300; Full-Tilt Review

"A thousand nations of the Persian empire will descend upon you. Our arrows will blot out the sun!"

Persian Commander 

"Then we will fight in the shade."

Stelios 

In Ancient Greece, as you well know, everybody worked out at the gym and soaked their biceps in oils.

Synopsis: 

The time is 480 BC, and the small city-state of Sparta comes under threat from the mighty Persian Empire. The ultimatum is simple, "join us or die", but despite overwhelming odds the Spartan King Leonidas will not submit. Instead, he leads 300 of his finest warriors to defend his homeland against the immeasurable invading hoard. 

Script: 1/2 - does the job.

 

Pace: 2/2 - never a dull moment.

 

Acting: 1/2 - better than what you'd expect in a film like this.

 

Aesthetic: 1/2 - stylish, but cheap-looking in places.

 

Intention: 2/2 - the slow-motion blood-and-sandal fantasy film to end them all!

Final Score: 7/10

Based (rather loosely) on a real historical battle, and adapted from the popular graphic novel 300 by Frank Miller.

Worth noting here, 300 is the polar opposite of the film Troy- and both would make for an interesting double feature- where as Troy took a war which may never have actually happened and treated it with as much realism as could be credible, 300 took a real conflict and treated it as though it were a myth. The results are rather intriguing. Another interesting aspect to consider (a concept subsequently lost in the awful sequel) is that of the 'unreliable narrator'; the film is structured in such a way that Dilios (spoiler: the soul surviving member of the the 300) is telling his story to inspire the warriors of Sparta in battle. Included in his tale are events and introspection that would not be known to him, such as the brave last stand, or exchanges between the King and his Queen. So, one might presume that the monstrousness of their enemies and the superhuman feats of his comrades have also been exaggerated? 

Either way, whether you agree with such hypothetical pondering or not, 300 is a still a very entertaining watch. The cast, including a pre-fame Michael Fassbender, Gerard Butler, Dominic West and Lena Headey, all bring a surprising amount of depth to bare on the material, considering how little time they have between the bloody battle scenes. 300's show-stopping slow-motion technique has been much overused in the years since it's release (including by the film's own director Zack Snyder, who has seemingly gone on to make this his raison d'etre), but here the technique is put to good effect, perhaps a shrewd move or by happy accident; the violence almost coming to a complete stop mid-action feels like a comic book panel made real. 

Many critics got a bit 'sniffy' with 300 on it's release. Most of them gave luke-warm reviews, praising the style but putting the boot into the content, but a few critics of the bleeding-heart variety roasted the film over it's (apparently) "disgusting political content" (homosexuals are evil, the disabled are treacherous, foreigners are tyrants, Caucasians are good, etc). I personally feel they were reading way too much into it; at the end of the day 300 is a comic book adaption, a superhero film. It's probably not meant as a reflection on real-world issues: this is half naked men with swords fighting monsters. I'd be worried if you felt like living your life by this scenario...