300 SETS MARCH RECORD WITH $70 MILLION OPENING WEEKEND

[MattBrady]

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/movies/300/300_1.jpg" align="right">On Friday, those with their eyes on such things knew something was up. Online movie ticket site Fandango.com was reporting that 92% of all online ticket sales for the coming weekend were for the film adaptation of Frank Miller’s <b>300</b>.

And then – the film brought in $27.7 million on Friday. When it was all said and done, the film, directed by Zack Snyder had laid waste to the competition, bringing in an estimated $70 million, making it the biggest opening weekend for a film in March since records had been kept. In Spartan fashion, the film made more than the nine other films in the top ten, combined. The film also came in as the 3rd largest R-rated opening of all time, and the fifth best debut for a film based on a comic book. The movie opened both in regular theaters and IMAX theaters, bringing in $22,567 per traditional theater and $55,000 per IMAX screen (62, total).

While a dropoff is expected in the coming weekend, the size will be of interest (with 50%+ being roughly the norm). After all, while some critics are dismissing the film (http://movies2.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/movies/09thre.html), others are pointing out what they feel to be obvious overtones to the current political climate, and how it could easily be seen as propaganda for the current war (http://slate.com/id/2161450/fr/rss), as, in the larger picture, the film's story is about the West holding back the East. In that comparison, as some critics have pointed out, it's easy to see (or have them pointed out) parallels: the Persians are heathens and monstrous, a small number of true believers sacrifice everything to ultimately convince their nation to rally to the cause. As such, <i>300</i> may enjoy better than average word of mouth to drive audiences who passed on the film this weekend to see it next weekend.

Additionally, <i>300</i>, which was an admitted risk after Hollywood has seen less than stellar returns on gladiator type fare, cost a reported $65 million to produce. Its success at the theater could lead to many aftereffects, the first of which being Warner Bros fast tracks Snyder’s adaptation of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ <b>Watchmen</b>, the director’s previously announced next comic book-based project. Likewise, as with the buzz from similar adult-oriented comic-based movies such as <i>Sin City</i> and <i>V for Vendetta</I>, <i>300’s</i> success will undoubtedly drive sales of the graphic novel in bookstores – although, as ICV2 (http://www.icv2.com./articles/home/10221.html) reported, Dark Horse appears to be having trouble meeting demand, and the graphic novel may be sold out for a period of weeks until more copies arrive in the country.

Additionally, the success of the film also reinforces Miller’s Hollywood reputation, which will most likely keep things moving along smoothly for his upcoming two film projects, <i>Sin City 2</i> with Robert Rodriguez, and an adaptation of Will Eisner’s <b>The Spirit</b>. Likewise, Miller’s other works, such as <b>Ronin</b> will most likely be pushed ahead on development schedules.

In the end, <i>300</I>’s strong opening, along with <i>Ghost Rider’</i>s earlier opening of similar magnitude seem to suggest that comic book-based movies are a Hollywood trend that’s far from over, and this year’s other comic-based films, such as <i>Spider-Man 3</i> and <i>Fantastic Four 2</i> are due for healthy box office takes as well.

[KoozyK]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.

[Joementum]

I'm predicting 300 million total for worldwide + DVD sales.

[Ace]

Big thing here is that it didn't open against anything.

[Comic-Reader]

From what I understand, Miller has about 6 or 7 scripts written for All-Star Batman, with 4 published, and one imminent. I'd guess that now that he's an official Hollywood mogul, his comic book work will dwindle to nothing.

For me, that's ok because I don't think All-Star Batman was any good to begin with, so no great loss. I was kind of interested in "Holy Terror, Batman," so we'll see if that ever materializes.

However, this is good for him and his career, no doubt. Also, now that Miller can serve as a public face to the world of comics, people may hopefully be intrigued enough to scan their local bookstores for other graphic novels written by him and other talented and off-beat creators.

This movie's success will definitely help dispell the notion that the general public still has that comics are only about kiddy superhero stuff.

I think Miller has the potential to have that sort of cult status cache that movie people like Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith do.

[Ace]

On the other hand, the reason why Marvel's so dark and gloomy is because almost all the main writers are fans of Miller.

I'd rather them be fans of Karl Kesel's DD run myself.

But yeah, this bodes well for him getting more creative influence on The Spirt.

[CitC]

Big thing here is that it didn't open against anything.

True, but whent there is nothing to go see, I stay home. This likely brought out a lot of people that wanted to see this movie, not just people that wanted to go see any movie.

[Jeremy Holstein]

faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.
.

The ending's straight out of the Graphic Novel. To have cut on the king dying would removed the whole plot thread about the nature of victory.

[Ye Olde Iowa]

I'm surprised it put up huge numbers like this, but I'm glad to see that it did. Snyder did a great job of literally recreating Miller's books on the screen, using nearly every line of dialogue and reproducing nearly every page of art; the fill-in subplots (the captain's relationship with his son, the playful competition between Spartans, and the political intrigue/scandal with Leonidas's wife) were all true to Miller's work and added a lot of depth to the film. I thought it was simply fantastic.

What surprises me even more, though, is that the packed house I saw the movie with (on a Sunday afternoon), was very enthusiastic and seemed to love the movie. I figured this would find a strong niche audience, but I'm glad to see it has had a wider appeal.

[FallenFate]

I loved the movie and thought it stayed very true to the comic and Miller's interpretation of the battle of Thermpylae. And I, for one, thought the acting was fine (they were acting against green screen the whole time, so there were actually no backgrounds to interact with) and the direction was amazing. I have complete confidence in Snyder's ability to bring "Watchmen" to the screen. And with "300" doing the numbers it's doing, it should mean that we'll see a "Watchmen" that sticks to the comic. And to be fair, I certainly would no longer count comic book movies as a trend, since it seems pretty obvious that they have very much grown into their own genre of movies and are here to stay,

[smitch]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.

"Back in Rome"? Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, friend. Although I will agree with you that the actor who played Faramir was a bad choice for that role, and the subplot with the queen and the council did seem forced. But then, we got to see more of the queen. While the "boylovers" talk about oiled abs, I'll talk about her!

Does anybody else wonder if there were prosthetic nipples on the women, to give them that Frank Miller "BOING"?

[FireLight]

Ya know - I've been seeing this trend for a while now - it's not an absolute - but:

What is up with forums and social sites all having the first post being something negative?

This article clearly paints a positive - rosy picture for the future of comics films and apparently healthy projections for comics. I look at films adaptation like this: In January 07 Civil War #6 sold 259,300 issues ... 300 sold an estimated 10 million tickets. Broadening exposure to a work some FEW people originally saw to a form where MILLIONS see it c'aint be a bad thing...

Film adaptations rarely get it 100% right based on the source material - but for the most part they do the 'story as a whole' pretty well. As a comic fan I walk into the theatre knowing it's not going to be perfect (I mean come on - organic web shooters!).

But this is a success - most people seemed to like it and it's healthy for the industry.

I begrudge no-one their opinion. Some don't like it they don't like it. But based on this I'm AM excited to see Watchmen come to screen - just to see if they can pull it off. Sin City and 300 are examples where many (including me) never thought they'd even come close and they did. LXG and Catwoman and Daredevil and Constantine are examples where I really thought it should have been a lot easier to pull off and they failed. So maybe Watchmen has a better chance than we might have believed...

[attritus]

I think as propaganda goes this film pretty much works both ways. It's also about a smaller nation forced to submit to an empire, supposedly for their own good. The smaller nation then defends itself by hoping that attrition of the empire's forces will demoralize them and force them to move on. I guess it's just a matter of perspective.

[FallenFate]

I think as propaganda goes this film pretty much works both ways. It's also about a smaller nation forced to submit to an empire, supposedly for their own good. The smaller nation then defends itself by hoping that attrition of the empire's forces will demoralize them and force them to move on. I guess it's just a matter of perspective.


You know, though, it's not really propaganda either way unless you are saying it is Spartan propaganda. The Battle of Thermopylae was a real battle and this was based on a graphic novel that was based on a historical event. Those that read propaganda in it have some serious issues in my opinion, no matter which way they read it.

[Skinshark]

I would think it also helps to cast capable third tier actors as well, a definite reflection of the budget vs. earnings.

I hope Watchmen does the same.

=s=

[DarkNomis]

On the other hand, the reason why Marvel's so dark and gloomy is because almost all the main writers are fans of Miller.

I'd rather them be fans of Karl Kesel's DD run myself.

But yeah, this bodes well for him getting more creative influence on The Spirt.

I don't know if you're old enough to remember this but Frank Miller saved Dardevil's comic from being canceled a couple of times in the '80s. Particularly with the Electra storyline and "Born Again" (still the best DD story arc ever !).

But what made the stories so notable was moreso than the high level of violence (for comics at that time) but the complexity of the heroes (as well as villian) situation in there personal lives.

In other words, the stories was more than just when a villian attack and then DD stops the villian. the stories involved around the villians actions and how they would drastically effect DD personally life and the people who know him. But it was things in a very real world approach (mentally ill criminals, DD trying to kill Bullseye after electra assassnation, DD being homeless, Karen Page doing porno, Kingpin's wife isssues, etc...)

This is what made Miller DD stories great. Change the whole course of DD stories as well as all comics in general with Miller's Opus on Batman in "Dark Knight Returns"..

The writers in Marvel today grew up on that syle of storytelling (including Kesel) which is why Marvel has a Frank Miller that feel in a lot of the stories today and DD have has some really great seriously deep personal storie arcs since then.

As for 300 doing so well, I hope this will make Hoollywood pay more attention ot adapting more of Miller's graphic work like RONIN and My personal Favortie THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS (That would make such a gereat Batman movies).

[michaelman9]

3 screens were sold out friday night, and my wife and i had to see it at a different theater (also packed) we really enjoyed it, and i'm glad it's doing well outside the comic fan circuit.

[erikthered25]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

[Ace]

I don't know if you're old enough to remember this but Frank Miller saved Dardevil's comic from being canceled a couple of times in the '80s. Particularly with the Electra storyline and "Born Again" (still the best DD story arc ever !).

But what made the stories so notable was moreso than the high level of violence (for comics at that time) but the complexity of the heroes (as well as villian) situation in there personal lives.

In other words, the stories was more than just when a villian attack and then DD stops the villian. the stories involved around the villians actions and how they would drastically effect DD personally life and the people who know him. But it was things in a very real world approach (mentally ill criminals, DD trying to kill Bullseye after electra assassnation, DD being homeless, Karen Page doing porno, Kingpin's wife isssues, etc...)

This is what made Miller DD stories great. Change the whole course of DD stories as well as all comics in general with Miller's Opus on Batman in "Dark Knight Returns"..

The writers in Marvel today grew up on that syle of storytelling (including Kesel) which is why Marvel has a Frank Miller that feel in a lot of the stories today and DD have has some really great seriously deep personal storie arcs since then.

As for 300 doing so well, I hope this will make Hoollywood pay more attention ot adapting more of Miller's graphic work like RONIN and My personal Favortie THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS (That would make such a gereat Batman movies).

You can do really personal stories without making them mired in the drudgery of reality. That seems to be the whole point of the superhero genre if you ask me.

[RoiVampire]

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q304/roivampire_photo/sparta.jpg

[Zugernaut]

You know, though, it's not really propaganda either way unless you are saying it is Spartan propaganda. The Battle of Thermopylae was a real battle and this was based on a graphic novel that was based on a historical event. Those that read propaganda in it have some serious issues in my opinion, no matter which way they read it.


Who says propaganda can't be based on real events? Of course, I'm using the term "real event" pretty loosely in terms of Thermophylae, since not only is 300 a rather loose interpretation of the accounts of the battle, but the accounts themselves are very likely hagiography. So if you want to count "very loosely based on third- and fourth-hand accounts of a battle that maybe sorta happened in this general way" as depiction of an actual event, then go ahead.

In any case, the machinery of the state can draw from all manner of sources for propaganda. Heck, it even tried to use Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the U.S.A." as propaganda, hoping the idiot masses would just shout the slogan and not listen to the actual words (which usually works).

[Vyper]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.
I'm fairly certain King Arthur didn't become king by pulling a sword from a stone, but hey, that's just my two cents

[Thalya]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

Actually, Miller and the filmmakers couldn't get sued. Watching to the end of the credits you could see the standard legal disclaimer about how these were fictitious characters which should not be inferred or understood to represent real people.

----------------------------

And honestly, the best thing I loved about this movie was that it was self-contained, a story of dream and legend made visual, honest to the story itself and the story alone. It was clearly its own reality and wasn't bound to modern politics (let alone history) the way, say, Episode 3 was. Sure there were a few lame references about "freedom isn't free", but no one in this day and age would have the stones to say the line that immediately followed it and which everyone has forgotten: "it must be paid for in blood."

[smitch]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

I'm not going to tell you to lighten up! But here's another point of view: I think the artistic liberties taken with the look are acceptable. I saw a special on the History Channel about it the night before, and they said that Leonidas' helmet crest would have gone side to side, not front to back. So you can nit pick that stuff if you want, but I was actually impressed at how much of the real history of the events made it into a comic book adaptation (and in turn, it's movie adaptation). "We will fight in the shade" is taken directly from Herodotus' history of the event. I know I have my nit picks as well, but I think we can all agree that this is a positive thing for comics. It's certainly more true to the source material than ANY other adaptation of a comic I have ever seen.

[G Dog]

To its credit, the big effing theatre in my area had four screens playing it and me and my friends could only get tickets for the 11pm show on Friday, and even it was almost sold out.

On the other hand, the movie sucked. This goes to show me that Frank Miller should not be adapted by "fans". They takes great pains to recreate the visual aesthetic of his comics and do nothing to try and adapt or improve his awful, cliche writing and dialogue.

Meh, at least it was better than Sin City...even though that's damning with faint praise, indeed.

[jaredgood1]

was absolute drivel. You could easily make an argument that 300 is a pro-US Iraq war allegory (people fighting for their ideals of freedom after attacks and threats against their way of life despite those in their government who don't want to fight) and that it is a pro-insurgents Iraq war allegory (a small group of people fighting a superiorly equipped enemy intent on supplanting their way of life and establishing a puppet government). That is, of course, assuming you actually have an open mind to look at the story objectively.

And complaining that there isn't an over-all anti-war message in the movie? A movie about Sparta? About Sparta? I honestly cannot understand the rational behind that complaint. Peace is not synonymous with anti-war.

/end rant, but damn that review pissed me off.

[khuxford]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

I'm not trying to tell you to lighten up...but he was adapting the comic book, not the history book...so don't blame the director for staying true to the source material instead of rewriting it to jive with historical fact.

[Theatre_Sniper]

I had alot of fun watching this movie, and the time showing when i saw it was sold out, and the crowd loved the movie. alot of fanboys are negative about this movie. But i think it stayed true to the comic, and the special effects were beautiful

[meblob]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

wow you really got good value out of your two cents.

[KoozyK]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.
i guess it was by chance that i was first. should i wait until someone else posts until i am able to say what i thought of the movie and if it's deserving of the huge opening? no. the article is about how big a success the movie was. i was simply saying how much i feel it's undeserving of such praise.

i'm sorry, but the whole 'this is good for comics' is a bad argument as well. ninety percent of the people who saw this had no idea it was based on a comic book and have no clue who frank miller is. if you think anything differently, you put way too much stock into the average moviegoer.

oh, and if you think half of those people who have no clue about the movies comic origins even care, you're sadly mistaken. none of them are going to run out and start collecting because of this movie.

[big_nerd]

Saw this yesterday with the wife and thought it was fantastic. Some people actually applauded at the end of the Senate scene (no spoilers, but you know which one I'm talking about), most of them women. You don't have to be a comic-nerd to get into a film with that much action framed within an actual story.

Politically speaking, it's impossible not to project your own feelings onto this film. I walked out of the theatre thinking that the people saying 300 is right-wing propoganda are out of their minds, but I'm way left of most. Can't wait until this comes out on DVD though. Awesome.

[Alan Coil]

Does anybody else wonder if there were prosthetic nipples on the women, to give them that Frank Miller "BOING"?

CGI, not prosthetic, most likely.

[DarkNomis]

You can do really personal stories without making them mired in the drudgery of reality. That seems to be the whole point of the superhero genre if you ask me.

And we should thank the comic book "gods" that it is.

God help us if comic stories get out of the "mire drudgery of reality" and go back to the days of the extremly restricted comic code, before Stan Lee did Spiderman stories involving drug abuse or Denny O Neil "find America" Green Lantern/Green Arrow and yes Miller's Hardnose DareDevil stories. Let those days stay dead.

This way the heroes that are beyond the normal human abilities can almost be seen as if they were really interacting with the "real world" which makes for better stories I think.

And to be honest I find it hard for anyone to be a Daredevil reader and NOT expect some drudgery of reality.

[artiepants]

You can do really personal stories without making them mired in the drudgery of reality. That seems to be the whole point of the superhero genre if you ask me.wasn't Stan Lee's basic conceit at the beging of Marvel that (when contrasted with DC) Marvel was to be "the world outside your window (except, ya know, with Super heroes and stuff)"?

[lfhobbies]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.

See - I disagree, the movie as a whole wa really accurate to the comic - the acting was well done I think with Butler (Leonidas) doing a bang on job. And some of the othe Spartans giving you the feeling that they were one group of people that had no fear of Death (the scene with the falling arrows and Stelios (I believe) talking about the irony of the sun being blotted out was great.

I think this (and Sin City) leads to a great thing.... "if we make a movie based on a comic lets make it true to the comic". That way we get less Catwoman movies and more movies that you can follow if you know the story. I applaud Miller for having the balls to stay the course and say "If you are adapting my stories, you are staying true to them" (paraphrasing some of his quotes to the industry).

Now hopefully Mark Millar will get into the Wanted development and smack some heads and get it back on track.

James

[MattBrady]

none of them are going to run out and start collecting because of this movie. nah - you can't claim this with any certainty whatsoever. <b>V for Vendetta</b> and <b>Sin City</b> GN sales soared after their respective movies, and <b>300</b> is selling at a pretty fast clip for a decade+ old OGN.

<i>Someone's</i> buying them. Are they "collectors" who will now haunt stores weekly/monthly? Probably not, but are they now more aware of comics than before? I'd bet they are.

Of course, none of this even touched upon the fact that virtually every review/blurb about the movie cites the source material, so in saying that 90% of moviegoers had no idea, you may be overly optimistic in your pessimism.

MattB

[lfhobbies]

i'm sorry, but the whole 'this is good for comics' is a bad argument as well. ninety percent of the people who saw this had no idea it was based on a comic book and have no clue who frank miller is. if you think anything differently, you put way too much stock into the average moviegoer.



That just means as comic book advocates people (and stores like myself) should be out there getting the word out to people that enjoyed the movie (those that didn't...hmmm lets ignore them;) ) We have POP items up that have been advertising 300 for months now and we are getting people in that we have never seen with questions about it - we sold out of the 300 HC 3 weeks ago (unfortunetly Diamond/DH hasn't had stock either) so that means people are picking it up - hopefully it brings in more readers to our industry.

[erikthered25]

I'm not going to tell you to lighten up! But here's another point of view: I think the artistic liberties taken with the look are acceptable. I saw a special on the History Channel about it the night before, and they said that Leonidas' helmet crest would have gone side to side, not front to back. So you can nit pick that stuff if you want, but I was actually impressed at how much of the real history of the events made it into a comic book adaptation (and in turn, it's movie adaptation). "We will fight in the shade" is taken directly from Herodotus' history of the event. I know I have my nit picks as well, but I think we can all agree that this is a positive thing for comics. It's certainly more true to the source material than ANY other adaptation of a comic I have ever seen.

That's a bad analogy cuz he turn King Xerxes into a 7 foot drag queen like figure that to me is not artistic license. I don't think it's a positive thing for anyone but that's just my opinion. I don't care for or like when folks take artistic license with anyone's history. I say if you're gonna tell it, be faithful to the events that occurred. I hate that it's okay to take artistic license with other people's history. I even hate when people take artistic license with their own history.

[MrNEWZ]

You can do really personal stories without making them mired in the drudgery of reality. That seems to be the whole point of the superhero genre if you ask me.

Or failing to make any female character remotely redeeming--- that is, unless you call prostitutes/strippers/porn stars as the "ideal" feminine role model.

[khuxford]

you may be overly optimistic in your pessimism.

You just blew my mind, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan! ;)

[AirDave817]

I wasn't planning on seeing 300. I never read the graphic novel. Just like I never read Sin City. I did see that one, and I really, really liked it. I never read Ghost Rider, so, I wasn't planning on seeing that either. I still haven't seen V for VendettaI don't know what category of comic book geek fanboy I would fit into. Maybe mainstream. I loved both Spider-Man movies - as movies in their own right that had nothing to do whatsoever with anything that goes on in the comic books. Besides, I'm only going to read Ultimate Spider-Man. Loved Batman Begins for the same reason. I saw Superman Returns on DVD a couple of months ago, and in spite of wanting to not like it, I enjoyed it.

I went to see both Ghost Rider and 300 because my non-comic book geek wife really wanted to see both movies. She wanted to see Ghost Rider for the flaming skull and flaming motorcycle, and she wanted to see 300 for the Spartan warrior's costumes. The fact that we talked about how cool the story was - for a movie was icing. We've gone to see the same comic-book movies and she pretty much tells me what she liked and what she didn't like.

[RTommyB216]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.
I have a degree in History and I'm very familiar with the innacurate nature of the book and film. Just like the Iliad was an adaptation of the Trojan war but wasn't accurate at all. Achilles wasn't REALLY dipped in a river that made him invulnerable. Frank Miller was attempting to make an Epic story like the Iliad, so I seriously doubt that the great great great great great great great great grandchildren of Xerxes are really upset about his portrayal. Everyone knows its not accurate, it doesn't claim to be.

[Ace]

wasn't Stan Lee's basic conceit at the beging of Marvel that (when contrasted with DC) Marvel was to be "the world outside your window (except, ya know, with Super heroes and stuff)"?

That may have been the initial concept, but it was a backdrop for the fantastic stories.

It wasn't the brunt of the stories themselves, which are no longer all that fantastic.

And we should thank the comic book "gods" that it is.

God help us if comic stories get out of the "mire drudgery of reality" and go back to the days of the extremly restricted comic code, before Stan Lee did Spiderman stories involving drug abuse or Denny O Neil "find America" Green Lantern/Green Arrow and yes Miller's Hardnose DareDevil stories. Let those days stay dead.

This way the heroes that are beyond the normal human abilities can almost be seen as if they were really interacting with the "real world" which makes for better stories I think.

And to be honest I find it hard for anyone to be a Daredevil reader and NOT expect some drudgery of reality.

And what the hell is wrong with most of the first 100 issues of Spider-Man? Or Roy Thomas' Avengers, or the FF.

I'll give you that 60s DC comics weren't great and had zip in the way of character development, but the Marvel comics hold up, and that's even with the code.

And there are plenty of comics that take those old styles, keep it from getting too mired in that drudgery, and can still do tremendously mature, interesting, character driven stories.

Look at the first volume of JSA (the current one's a bit more brutal than it has to be to get the point across). Look at Busiek and Nicieza's Thunderbolts, where you deal with huge questions, like how someone raised to be a Nazi like Zemo can possibly deal with feelings of heroism.

I don't know. Maybe I just like my comics (even DD; my favorite stuff with him was when the Heroes were gone and he was trying to tackle the Rhino on his own. Next up might be the arc where he's dealing with a whole bunch of Ultrons), with a heaping sense of wonder.

[GeorgeG]

I believe the female demographic drove the numbers to $70 million. A lot of women wanted to see this movie for whatever reason.

Making a profit--on its first weekend no less--says A LOT. I didn't think Watchmen would ever get made, but because of 300--and if the same people are attached--then I would say it's a guarantee it will be made.

[funjoe]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.

I agree 100% with your first two paragraphs, but you totally lost me with the third. I didn't think the movie's weak points (which you pretty much covered) were enough to bring the movie as a whole down. The story was great overall, although the subplot was pointless. The acting was effective overall, although David Denham's ("Faramir") performance was lacking. And I thought the director did a nice job. Bottom line, I had a great time watching that flick. And I thought Gerard Butler was excellent.

[eltopo]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.
I liked it a lot
but agree that Synder is going to ____ up watchmen

[Sir Jon]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

It's people like you what make me dislike the internet intensely. History is all revisionist in the end, as no one that was there at the time of the events being interpreted are alive to say what is and isn't accurate! You tell me what film ever showed historical events fully accurately and I'll be amazed. Your complaint is flawed and your attempt at showing enlightenment towards your complaint at the end shows your lack of faith in your own opinion.

I enjoyed 300 but found the movie to be inferior to the graphic novel. I also found an earlier film, The 300 Spartans, to be a superior movie to 300, except in it's fight sequences, which were nothing more than a pure fanboy thrill for me.

Sir Jon, the irritated

[Kolimar]

Fan-freaking-tastic. :) :) :)

[Kolimar]

The complete list of comics-based movies (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41643) :p :D ;)

[Spartan]

Wow, those are some incredibly limp paralells to supposed "real world politics." You could bend any "us vs them" film to fit that criteria.

I highly doubt people are walking around "Hey, go check out 300 man! Not only is it cool, but it summarizes my feelings on the currrent US / Iraq war in our post 9-11 world.....and there's boobs."

You want to know why the film is doing so good? Because there hasn't been a good action film in a long, long time. This film wasn't about politics, or family values, or character studies -- it was an endless series of slow motion fight scenes, and goddamn if it wasn't bloody glorious.

[burrfoot]

I enjoyed the movie very much but must admit I had never read the original comic by Frank. Just never picked it up. Don't know why?

I was also shocked to see that the guy who played Xerxes was also the guy who played Karl(Laura Linney's love interest) in Love Actually. LOL.

[Gordon McAlpin]

Does anybody else wonder if there were prosthetic nipples on the women, to give them that Frank Miller "BOING"?

They don't use prosthetics. It's this real high-tech ____ called "ice."

[smitch]

I. ...She wanted to see Ghost Rider for the flaming skull and flaming motorcycle, and she wanted to see 300 for the Spartan warrior's costumes. The fact that we talked about how cool the story was - for a movie was icing...

Hilarious! Go to a movie for the costumes. Hey, the story wasn't bad either! That's like going to a resturant for the napkins, and finding the food's pretty good too! I'm just giving you crap, man.

[MadBandit]

was absolute drivel. You could easily make an argument that 300 is a pro-US Iraq war allegory (people fighting for their ideals of freedom after attacks and threats against their way of life despite those in their government who don't want to fight) and that it is a pro-insurgents Iraq war allegory (a small group of people fighting a superiorly equipped enemy intent on supplanting their way of life and establishing a puppet government). That is, of course, assuming you actually have an open mind to look at the story objectively.

And complaining that there isn't an over-all anti-war message in the movie? A movie about Sparta? About Sparta? I honestly cannot understand the rational behind that complaint. Peace is not synonymous with anti-war.

/end rant, but damn that review pissed me off.


Don't worry, man. She's just one of the many self-loving fools who can't leave their politics, right or left, in the movie theater's lobby. 300 works as a film, and Miller must be stoked by now (Dark Knight Returns: The Movie sounds more than possible :D ).

Warner Bros should re-release the film during November as an Oscar contender.

[MadBandit]

Wow, those are some incredibly limp paralells to supposed "real world politics." You could bend any "us vs them" film to fit that criteria.

I highly doubt people are walking around "Hey, go check out 300 man! Not only is it cool, but it summarizes my feelings on the currrent US / Iraq war in our post 9-11 world.....and there's boobs."

You want to know why the film is doing so good? Because there hasn't been a good action film in a long, long time. This film wasn't about politics, or family values, or character studies -- it was an endless series of slow motion fight scenes, and goddamn if it wasn't bloody glorious.

I think it was all about politics, family values, character studies and the bloody, slow-motion fight scenes, and that's not bad at all. Plus, Frank Miller's participation in the project.:D

[Charlie Hustle]

good news, i loved the flick.

[sol]

I personally think it sucks that he took such a revisionist pen to historical information because I've been searching online and King Xerxes never looked like that. If I took a closer look, I'd probably find even more information that's been changed or altered. Although it's "just an adaptation from a comic book and it's not supposed to be taken seriously" I'm disturbed how it's okay just go in and revise someone's history. If Xerxes or anyone else in his family lineage was alive today, they could sue Frank Miller and everyone involved for defamation of character because his version or vision of events is inaccurate. I've always been uncomfortable with this type of revision because I personally don't think it's right. I know he's not telling it as if it's history because he has a narrator but to me that's just a cop-out and a ploy to get around the fact that he has revised someone else's history.

Of course I expect the replies of lighten up..etc..etc..etc.. But that's just my two cents.

History is written by the winner. Who knows how much of what was altered in 'history'? I don't think i'd get too wrapped up in believing something i read...it always ends badly.

[Thalya]

Wow, those are some incredibly limp paralells to supposed "real world politics." You could bend any "us vs them" film to fit that criteria.

I highly doubt people are walking around "Hey, go check out 300 man! Not only is it cool, but it summarizes my feelings on the currrent US / Iraq war in our post 9-11 world.....and there's boobs."

You want to know why the film is doing so good? Because there hasn't been a good action film in a long, long time. This film wasn't about politics, or family values, or character studies -- it was an endless series of slow motion fight scenes, and goddamn if it wasn't bloody glorious.


The Spartan has spoken. :D

[Groovie Mann]

300 was an awesome flick. it kept the feel of frank miller alive and the stuff that the director and screenwriters added didn't take anything away from it.

[DarkNomis]

And what the hell is wrong with most of the first 100 issues of Spider-Man? Or Roy Thomas' Avengers, or the FF.

I'll give you that 60s DC comics weren't great and had zip in the way of character development, but the Marvel comics hold up, and that's even with the code.

And there are plenty of comics that take those old styles, keep it from getting too mired in that drudgery, and can still do tremendously mature, interesting, character driven stories.

Look at the first volume of JSA (the current one's a bit more brutal than it has to be to get the point across). Look at Busiek and Nicieza's Thunderbolts, where you deal with huge questions, like how someone raised to be a Nazi like Zemo can possibly deal with feelings of heroism.

I don't know. Maybe I just like my comics (even DD; my favorite stuff with him was when the Heroes were gone and he was trying to tackle the Rhino on his own. Next up might be the arc where he's dealing with a whole bunch of Ultrons), with a heaping sense of wonder.

Nothing is wrong with the first 100 issues of Spiderman, but what made him more profound and yes, more intersting reading was the books that came after that. Harry's drug problem, the death of Gwen Stacey and Norm Osborn, Spidey graduating High school for college, etc.

Marvel (Stan Lee really) had been pushing the edges of the comic code already to reflect more of the "real world" even before the spidey drug issues with the creation of very unconventional "anti-heroes" that was very much against the norm of other comic publishers at the time (DC, Charlton, etc.)

Iincluding a blind one (DareDevil) A Frankenstein Monster (Hulk) An African king (Black Panther) and mutants (X-Men) that was basically an analogy for minorites in the country.

The Spidey Drug issues (printed without permision of the code) was just the capper of something that Marvel had been etching towrd for some time anyway.

And the great Roy thomas' Avengers, after Marvel had pretty much gave the comic code a miss, bring in the current political aspect of the time with government offiical involment with the actions of a superheroes group (During Kree-Skull War) and how they should be sanction (which we saw finally come to escalation in last year Civil War) as well as affrimitive action dictating their ranks and where they can operate over US enemies soil or not.

And the Fantastic four did introduce that Sue having an extermarital affair with Namor in the early 70s. Caertainly that was never done before with a "heroine" and are very "real world" isssues.

I mean. Dardevil did get expose by the press and was recently in jail, so you can;t ge more "real" than tat.

Comics still have a sense of wonder, now more than ever, except they have inculcate the aspects of our real world in them and even moreso becasue of writers like FrankMiller.

[smitch]

They don't use prosthetics. It's this real high-tech ____ called "ice."

Ha. No seriously though, different women have different shapes of boing. These were the straight out, flat top, Frank Miller illustrated nips. It may seem juvenile to talk about, but I'm telling you the filmmakers went to lengths on this.

[DaVeO]

I would just like to say that I very much liked David Wenham's performance in the movie. :D

[Ace]

Nothing is wrong with the first 100 issues of Spiderman, but what made him more profound and yes, more intersting reading was the books that came after that. Harry's drug problem, the death of Gwen Stacey and Norm Osborn, Spidey graduating High school for college, etc.

Marvel (Stan Lee really) had been pushing the edges of the comic code already to reflect more of the "real world" even before the spidey drug issues with the creation of very unconventional "anti-heroes" that was very much against the norm of other comic publishers at the time (DC, Charlton, etc.)

Iincluding a blind one (DareDevil) A Frankenstein Monster (Hulk) An African king (Black Panther) and mutants (X-Men) that was basically an analogy for minorites in the country.

The Spidey Drug issues (printed without permision of the code) was just the capper of something that Marvel had been etching towrd for some time anyway.

And the great Roy thomas' Avengers, after Marvel had pretty much gave the comic code a miss, bring in the current political aspect of the time with government offiical involment with the actions of a superheroes group (During Kree-Skull War) and how they should be sanction (which we saw finally come to escalation in last year Civil War) as well as affrimitive action dictating their ranks and where they can operate over US enemies soil or not.

And the Fantastic four did introduce that Sue having an extermarital affair with Namor in the early 70s. Caertainly that was never done before with a "heroine" and are very "real world" isssues.

I mean. Dardevil did get expose by the press and was recently in jail, so you can;t ge more "real" than tat.

Comics still have a sense of wonder, now more than ever, except they have inculcate the aspects of our real world in them and even moreso becasue of writers like FrankMiller.

I think, much like any good idea, they took it way too far.

But I think in the end we're going to have to agree to disagree here.

[MadBandit]

I would just like to say that I very much liked David Wenham's performance in the movie. :D

Yeah, as Dillos, he gave fierceness to the tale as the narrator. :D

[Boxful]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.


Yes, you could have waited a little longer to post your negative comment. I read yours first so here you go:

I'd like the think the artistic visual aspect of this film is what has been drawing people to the box office. It looks very original and action packed from what I saw on the trailers. And being a huge Miller fan is what will draw me to see this movie. I loved the graphic novel and will most likely enjoy this movie as well.

Could it be that people saw the Sin City movie, really liked it, and are willing to give Miller's 300 the benefit of the doubt? Hmm, that could be.

'From the creator of Sin City' can have as big a draw as 'Staring these huge actors!'.

Seems you already have your mind made up on the watchmen movie too. Fair enough I guess as I'm guilty of that from time to time. But no doubt you'll be posting your negative comments when that one comes up too. I'll be sure to ignore them next time.

[DarkNomis]

I think, much like any good idea, they took it way too far.

But I think in the end we're going to have to agree to disagree here.

Actually that part I agree with you (and some of you previous comments about comics being a world of wonder, I agree there also.) that some writers did take it a little to far in putting the "real world" in books i.e a book gratiously filled with sex and violence (including Frank Miller).

But for the most part, at least for me, I think what we've seen in the last 35 or so years that the type of stories that are told in as comics have had more relevance that reflects current society of it's time and still have that sense of wonderment that you loved as a kid than it ever had since their creation.

[Nate-Earth 2]

I just saw a thing on Headline News about 300 hitting the 70 million mark this past weekend, and a movie reviewer on the broadcast stated that "the genius Frank Miller is the greatest 'graphic novelist' of our time, period"... I, and I'm sure alot of others, would not agree with that. Like I've said before, his run on DD, Dark Knights Returns and Year One were, in my opinion, Frank Miller's only read-worthy works. Everything else I've read of his, from Sin City to Hard Boiled, to Martha Washington, to the joke that is All-Star Batman, were alright at best, terrible at worst. I just thought his statement was funny, because there are so many others who would be more deserving of such a statement.

[Boxful]

I just saw a thing on Headline News about 300 hitting the 70 million mark this past weekend, and a movie reviewer on the broadcast stated that "the genius Frank Miller is the greatest 'graphic novelist' of our time, period"... I, and I'm sure alot of others, would not agree with that.

Good point. Probably should have gone with 'the most known graphic novelist of our time'. He's certainly up there with the greats though.

I Loved the Maus books. Spiegelman was it? I'd put him near the top.

Miller has certainly done his share of great work but it's understandable to have a couple of stinkers here and there. DK2 comes to mind for me (though Varley needed to lay off the photoshop rainbow gradient tool. Can't blame him for that aspect)

[Macocco]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.


This movie takes place in Sparta, Greece not Rome! It's about "The 300 Spartans" that's why they called this movie 300, get it? You were not paying attention to this movie because if you were you would have known that. Man, what a frigin' ninny, lol. :rolleyes:

[evanation]

erikthered25,
it's not Rome, it's Greece and second either ending is an excellent way to end things. the king dying is a good way to go but the ending we got was great. it just showed that that after the king dying, all of greece was united and where the persians feared 300 spartans, now they got 10 000 + to deal with.
bare inmind that if the movie ended just as the king died then that wouldn't be a conclusion. that would be cheating the audience. i thought the film was excellent and trust me dude, i'm very strict with what i consider good.

[Fletcher]

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q304/roivampire_photo/sparta.jpg


man I laughed at this picture so hard I think I pulled something.

[Fletcher]

Ok ok I know I am double posting whoopdee doo. Anyhoo......

I am not surprised that 300 opened strong. It was advertised in the right way and opened on the right weekend. The movie people will now have to see how many peole go back to see it for a second and third time.

I loved it and as I said in a post on the other board if you wanted a TOTALLY accurate telling of what EXACTLY happened, all the whys and where-fors watch the HISTORY network. If you want a fun movie, a movie that you can sit back and enjoy go see the film.

What is more interesting in this article is that they make mention of a Ronin film. This is the first I have heard of it and I try and stay on top of movie news from other sites and periodicals geared more towards film that this one. That is a movie I think that will rock the house down.

[funjoe]

I'm not going to tell you to lighten up! But here's another point of view: I think the artistic liberties taken with the look are acceptable. I saw a special on the History Channel about it the night before, and they said that Leonidas' helmet crest would have gone side to side, not front to back. So you can nit pick that stuff if you want, but I was actually impressed at how much of the real history of the events made it into a comic book adaptation (and in turn, it's movie adaptation). "We will fight in the shade" is taken directly from Herodotus' history of the event. I know I have my nit picks as well, but I think we can all agree that this is a positive thing for comics. It's certainly more true to the source material than ANY other adaptation of a comic I have ever seen.

Plus, they almost had to make the Persians monstrous, didn't they? I would think the filmmakers wanted to make sure the audience sympathies lied with the Spartans and, early attempts to humanize the Spartan King aside, they aren't exactly a warm and fuzzy bunch. I think it would be harder to root for the Spartans if they were just hacking and slashing their way through normal looking soldiers. Much easier to just make it a simple good guys vs bad guys thing by making the enemy monsters (but what was the deal with that Hellraiser-looking fat dude with the axes for arms)?

[skl183]

I'm willing to bet FF2 won't do nearly as good as its predecessors.

Spidey 3 I see cleaning up with this being Maguire's supposed last film in the series. Just leave'em hanging just like X3...

[FallenFate]

I'm willing to bet FF2 won't do nearly as good as its predecessors.

Spidey 3 I see cleaning up with this being Maguire's supposed last film in the series. Just leave'em hanging just like X3...


I think FF2 will do fine. I am willing to bet, in fact, that it will do BETTER than the last one did. As for Spider-Man, I think that Tobey is anlging for more money since he's only contracted to do three, but the series will go on without him if he doesn't come back.

[JLAJRC]

I found the movie to be interesting, but I wasn't blown out of my seat like I was with Sin City. I'll read the graphic novel because of it, though. Personally, if I want a sword/sandal type-entertainment, HBO's "Rome" still rules.

[GohanWinner]

I have a degree in History and I'm very familiar with the innacurate nature of the book and film. Just like the Iliad was an adaptation of the Trojan war but wasn't accurate at all. Achilles wasn't REALLY dipped in a river that made him invulnerable. Frank Miller was attempting to make an Epic story like the Iliad, so I seriously doubt that the great great great great great great great great grandchildren of Xerxes are really upset about his portrayal. Everyone knows its not accurate, it doesn't claim to be.
That's probably the best description of the story I've heard, kudos.

I greatly enjoyed the film, more than I even expected to.

Am I the only one who liked Faramir in it? I feel like I was. His voice was great.

[spideyisgod]

if these movies are doing this good right now, can you imagine what numbers spider-man 3 is gonna put out. comic movies aren't dying out anytime soon and i am very happy for it.l

[Mott]

i'm genuinely surprised about this. the movie had no huge marketable stars and still manages a box office of this magnitude? weird.

in my opinion, the movie wasn't even that great. all the senate stuff with the queen and that dude from the wire was lame. faramir was lame too - especially with that last scene back in rome where he was leading the army. why did we need that? just cut on the king dying.

bad story. bad acting. and bad directing. this coming from the director who is going to screw up the watchmen. can't wait.


Thanks for the positive insight Debbie Downer! Who $#IT in your cereal Darth.

[Alan Coil]

I just saw a thing on Headline News about 300 hitting the 70 million mark this past weekend, and a movie reviewer on the broadcast stated that "the genius Frank Miller is the greatest 'graphic novelist' of our time, period"... I, and I'm sure alot of others, would not agree with that. Like I've said before, his run on DD, Dark Knights Returns and Year One were, in my opinion, Frank Miller's only read-worthy works. Everything else I've read of his, from Sin City to Hard Boiled, to Martha Washington, to the joke that is All-Star Batman, were alright at best, terrible at worst. I just thought his statement was funny, because there are so many others who would be more deserving of such a statement.

Maybe not the greatest, but, after 300 and Sin City, perhaps the richest!

And Miller may never do another comic book if he is kept too busy writing for movies.

[Bloodmage]

Posted this in another board, but I guess it works here too....

I think if you want to nitpick the movie to death, you could find an anti-war message, a pro-war message, a homoerotic message, a homophobic message, a pro-West message, a pro-Middle East message, a pro-insurgent message, a pro-US message, a women's rights message, an anti-imperialsm message, a pro-hunchback message, an anti-hunchback message, etc., etc.

But this can be done with any movie with war or politics in it. The Lord of the Rings trilogy, both Star Wars trilogies, The Passion of the Christ, Gladiator, hell I could probably find some sort of "propaganda" in any movie if I wanted to. And what's funny is that these same reviewers don't call these misnomered "documentaries" of late as being propaganda. Wheter you agree with his messages or not, every Michael Moore film is a propaganda film, but no one calls it that. We call it a documentary, even though a true documentary according to Princeton University is "a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event".

Moore's films have just as many inaccuracies as 300 had, and 300 is a work of fiction. Another popular documentary filmmaker, Morgan Spurlock, is guilty of the same. These films are represented as non-fiction even though facts are omitted, and a persuasive narrative guides the films. Yet I don't see any of these publications decrying these films as propaganda. Oh that's right, because they have the same viewpoint. And before you flame me, I know that the other side has released similar stuff, but Moore's the biggest name, so I'm going with him.

300 is an exaggerated story of an event that MAY have actually happened (there are no first-hand accounts of the Battle of Thermopylae) in a country 2000 years ago which we have very little historical knowledge of. Outside of Herodotus, we base a lot of our "knowledge" of Sparta on differing accounts of the time, and even Herodotus' accuracy is often called into question.

So, to summarize, 1- don't overthink its historical in/accuracy, 2- to the pessimists here, lighten up, and 3- stop looking for messages that aren't there/labelling fictional stories written BEFORE the current war as propaganda.....especially when there's real propaganda being spread (by both sides) all the time.

[Macocco]

Plus, they almost had to make the Persians monstrous, didn't they? I would think the filmmakers wanted to make sure the audience sympathies lied with the Spartans and, early attempts to humanize the Spartan King aside, they aren't exactly a warm and fuzzy bunch. I think it would be harder to root for the Spartans if they were just hacking and slashing their way through normal looking soldiers. Much easier to just make it a simple good guys vs bad guys thing by making the enemy monsters (but what was the deal with that Hellraiser-looking fat dude with the axes for arms)?


Good point basically the movie is an adaptation of the comic book and for the purposes of telling the story in that context the Persians were depicted cartoonish in contrast to the already hard edged, Spartans. The Hellraiser-looking dude was a bit over the top, yes. The point is that it is a faithful adaptation of the comic book and the comic is a faithful telling of actually historical events for the most part except for the comic book "sauce" Frank Miller added, i.e. the mutants and monsters? It does not snow in Sparta either? Personally I would have preferred a straight up historical telling of the story. There is a 1962 movie called "The 300 Spartans" available on DVD as well which I believe was Frank Miller's inspiration for making this comic.

The ending is excellent and correct because it illustrates the significance of this battle and why it unified ancient Greece to fight off the invading Persian Army and usher in the first Democracy. So IMHO I think we all owe a small bit of gratitude to those brave 300 soldiers and the sacrifice they made not to mention it was a greatly entertaining film. The only thing that pisses me off is when some idiot says the movie sucks because they didn't like the part in Rome with the guy from the "Wire" or people justifying stupidity by saying yea, yawn well, who cares.

[Macocco]

Hopefully I think what the huge success of the movie 300 and Frank Miller's graphic novel may have achieved is the invigoration of an old genre known as "sword and sandals". This is what my friend was, I believe trying to allude to? The state of the art effects and advancements in motion picture technology have added a new veneer of realism and excitement to what I believe can become a poignant and exhilarating genre of film entertainment. I would like to see more definitive kick-ass and intelligent movies made of this type. I think this is what Frank Miller had in mind when he created 300.

http://www.foxmovies.com.au/content/fox_films/363/images/300Spartans-DVD-Flat.jpg

[Drcharles]

This Film looks the ' Dogs Bollocks ',
and at present so Damned Apt

[Macocco]

Thanks for sharing your profound insight, Bluto. :rolleyes:

http://www.popeye-n-olive.com/image/bluto3.gif