Quote:
Originally Posted by Tankmobile
i mean relatively new ones  sat through "300" last night and just found it but-numbingly boring
historically inaccurate, poor character development, and the fight scenes were unrealistic and untrue. |
Historically inaccurate? The movie is based on the comic book by frank miller and not the event itself. As for the poor character development, I've seen this arguement used by a couple of critics,albeit :
a) the "time span" of the movie is only a few days long.
b)we are talking about a military unit going on a campaign, what did they expect,see the hoplites socialize/flirt/exhibit their emotional world? The chars were nicely developed.
The fight scenes weren't realistic indeed. But so it was in the matrix case, since the point in those movies was to take the action film genre a step forward. Both movies were succesful in this. Once again ,this wasn't a documentary on ancient warfare,just an action movie based on a comic book which was loosely based on an 1960's movie which was based on the historical facts...Surprisingly ,the basic guidelines weren't inaccurate at all,it is just the whole "LOTR" atmosphere that some people disliked. Heh, the movie even has a smeagol (ephialtes).
I liked the movie a lot. What I didn't like was the hollywood cliche chit chat ("We are Free men fighting for justice"/daddy warrior goes ballistic when his son is killed etc). And of course the revival of a feud dead for about fifteen centuries (Greece v Persia) is rather silly,although I had seen that coming.
Linear Mode
