Last night I watched 300 for the third time. (I started watching it with Kelley; halfway through she fell asleep. Sadly, blood and bellowing and the bluescreen ballet-of-death don’t delight her.)
300 is awesome. As long as you don’t require realism in any sense: fight physics, character development, history.
I haven’t read the Frank Miller/Lynn Varley graphic novel but there are a handful of scenes in the film that I know in my bones are visual set pieces lifted from the book: kicking the emissary down the hole; the tree of dead villagers; the tumble of Persians off the cliff. (Those familiar with the book please correct me. Also, feel free to describe other scenes common to film and book.) I’m also pretty sure that the book probably had more male nudity. Perhaps less female nudity–or perhaps not. But this is Hollywood, a reality where all girls have naked nipples and no boys have penises (or even bare bums–yay for red cloaks).
I found the endless rippling abdominals and little leather man panties very amusing. It’s pleasing to see boys treated as eye candy for a change. (I couldn’t decide how many of the six-packs were fake. Anyone know?) I didn’t like the fact that all the characters (I use the word loosely) involved in girl-on-girl action were disfigured. I didn’t think much of the monsters–I couldn’t get them to make sense when the rest of the film stuck to pseudo-realism (are they in the book?). The orgy scene sucked. (No pun intended.) Why don’t film makers pay attention to orgy continuity? Without continuity, the whole thing becomes senseless: we see a woman sliding down another woman *before* they’ve locked eyes. We see women magically reclothed *after* they’ve begun to have sex. No continuity = no story. Without a story to tell ourselves, we don’t feel the sexual tension. No sexual tension in a filmed orgy = pointlessness.
But, oooh, the violence was *awesome*. I am a sucker for the all-or-nothing, beserk-in-battle, do-or-die-with-swords, one-against-an-army motif. (My favourite Xena episode was “One Against an Army.”) I love witnessing people commit. The best part? No angst. Everyone knew what was right (for them) and behaved accordingly. No dithering. Fabulous.
It was fun, too, imagining fanboy emotional distress as Big Boy Xerxes stood suggestively behind Little Leonidas and talked in his creepy bass about kneeling. The symbolism of Leonidas finally piercing his enemy with a spear (then dying before anyone could Do Anything Bad to him) was not lost on me.
And of course it’s cool to think (again, I use the word loosely) that a storyteller could make such a difference. I expect I’ll watch this yet again in a few months.
18 thoughts on “little leather man panties”
Here’s a few comparisons, FYI.
< HREF="http://littledailyprophet.wordpress.com/2006/12/15/300-theatrical-trailer-captures-compared-to-frank-millers-comic-scans/" REL="nofollow">http://littledailyprophet.wordpress.com/2006/12/15/300-theatrical-trailer-captures-compared-to-frank-millers-comic-scans/<>Yes, they certainly left out some wedding tackle.
300 is definately in my top ten. And yes, the kneeling bit had me “woot-wooting” all the way home too….
Honestly, I was so bored by it? We got it “On Demand” & I watched about half of it before pausing it & then I never went back to it.
For similar saturated color palates, may I HEARTILY recommend “The Fall”?
Yeah, it bored me, too. So fakey and I didn’t buy the acting at all. And they all looked self-conscious in their man-panties.
I read a lot of the 6 packs were real. They were put on special diets and regimens for the film.
I saw it on a plane and loved it. For reference, I am male, heterosexual, not remotely turned on by six-packs, and had no idea that it was an adaptation of a graphic novel. When I learned that, the style of the film made a lot more sense, and it was the <>style<> I liked so much – it gave it an aura of mythic depth that a more conventional treatment might have missed (<>Troy<>, anyone?)
<>But this is Hollywood, a reality where all girls have naked nipples and no boys have penises (or even bare bums–yay for red cloaks).<>That’s one of the things in <>Watchmen<> that made me happy. There’s a lot of male full frontal nudity (okay, the guy is blue, but the constant sight of blue dick still seemed to tickle the audience). <>Watchmen<> also features more male bare bum than female. There are a lot of things I don’t like about the movie, one of them being Rorschach’s voice and voice-overs, but it sure is worth watching, IMO.
<>300<>, I can see it once a year, but as far as ballet-of-death goes, I’d rather do <>Hero<> or <>Kill Bill<>.
It’s a painting in motion, which is fine, but after I had about twenty minutes of it I wanted something less stunning and more immersive—like real history. From what I saw it bore slight resemblance to the actual story, but I still prefer the 1960-era version with Richard Egan, “The 300 Spartans” which laid out the politics clearly and made you actually give a shit about some of these people.
But, oh, 300 is pretty to look at.
Karina, the Rorschach voice over was the best part! After the ton of blue dong.
Also, I am pretty much over Frank Miller. Where pretty much = totally, absolutely.
I found it pretty but offensive. Saw it once. Fumed at the screen. Never watched again. It was pretty though.
I found it boring. Xerxes looked and sounded marvelous, but that’s where it ended. Zack Snyder has an alarming knack for stylizing violence (see Watchmen) that encourages cheering in people. Yikes.
I still haven’t seen 300. But I’ve seen, and enjoyed, Meet the Spartans. Yes, it’s dumb. But it’s funny, and from everything I’ve heard it’s gayer than 300.
Hehe Karina!! I was getting ready to mention those flicks. Another 2 that make my top ten, aside from a small handful of ‘Serious Films About Anguished People’.
So did you like, or better yet, have you seen Hero or the Kill Bill movies, Nicola?
<>Realmcovet<> – Kill Bill Rocks. Stylistically, it’s beautiful. The colour and lighting takes my breath away every time I see it. Favourite scene? O-Ren Ishii (Cottonmouth) and Beatrix Kiddo (The Bride) squaring off in the snow outside The House of Blue Leaves to the tune of Santa Esmeralda’s “Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood”. Tarantino has seldom been that good before or after.
<>realmcovet<>, yes, I’ve seen <>Hero<>. Very pretty, and kind of peaceful; like watching my water screensaver.
I haven’t managed to sit through more than five minutes of a Tarantino film since <>Pulp Fiction<>. The man just pisses me off.
Hero was such a blatant rip off of Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon — rather, it milked a lot of what American audiences liked about Crouching Tiger, Tan Dan’s score with fiddle solos, pretty landscape photography — with a bit of Rashomon thrown in for artistic pretension, and it manages to waste several of my favorite actors. Crouching Tiger is much better, including the fights. (For wushu eye candy, I prefer Zhang’s The House of Flying Daggers.)
Pulp Fiction was the last of Tarantino’s films I saw, too. When Kill Bill came out, a lot of people I knew told me I just had to see it, but then I noticed that what they loved about it was what I hated about Tarantino’s other work, so I passed.
Oh, yeah, <>The House of Flying Daggers<> is sweet.
I don’t care much for Tarantino’s films, but there’s something about <>Kill Bill<> that I find aesthetically pleasing.
I liked <>Flying Daggers<>, too. Uma Thurman, though, I find difficult to watch.
Why, because of the fake martial arts?
Comments are closed.