So "300" is only at 60% on RottenTomatoes.com

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Platypus

Lifer
Apr 26, 2001
31,046
321
136
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: Platypus
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: DAGTA
Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.


Why are people so obsessed over this movie? It's just a movie...

And why does no one ever answer this question?


The critics are correct, the Spartans wore body armor. Don't believe me? Read a history book.

http://history.missouristate.edu/jchuch...%204--Greek%20Warfare%20and%20Army.htm


The critics are NOT correct, this isn't supposed to be a historical reenactment. It's based on the graphic novel in which they wore nothing at all.. though that'd really give some people in this country heart attacks :roll:


I KNOW it is based off of a graphic novel, however that does not invalidate a critics statement that the Spartans did not fight dressed like that. No one is making the argument that you shouldn't watch the movie because it is not historically accurate, they are just pointing out the absurdity and innaccuracy of portraying spartan hoplite armor the way it is in the movie. For example, what if I made a movie based on the US civil war battle of gettysburg, in which all the soldiers wore blue or gray tutus but which in all other regards was accurate? You would immediately point out that it is a bit silly to have the soldiers dressed like that, wouldn't you?

I really don't know how much clearer I can make it... it's based on a graphic novel... why should critics be holding it up to the same standards as a movie that was MEANT to be historically accurate. The graphic novel was NOT meant to be historically accurate, it's a fiction based on facts. That's like saying there's no such thing as wizards in a Harry Potter movie because it's not historically accurate. You CANNOT compare them so that was my point.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: Platypus
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: Platypus
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: DAGTA
Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.


Why are people so obsessed over this movie? It's just a movie...

And why does no one ever answer this question?


The critics are correct, the Spartans wore body armor. Don't believe me? Read a history book.

http://history.missouristate.edu/jchuch...%204--Greek%20Warfare%20and%20Army.htm


The critics are NOT correct, this isn't supposed to be a historical reenactment. It's based on the graphic novel in which they wore nothing at all.. though that'd really give some people in this country heart attacks :roll:


I KNOW it is based off of a graphic novel, however that does not invalidate a critics statement that the Spartans did not fight dressed like that. No one is making the argument that you shouldn't watch the movie because it is not historically accurate, they are just pointing out the absurdity and innaccuracy of portraying spartan hoplite armor the way it is in the movie. For example, what if I made a movie based on the US civil war battle of gettysburg, in which all the soldiers wore blue or gray tutus but which in all other regards was accurate? You would immediately point out that it is a bit silly to have the soldiers dressed like that, wouldn't you?

I really don't know how much clearer I can make it... it's based on a graphic novel... why should critics be holding it up to the same standards as a movie that was MEANT to be historically accurate. The graphic novel was NOT meant to be historically accurate, it's a fiction based on facts. That's like saying there's no such thing as wizards in a Harry Potter movie because it's not historically accurate. You CANNOT compare them so that was my point.

TAKE THAT BACK! there are wizards! I took the class from the University of Phoenix online!
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Cream of the crop reviews are at 80%.

I could care less about what some blogger with a vendetta and a domain name rates it.
 

bigdog1218

Golden Member
Mar 7, 2001
1,674
2
0
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: Platypus
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: DAGTA
Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.


Why are people so obsessed over this movie? It's just a movie...

And why does no one ever answer this question?


The critics are correct, the Spartans wore body armor. Don't believe me? Read a history book.

http://history.missouristate.edu/jchuch...%204--Greek%20Warfare%20and%20Army.htm


The critics are NOT correct, this isn't supposed to be a historical reenactment. It's based on the graphic novel in which they wore nothing at all.. though that'd really give some people in this country heart attacks :roll:


I KNOW it is based off of a graphic novel, however that does not invalidate a critics statement that the Spartans did not fight dressed like that. No one is making the argument that you shouldn't watch the movie because it is not historically accurate, they are just pointing out the absurdity and innaccuracy of portraying spartan hoplite armor the way it is in the movie. For example, what if I made a movie based on the US civil war battle of gettysburg, in which all the soldiers wore blue or gray tutus but which in all other regards was accurate? You would immediately point out that it is a bit silly to have the soldiers dressed like that, wouldn't you?

Well I don't think the Spartans spoke english either but I don't see any of the know it all critics and history nerds complaining about that. All of this whining has nothing to do with historical accuracy, it has to do with nerds trying to act superior with useless knowledge.
 

Crono

Lifer
Aug 8, 2001
23,720
1,502
136
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Damn, 4 pages and no mention?

THIS, IS, MAAAAAADNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESS!!

THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Up to 64% on Rotten Tomatoes, now.
 

Malfeas

Senior member
Apr 27, 2005
829
0
76
Originally posted by: Platypus
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: Platypus
Originally posted by: Malfeas
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: DAGTA
Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.


Why are people so obsessed over this movie? It's just a movie...

And why does no one ever answer this question?


The critics are correct, the Spartans wore body armor. Don't believe me? Read a history book.

http://history.missouristate.edu/jchuch...%204--Greek%20Warfare%20and%20Army.htm


The critics are NOT correct, this isn't supposed to be a historical reenactment. It's based on the graphic novel in which they wore nothing at all.. though that'd really give some people in this country heart attacks :roll:


I KNOW it is based off of a graphic novel, however that does not invalidate a critics statement that the Spartans did not fight dressed like that. No one is making the argument that you shouldn't watch the movie because it is not historically accurate, they are just pointing out the absurdity and innaccuracy of portraying spartan hoplite armor the way it is in the movie. For example, what if I made a movie based on the US civil war battle of gettysburg, in which all the soldiers wore blue or gray tutus but which in all other regards was accurate? You would immediately point out that it is a bit silly to have the soldiers dressed like that, wouldn't you?

I really don't know how much clearer I can make it... it's based on a graphic novel... why should critics be holding it up to the same standards as a movie that was MEANT to be historically accurate. The graphic novel was NOT meant to be historically accurate, it's a fiction based on facts. That's like saying there's no such thing as wizards in a Harry Potter movie because it's not historically accurate. You CANNOT compare them so that was my point.

Nobody is trying to hold the movie up to any standard of historical accuracy. They are just pointing out that the spartans did not dress or fight like that. That's it. Get it?

 

Shadowknight

Diamond Member
May 4, 2001
3,959
3
81
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: torpid
Normally I'd laugh at the claim that the film is overtly political in nature, but I laughed at the same notion in V for Vendetta and as a result ending up watching one of the worst movies I'd ever seen. Of course, the lame-brained over simplified politics were just one small reason why that movie sucked, so maybe I should still keep laughing.

Well, V for Vendetta was based off a comic book that was overtly political in nature. Should have been no surprise there.

The comic book is 20 years old, and was about the Margret Thatcher administration. It was a LOT darker and MUCH better written. V was completely koo-koo for Cocoa Puffs there. His treatment of Evey also made more sense vs. the movie. The Bush anvils really pulled the movie down, particuarly given how badly written they were.
 

40sTheme

Golden Member
Sep 24, 2006
1,607
0
0
I think the movie looks cool.
I also think it is hilarious that people are bashing the historical accuracy... it's based off of a graphic novel if I'm not mistaken. You think it's REALLY supposed to be accurate?
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: 40sTheme
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
I was really looking forward to this movie until I saw this clip: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0lW9gw5TwxE

Now I'm considering skipping it.

Why? That was a sweet and extremely well choreographed scene..

yeah it was good. wonder how long that took? sheesh.


teh movie looks exactly like i am hopeing. a mindless action flick that will entertain me for a few hours.
 

DaShen

Lifer
Dec 1, 2000
10,710
1
0
Dang and I set something up with some friends to go watch it this weekend. Now maybe I will change that plan. Who knows.
 

masshass81

Senior member
Sep 4, 2004
627
0
0
The critics should have chosen their words wisely...

This isn't a bad movie...

THISSSS ISSS SPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

masshass81

Senior member
Sep 4, 2004
627
0
0
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Damn, 4 pages and no mention?

THIS, IS, MAAAAAADNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESS!!

THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Up to 64% on Rotten Tomatoes, now.

hahah I was looking for that. 80% from the cream of the crop..
 

brxndxn

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2001
8,475
0
76
65% critics.. 89% users..

DEFINITELY AN AWESOME MOVIE..

Whenever the critics are lower than the users, the movie tends to be pretty good. Whenever the critics are higher than the users, the movie tends to suck big fat monkey balls. Critics are stupid wastes of liberal PC lard.
 

alrocky

Golden Member
Jan 22, 2001
1,771
0
0
Originally posted by: Eeezee
Edit: I did some research on what the Spartans may have looked like at the time, and here are the results

1) Spartan soldiers worked out naked
2) For battle, they wore nothing but a cloak, a helmet with a phallus protruding from the front, and assless leather chaps
3) They wore lipstick and mascara
:laugh: Okay where's that link and the pics!

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I don't really care, but lets call a spade a spade...warriors wore armor and clothes so they didn't die as often
yup, dying once is enough...
Originally posted by: Mwilding
My reason for nitpicking the reality is that Gates of Fire is one of the best books I have ever read and it was supposed to be made into a movie. 300 has pobably preempted it with an unrealistic portrayal of one of the most fascinating events in military history.
A darn shame that! Read that book and would've loved to see that movie.
 

b0mbrman

Lifer
Jun 1, 2001
29,470
1
81
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: DAGTA
Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.


Why are people so obsessed over this movie? It's just a movie...

And why does no one ever answer this question?

What is the point of asking this question? If you don't get it you probably never will.

That's my favorite dodge :)
 

b0mbrman

Lifer
Jun 1, 2001
29,470
1
81
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: BrownTown
Yeah, that deffinitely was NOT what they wore back in the day. Maybe for working out or training, but in real battle you wear ARMOR, every depiction of greek phalanxes I have ever seen had the people fully clothed and wearing armor. That is jsut one of a hundred things which are completely inaccuracte about this movie. I know its not even based off the historical even so its doesn't matter, but please don't use historical accuracy to justify anything that happens in this movie becasue odds are your wrong.

EDIT: not somoene is prolly gonna try to say that clip where the sword cut right threw people with no problem is accurate too?

through

Zing! You owned him!

 

b0mbrman

Lifer
Jun 1, 2001
29,470
1
81
Originally posted by: brxndxn
65% critics.. 89% users..

DEFINITELY AN AWESOME MOVIE..

Whenever the critics are lower than the users, the movie tends to be pretty good. Whenever the critics are higher than the users, the movie tends to suck big fat monkey balls. Critics are stupid wastes of liberal PC lard.

Examples from both extremes?
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: DAGTA
Originally posted by: clamum
Fvck the haters.

As for the tirade about the lack of the Spartans' clothing, wasn't that how they fought back then? I thought they took quite a bit of pride in their bodies.


Why are people so obsessed over this movie? It's just a movie...

And why does no one ever answer this question?

What is the point of asking this question? If you don't get it you probably never will.

That's my favorite dodge :)

Mine is the Magnum