300. worst movie ever?

I was thoroughly disapointed. yeah, i know, I just saw it, and I know im late. whatever. anyway. I thought it was horrible. Other thoughts?

This is Blasphemy this is Madness!

I thought it was alright, yeah it wasn't historicly accurate and they could have done without the Queens side story but the fight scenes were great.

Originally Posted by Kiljan Arslan

they could have done without the Queens side story.

Movies these days always gotta have at least 1 pointless femifascist wench in them.
On the director's cutting room floor is an omitted scene just before the love scene where Leonidas is crying and begging his queen for sex.

Ehh. I thought it was good at first, but when the shiny newness of the visuals wore off I realized there's very little to it.

Therefore I vote B for suckage.

I wa sthoroughly disappointed by the uber fake blood. It didnt even look real. In comparison with Braveheart or Gladiator, 300 should just walk away. feuturing such lines as "for tonight we dine in hell" (wtf??) and the best line of the movie being "This is Sparta" whoopdedoo. it was pathetic. honestly. The spartans were thrilled to die? I dont think so.

AND

the spartans didnt win by breaking formation and running madly out. two guys sword fighting killing like a undred immortals.

Come on! It is far from the best movie ever, but it is certainly not the worst. There are much worse films than this.

Originally Posted by _Pontifex_

I wa sthoroughly disappointed by the uber fake blood. It didnt even look real. In comparison with Braveheart or Gladiator, 300 should just walk away. feuturing such lines as "for tonight we dine in hell" (wtf??) and the best line of the movie being "This is Sparta" whoopdedoo. it was pathetic. honestly. The spartans were thrilled to die? I dont think so.

That was my main complaint too. It seemed silly. A friend of mine kept telling me how good it was......but when I saw the monstrous rampaging rhino in the trailers...I knew I wouldn't like it.

I couldn't/didn't even look at all of it.

As long as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the new Star Wars are considered "movies" then it's going to be hard for ANY movie to EVER be considered "worst movie ever"...they have the top 6 slots sewed up for eternity.

Originally Posted by morteduzionism

As long as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the new Star Wars are considered "movies" then it's going to be hard for ANY movie to EVER be considered "worst movie ever"...they have the top 6 slots sewed up for eternity.

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top

Lord of the Rings: 12th, 19th and 29th
Star Wars: 8th, 11th, 108th


So what films do you like?

Originally Posted by zedestroyer

So what films do you like?

I liked some of the films on that list. I liked the original Star Wars. Usual Suspects. Godfather. What was the movie with Arnold Schwarzaneger(sp) where he was on Mars...that was good. Something About Mary(probably one of the funniest movies I've ever seen). Pulp Fiction(mindless violence but smart). Braveheart. Platoon. Full Metal Jacket. Apocalypse Dawn(?)-Martin Sheen/Marlon Brando. The Prince of Darkness...and others

I just didn't think LOTR/new SW were good...they were horrible. I can't even remember whether or not I even saw the 3rd LOTR that's how bad they were...to me.

I think, for LOTR, that the acting was so bad I couldn't take it. I don't think Jackson was able to pull off the...scope/size...of Middle Earth. He wasn't able to capture the growth of the characters. Especially Merry/Pipin(that's what really irks me). Lastly, he had Sam come across as weak and effiminate. It was just a bad movie and did a disservice to the books...IMO.

Star Wars. It was like Lucas didn't even watch his own movies when he made those pieces of crap. He would've been better off letting the movies be about one of the books that have been written. The movie was seemingly about the creation of Vader, right? Anakin was weak. Vader was supposed to be the uber-Jedi(based on movies IV, V and VI) and what did we see? Nothing. Vader was supposed to have been some kind of freak pilot(IV, V and VI) What did we see? Nothing. All Anakin/Vader did was murder a bunch of Jawas and some kids. Out of the three grown Jedi he fought he was 1-1-1, the last one damn near quartered him. That's Darth Vader!?

Then again maybe I'm wrong. Vader did wait over 20yrs to fight Obi Wan again(when he was old) maybe Vader was still shook over their last encounter, so then it would make sense? I didn't even get into the bad acting and the weird romance between Anakin/Padme...they were just bad movies.

Originally Posted by morteduzionism

. What was the movie with Arnold Schwarzaneger(sp) where he was on Mars...that was good.

Total Recall, and that's one of Arnold's best films.

Originally Posted by morteduzionism

That was my main complaint too. It seemed silly. A friend of mine kept telling me how good it was......but when I saw the monstrous rampaging rhino in the trailers...I knew I wouldn't like it.

I couldn't/didn't even look at all of it.

As long as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the new Star Wars are considered "movies" then it's going to be hard for ANY movie to EVER be considered "worst movie ever"...they have the top 6 slots sewed up for eternity.

I understand why some people don't like the Star Wars prequels, but what the hell do you have against Lord of the Rings? You may not like fantasy films, but as far as they go LOTR is top notch.

Yes it wasn't historicle however unlike some film that was about a mythical english king it didn't claim historicle accuracy it was based on a comic book.

Good film. Shite documentary. Good job it was never meant to be a documentary then.

Originally Posted by Kiljan Arslan

Yes it wasn't historicle however unlike some film that was about a mythical english king it didn't claim historicle accuracy it was based on a comic book.

yeah, after seeing the movie poster for that movie, I am utterly dumbfounded that anyone beyond the age of 15 even tried to view it. But alas, society disappoints as always.

300 was an unmistakably ****** movie. I found myself skipping through rougly half of it, in order to see the silly-but-mildly-entertaining fight scenes.

I knew 300 was a ****** movie the very moment I first saw the trailer for it, many months before the movie's debut (a war-rhino, the king looking for permission from his queen before he murders the persian diplomat, elephants the size of skyscrapers, slow-motion non-phalanx fighting, NIN music, zombies and creeps... NEED I GO ON???) though, so I wasnt surprised and was already anticipating I'd be skipping through most of it.

Yeah, Really. I forgot all about the music, that was one of the gayest parts. The movie was made to satisfy some ignorant might-as-well-be-illiterate kids that like to see people get killed. Violence in movies is okay, but when every death is in slow motion with completely unrealistic spurts of blood....no....not even worth it

Originally Posted by _Pontifex_

The movie was made to satisfy some ignorant might-as-well-be-illiterate kids that like to see people get killed.

Well, thank you for that spiteful contribution.

On a general note, I thought there was an uber-300 thread here already? Eh, havn't been in this forum for a while.

It seems most people who genuinely despise the film always complain about its historical accuracy. Please, I still can't believe people are even bringing up historical accuracy over the film. I guess if that's something a viewer is unable to set aside from their mind there's just no way they could ever like it.

Originally Posted by _Pontifex_

Yeah, Really. I forgot all about the music, that was one of the gayest parts. The movie was made to satisfy some ignorant might-as-well-be-illiterate kids that like to see people get killed. Violence in movies is okay, but when every death is in slow motion with completely unrealistic spurts of blood....no....not even worth it

I'm not a kid, I'm not ignorant and I loved this movie.
Some people, like you, just like to act superior to the rest of the common mortals, don't they?

The history of 300 is simple , Persians invade -> Spartans fight back, but at least it's best to have a simple history but with action and great visual effects, than to have a stupid history ("I Am Legend", "3.10 to Yuma", "Eastern Promises") or even a boring history ("American Gangster", "Atonement").

Originally Posted by zedestroyer

I'm not a kid, I'm not ignorant and I loved this movie.
Some people, like you, just like to act superior to the rest of the common mortals, don't they?

The history of 300 is simple , Persians invade -> Spartans fight back, but at least it's best to have a simple history but with action and great visual effects, than to have a stupid history ("I Am Legend", "3.10 to Yuma", "Eastern Promises") or even a boring history ("American Gangster", "Atonement").

Wow, all those films you named are better than 300 imo. Well, maybe not I am Legend, but still.

Originally Posted by Dead*Man*Wilson

Wow, all those films you named are better than 300 imo. Well, maybe not I am Legend, but still.

Atonement is just boring, I most fell asleep when I saw this movie, to long movie, to short and stupid story.

American Gangster is deceiving, I wasn't expecting much action, but I was expecting to see more. I was expecting a more intense intrigue and chase. This film just don't bring nothing new. I prefer Lord of War, it's much better.

3.10 to Yuma is just stupid, a nice outlaw that goes to prison to help a farmer?

Where is the history of Eastern Promises? The argument is confusing and incomplete, 300 at least have a beginning, middle and end.

I Am Legend is very bad, after watching 28 Days, 28 weeks and Dawn of the Death, I Am Legend don't have nothing new and is somehow boring, the majority of the film just shows Neville walking around.



This poll just shows that this movie is far from being bad.