot, Gladiator, and Braveheart above it though.
Seems to me like the haters are too caught up by Brad’s good looks to realize he’s a damn good actor. And he’s the metrosexual?[/quote]
Brad Pitt is an excellent actor, IMO, but he was horribly miscast as Achilles.
Achilles was beautiful, impulsive and arrogant, and Brad Pitt did a good job portraying this side of Achilles. As for the most important part of portraying Achilles – being the greatest killer who ever lived – Pitt sucked donkey balls.
An actor just needs a certain something to play a cold-blooded killer, and Pitt doesn’t have “it”.
Because Pitt couldn’t make you believe that he, Achilles the Greatest Killer to Ever Walk the Earth, was anything more than a fancy-boy, the whole character just fell apart.
And you can’t have a good movie about the Trojan War without having a good Achilles.
It’s the same reason Daniel Craig was awesome as James Bond and Pierce Brosnan struggled at it. Craig had “it”, Brosnan didn’t.
[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
It’s the same reason Daniel Craig was awesome as James Bond and Pierce Brosnan struggled at it. Craig had “it”, Brosnan didn’t.
[/quote]
This is very true. Bond must be one of the hardest roles on the planet to play, because the main thing you have to have to play Bond, is not taught in any acting class, or from experience, or anything. You either have it, or you don’t.
[quote]florin wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
…
As for the most important part of portraying Achilles – being the greatest killer who ever lived – Pitt sucked donkey balls.
true, no doubt[/quote]
Remember how Tim Roth just seemed like a killer in Rob Roy? Pitt was not convincing as a killer.
I’m one of the people that actually likes Troy. I’m also very biased in the sense that I like any stories involving Greek mythology; one of my favorite classes I ever took in college involved reading a lot of classical Greek texts, especially Homer. Some might think “Well, that should make you like the movie less, because they butchered the story…”; and they probably have a point. Nevertheless, I like the movie very much.
As for Bloom, the fact that everyone dislikes him in that movie so much kind of tells me that he played his part well. I disliked him greatly in the movie, but I got the feeling that that was intentional. In my opinion, he was supposed to be someone who had no fortitude, confidence, will, etc. (trying to run back to the gates?), and who was more concerned with impressing the ladies than doing his duty as a prince; an ancient-day “metro”, if you will.
I have to say that brought a hole new level of bad ass to movies Im going to see it again on sunday I liked it that much
the only thing I didnt like was the underwear/sack holster they wore that was pretty gay
cant wait until it comes out on DVD
n3wb[/quote]
From what i have been reading and understand… many times Spartans entered into combat armourless, or with very little armour on to prove there superiority in battle.
AND there was that whole thing where the Spartan army ate, bathed… and slept together… in a “gay” way. To “love” you fellow solider made you fight that much harder to keep your fellow solider safe in combat it was believed.
I have to say that brought a hole new level of bad ass to movies Im going to see it again on sunday I liked it that much
the only thing I didnt like was the underwear/sack holster they wore that was pretty gay
cant wait until it comes out on DVD
n3wb
From what i have been reading and understand… many times Spartans entered into combat armourless, or with very little armour on to prove there superiority in battle.
AND there was that whole thing where the Spartan army ate, bathed… and slept together… in a “gay” way. To “love” you fellow solider made you fight that much harder to keep your fellow solider safe in combat it was believed.
[/quote]
You are correct. The Spartans were not necessarily homosexual, but they did encourage man-on-man relationships for the reason you stated above. Funny how the move avoided that whole side of the Spartan lifestyle.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Agent Frost wrote:
n3wb wrote:
I saw it to
I have to say that brought a hole new level of bad ass to movies Im going to see it again on sunday I liked it that much
the only thing I didnt like was the underwear/sack holster they wore that was pretty gay
cant wait until it comes out on DVD
n3wb
From what i have been reading and understand… many times Spartans entered into combat armourless, or with very little armour on to prove there superiority in battle.
AND there was that whole thing where the Spartan army ate, bathed… and slept together… in a “gay” way. To “love” you fellow solider made you fight that much harder to keep your fellow solider safe in combat it was believed.
You are correct. The Spartans were not necessarily homosexual, but they did encourage man-on-man relationships for the reason you stated above. Funny how the move avoided that whole side of the Spartan lifestyle.
[/quote]
It was “avoided” because that simply was not the case with the Spartans and the comments above are a reach, at best (and mostly sound like trying to view ancient history through a modern conception of the world).
There is nothing that suggests that the Spartans acted in the way you describe at all and it sounds like you are lumping them together with the Athenians because they were all Greek.
