 
300
MPAA Rating:
 for graphic battle sequences throughout, some sexuality and nudityReviewed by: Michael Karounos Extremely Offensive
Moviemaking Quality:
 Primary Audience:
Adults
Genre:
Action, Adventure, Drama, War
Length:
1 hr. 57 min.
Year of Release:
2007
USA Release:
March 9, 2007 (wide)
   Relevant Issues
How does viewing violence in movies affect the family? Answer Why are humans supposed to wear clothes? Answer        
“Prepare for glory!” Producer’s Synopsis: “Based on Frank Miller’s graphic novel, 300 concerns the 480 B.C. Battle of Thermopylae, where the King of Sparta led his army against the advancing Persians; the battle is said to have inspired all of Greece to band together against the Persians, and helped usher in the world’s first democracy. 300 Spartans fought to the death against Xerxes and his massive Persian army.” “300” is one of those films that is difficult to summarize because there is so much that is interesting about it and so much that is offensive. The short review for this film, as regards a conservative Christian audience (or a pacifist non-Christian audience), is don’t see the movie. Content There are several prolonged scenes of female nudity: one of a writhing, bare-breasted oracle; one of a husband and wife making love; and one of Xerxes’ harem. The first two are tolerable for a mature Christian audience; the latter is perverse and pornographic in its characterization. There are also graphic scenes of slaughter, decapitation, and dismemberment. Some liberal reviewers (Dana Stevens) argue the film is homophobic in its portrayal of Xerxes and the lesbians in the harem, while a gay reviewer (David Foucher) liked the movie very much. That kind of critical dissonance, on both the left and the right, seems to be a common reaction to the movie. Tone I found all of those elements objectionable and unnecessary, but most disappointingly, from a Christian point of view, is the harsh tone of the movie as reflected in its portrayals, its speeches, and its action sequences. There is a way to portray nudity, violence, and even mayhem in an “artistic” manner that strikes a balance between realism (e.g., “Gladiator,” “The Patriot” and degradation (e.g., “Seven,” “Reservoir Dogs”), which a mature Christian audience can watch without feeling soiled. It is on this point that the movie fails because the tone is angry, hateful, and often debasing. The portrayal of the Persian army is very negative and is referred to as a “monster” at least twice, with a specific comparison being made to an earlier scene with a demonic wolf. The use of a troll-like giant, unhistorical battle rhinos, and a nipple-pierced blob with lobster-claws instead of hands was distasteful, to say the least. I don’t espouse moral or cultural equivalence, but speaking as an ethnic Greek whose father was born in Sparta and fought against Greece’s latter day invaders (Hitler’s Nazis), it is important to point out to viewers who may not know ancient history that the Persians were a highly socialized civilization. They were accomplished in everything, except the one virtue that the Greeks alone of the ancient peoples were able to weave into the fabric of their society: democracy. The Persians were indeed tyrannical: they enslaved entire nations, treated women like things, and slaughtered city populations, as in the numerous accounts we read about in the Old Testament, but they weren’t physically monstrous. But the main reason I didn’t like the portrayal of the Persian army in the movie as containing freaks and monsters is because I felt the Greeks in the movie must become, in some measure, monsters to defeat them. In a sense, one is defined by one’s enemies, as well as by one’s friends. Had the movie portrayed the Persian army as glorious in its own right, as it must have been to have defeated almost all the known world, it would have magnified the Greek accomplishment without debasing the Persians. For example, a Spartan warrior witnesses his son killed in battle and his epiphany, after much reflection, is to say that his “heart is filled with hatred.” Then there is a dramatic pause in which we wait for the response of the most moral character in the movie, Leonidas, who replies “Good.” This was a little shocking to me. Besides being an inaccurate portrayal of how Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle would characterize irrational grief, it is a spectacular failure of the movie’s moral vision. Up to this point we had heard speech after speech which emphasized “justice,” “law and order,” “liberty,” “hope,” and above all, “reason.” Over and over in the movie, “reason” is cited to characterize the Spartans and the Greeks in general. But this is not a reasonable response, and the ancient Greeks did not fight with hatred. When told that the Persian arrows would blot out the sun, Herodotus records that Dieneces, the Greek reputed to have fought with the greatest glory at Thermopylae, replied: “Then we shall fight in the shade.” That moment is in the movie. As Victor Davis Hanson notes, “the Spartan mystique was a product of singular discipline and organization, and the ability to stay in rank” (A War Like No Other, 138). Other armies charged in masses; the Greeks marched in order, singing to the martial music of flutes. Hanson notes that the Spartan general, Brasidas, rallied his troops against the Illyrians by characterizing them as a “mob” with “no order” (138). Order, discipline, and organization are all characteristics of an army that is remarkably cool-headed and professional, not hateful and angry. These comments will seem like quibbles to some, but in a movie about justice, liberty, and reason, it is the tone that informs the selection of images, the delivery of the lines, and the portrayal of certain characters. Whether or not the movie is a conservative response to contemporary terrorism (as some reviewers on both sides of the spectrum claim), or a libertarian, anti-religious, anti-terrorist response, as I would further argue, the tone strikes a harsh, discordant note that contradicts the intention of the movie. This is most evident in how the lines are delivered by Gerard Butler, who shouts in almost all the key moments of the movie. Whether this is his fault or the fault of Zach Snyder, the director, is unclear, but the result is a portrayal of an angry man rather than a passionate man. Again, people will disagree on this point, but it is how it struck me. Visuals As everyone probably knows, the movie was filmed primarily against a blue screen, similar to the look of the field scene at the end of Gladiator in which Maximus is re-united with his dead family. The reason special effects are “special” is because they are used in a selective manner. When movies are made with unceasing explosions, unceasing sexual content, or unceasing visual effects (e.g., rotoscoping in A Scanner Darkly), the “special effect” risks becoming banal and trivializes the intended effect. I think 300 was successful in maintaining the freshness of using the technique for the whole film, but others may not. At least, in no place did I find the use of the technique ridiculous. However, it begs the question of how the film might have looked in a conventional format. Is a dream-like blue screen aesthetic more effective than simple realism? I’m not sure. Personally, I prefer my realism to be realistic. Worldview When Xerxes approaches on a throne platform carried by slaves and says “Let us reason together,” the irony is obvious. A man who thinks himself a god and demands slavish servitude from the entire known world is not someone who “reasons” in a conventional sense. This is historically accurate. The real Xerxes had his admirals beheaded after the naval loss at Salamis and beheaded those who dared contradict him. Alexander the Great, under the influence of his Persian advisers in the late part of his campaign, did the same thing. This was how Eastern satraps conducted themselves. By contrast, the Greeks arrived at decisions by argumentation and held their generals (and kings) accountable for their actions. As Hanson notes, the foundation of freedom is free speech, and the Greeks had two words for free speech: “isegoria,” the freedom to speak in an open assembly, and “parrhesia,” the freedom to say what one liked (Carnage and Culture 51). Indeed, Hanson observes that the Athenians worshiped the gods of Freedom and Democracy, named ships after those ideas, and even named one Free Speech (“Parhhesia”). Thus, it is characteristic that when the time came for the Greeks to decide what to do when they learned that the Immortals were behind them, they held an assembly which Herodotus recorded as follows:
This council included representatives of all the men and was not a decision made by Leonidas himself. The point I am making here is that the movie’s emphasis is on reason and discourse. As such, it is pure Enlightenment and Modern, as opposed to postmodern. This is also reflected in the movie’s clarity of values in portraying good and evil, free and slave, right and wrong. Secondly, the movie is anti-religious. When Leonidas is told to “trust the gods,” he replies “I’d prefer to trust reason.” The early scenes with the Spartan ephors show priests who are deformed and depraved. The voice-over describes them as priests of the “old gods,” “corrupt,” “diseased,” and “worthless.” Physical deformity, as in the case of Ephialtes, the Ephors, and the freaks of Xerxes, is typically a metaphor for moral deformity, as in some of the stories of Flannery O’Connor. So when Xerxes, who calls himself “god” and “lord,” says “Let us reason together,” we must understand his statement in its famous context as a specifically Judeo-Christian phrase, as an old-style “god” speaking as God did in the Old Testament:
Xerxes is offering Leonidas a last chance to be his vassal, and he is doing so in the language of the Old Testament. Frank Miller, the author of the graphic novel 300 portrayed Christians negatively in his graphic novel Sin City. I have read neither, but I am willing to bet that Miller, based on his portrayals of Christians, and his on-the-record comments against Islamic terrorism, sees all religion as fundamentalist and a threat to the religion of “reason.” And that’s fine. But from an intentional Christian perspective, which is how Christians should view everything, there are Christian responses to the ugly tone of the movie and its worship of “reason.” The response to content with such an unchristian tone can employ one of three strategies: avoid it (James 4:7); counter the desire to enjoy what is bad by actively seeking out that which is good (Philippians 4:8); and use good judgment in what you see. Good judgment is where grace comes in, but in grace is implied the imperative “Be holy, because I am holy” (1 Peter 1:16 NIV). A Christian response to the religion of reason brings to mind Paul’s famous response to King Festus’ accusation that Paul is “insane”:
Christianity is a reasonable religion because it is the religion of God’s love for man and man’s love for man. 1 Corinthians 13 describes love not as a passion or an instinct, but as a decision:
Love is the ultimate rationale. Conclusion Although the battle sequences relied too much on slow motion and stop action, they were beautifully filmed. Gerard Butler did an excellent job in the choreographed fight scenes which showed how the Spartans fought as a team. Many of the speeches were straight from Herodotus and lent the film historical authenticity. The portrayal of Leonidas’ wife, Gorgo, was feminist in a positive way while maintaining the relationship of husband and wife as full partners (although one of her actions is unrealistic and degrading). These and other elements of the movie were pleasing and satisfying. There is also an interesting Antigone-like moment in which Leonidas must choose to obey his conscience or the strict rule of law. This could potentially be read in a contemporary political light, because it portrays the internal bickering of the country’s apathetic and traitorous rulers as hampering the generals and the war effort. These and other quality moments counterbalance the tonal and visual offences. However, one measure of a film’s worth is how it leaves you feeling, and I left the movie feeling unholy, unheroic, and, ultimately, unmoved. Nonetheless, as a chronicle of a pivotal moment in Western history, when the new lights of democracy, liberty, and reason were being threatened by the “old” ways of tyranny, slavery, and superstition, “300” is still an instructive object lesson for our time. Herodotus concludes his account simply, stating: “Thus fought the Greeks at Thermopylae.” What he meant is, this is how they “thought” when they fought. Leonidas and the 300’s epitaph at the site of the battle reads: “Go, stranger, and tell the Spartans that we lie here in obedience to her laws.” The ultimate act of sacrifice is to rationally die on behalf of someone else in accordance with a greater principle. This both Spartans and Christians can equally understand. Violence: Extreme / Profanity: Minor / Sex/Nudity: Extreme See list of Relevant Issues—questions-and-answers.  Positive
Positive - To be laconic (in honor of the Greek origins of Laconia itself), “300” evoked extremely visceral responses from the pits of my body. I heartily laughed, dealt and received the blows of battle, and was moved at the film’s conclusion. People may attack this “Alamo of antiquity” for various historical reasons, but from what I know about the Battle of Thermopylae, this film stays close not only to the premise, but to the witty lines themselves. The film is very violent indeed, but because the blood is reminiscent of a comic-book, little offense was taken. On the contrary, being a guy, the blood only amped up the leonine nature of men. There were two sexual scenes in the film, neither of which are easily passed over, but I have seen worse in R-rated films. To sum it up, '300' was everything I imagined. A historically based, exciting, viscerally emotional epic that made the ticket price worth every penny. Herodotus would be proud. Positive - From a Christian perspective, the historical fiction film “300” both offends and pleases, which is often the case with a product from an industry with a passion for the Antichrist. What pleases is the zeal and thirst for excellence of the mighty Spartan army of 300. With the evil Xerxes and his Persian army of hundreds of thousands threatening to either subjugate or annihilate Greece, King Leonidas of Sparta rallies his band of 300 warriors in preparation for a battle which defines “the underdog” like no other, except for maybe that Alamo thing centuries later. Leonidas exercises some post-modern political doublespeak to justify the war while his antagonist stays behind to accuse him of anarchy to the political leaders. Positive - Well, apart from the buckets of blood, numerous slashes and gashes, stabbings, piercings, impalings, decapitations, etc. (a bit over-the-top at times to the point where it feels like a video game), and apart from the gratuitous sex scenes (manifested in various forms, though not prolonged), the movie was good. Yep. I might be a part of the select few who can honestly walk away from this film and say it was good. I like to think I have a better appreciation for “300” because of John Eldredge’s “Wild at Heart;” the book seems to have instilled in me a 'heightened awareness.' And on that note, I’ll say this is definitely a guy flick. Positive - Unlike most of viewers it seems, I expected the violence, sex scenes, homosexual references, “King of Kings” comments, etc… because I knew the story, saw the previews, and know about the culture of the time period. I read some reviews on this site and sometimes wonder what some viewers expect from a rated-R movie about a historical WAR with a comic book/fantasy twist. The sex scene was not all that graphic, and it was between husband and wife. The Spartans were fighting for what they believed in. They were not going to be taken over by the Persian tyrant who claimed to be a god. They showed tremendous courage that sparked a nation to become united and defeat the enemy that was to rob them of their freedom. Also, I am annoyed by the people on other forums who say this movie is racist. It seems like every movie is racist in some way these days. They were upset that blacks were in the evil Persian army. The Persians were made up of many different cultures that conquered by the ruler, read up. This movie is rated-R for a reason, but I took my 13 year old brother to see because I thought he could handle the content, which he did. It’s up to individuals to choose who they take to see this movie. Positive - I think people are forgetting that this movie was based on the graphic novel 300, not the historic war. That being said this movie wasn’t made to be 100% historically accurate. Honestly, the monsters were no more scary then those of “Lord of the Rings.” The content of this movie is interesting. Honestly, every nudity scene in the movie was not needed at all, it’s a shame that they had to have those in there, because, that being said, this movie is truly terrific. The battle scenes were filmed and captured, the Spartans were true warriors and that is the point of this movie, they were taught never to retreat or surrender and they don’t! When a huge force of AKA the persians are attempting to rule them the spartans defend what is rightfully their’s and that’s where I think people here are missing the point. The blood, honestly, was not even on a gore level to that of “Braveheart” or “Gladiator,” in fact, the blood was much more cartoonish in this movie. If you get offended by war then skip this movie, if not then go see it. The nudity scenes don’t just come up, and you can easily close your eyes or even leave the theater during the scenes because they really add nothing to this movie. Positive - Is it a good movie? Yes, as long as received for what it is. It is highly offensive, and sometimes unrealistic, however it is the depiction of an adult comic series so this is to be expected and enjoyed. I disagree with the reviewer on several points. The one being that the Persians were actually an impeding evil, had they actually succeeded in invading Europe nothing would have unfolded in the glorious positive manner that it did, eventually paving the way for a Christian empire. For this reason, Thermopylae is one of the most important battles in the history of the world. Positive - This is one of the better movies to come along in a LONG time. It’s historical, filmed well and even has good acting performances, but the main thing that I liked was the never-give-up attitude of the Spartans. No matter what the Persians threw at them, they overcame. This is a good analogy (although not intended, I’m sure) of how we Christians need to act when the world comes at us. Leonidas even lays down his life defending his people for his beliefs, which is another strong message for ANYONE. Positive - When the massive Persian army led by the general Hydarnes approaches, Spartan King Leonidas divided his army and remained in the pass with his 300 and with some warriors who refused to leave. The King’s intent was to delay the Persians, sacrificing himself and his men. Before the battle starts, the Persian warns him about the futile defense against the massive Persian Army, suggesting that 'Our arrows will blot out the sun.' Leonidas replied, 'Then we will fight in the shade.' “300” is the adaptation of Frank Miller’s graphic novel of the same name. So, it’s not the exact historical depiction or dramatic like the previous 1962 film “The 300 Spartans.” The movie still has messages of sacrifice, chivalry and freedom. I really enjoyed this movie. Positive - I saw the movie “300” just yesterday, and as a Christian I did not personally have any serious issues with it. The bloodshed and gore was too cartoonish to make me wince, although I’ve seen more of my fare share of the realities of war. As a solider myself, I definitely disagree with the main reviewer’s take that anger should not be present in battle as it was with the Spartans. I will save my breath on that however, because it is obvious that the main reviewer has never been in battle himself, fighting for his own life as well as his comrades. Christian or not, anger is present, and very, very necessary in war. Positive - This was one of the best movies I’ve seen in a while! I love the whole way the colors were played down, to me this made it feel more like the graphic novel it’s based on. The battle this movie is based on was one of the most heroic 'last-stands' in history but one that a lot of people have never heard about (checkout the book The Histories). All in all, I really enjoyed this movie… Positive - …it was based off of the comic book by Frank Miller. A comic book. What do you expect? In an interview, Frank Miller even said that the movie is not historically accurate. He said how he changed things, and wanted to make it more gruesome and intense. A comic book. Positive - “300” is a fantastic epic, similar to “Gladiator,” although not as good, in my humble opinion. I will say it’s a must see for anyone into that type of movie, as a film of this style and quality are few and far between. This movie does have a few scenes of female nudity, and a scene of… err… “consensual” rape? Can’t go into detail, but no nudity is shown. However, that is the one scene of the movie that I would consider offensive. This movie isn’t for children, but isn’t that obvious from every aspect of the film? Positive - …“300” is a well made movie. I think even more importantly I was made aware of the fact of how powerful God is by one thing I saw in this movie. You may not get the same message, but I was impressed by one particular scene in which the envoy for Xerxes comes to the 300 and commands them by the authority of a mortal and refers to him as 'Ruler of rulers, lord of lords'. I just kept thinking if someone that was mortal and evil could be called that, how much more could we as believers have boldness to say that about God, because we really do serve the King of Kings. We should have the same boldness when venturing for him. I loved that in the movie. The fight scenes are breathtaking .I loved the way the movie makers established the credibility of the movie. Unlike the film troy, I really got a sense of scale with Xerxes’ armies, and I was reminded of biblical references to armies that were as vast as the sands of the sea, and no man could count them, in this film we get to see that and it’s awesome to behold. Another aspect I like was the overall portrayal of courage, we get to see people who are standing against impossible odds and holding their ground. They keep their faith up even when all appears lost. They work together and move as one, each man looking out for the other. If you go to see the movie don’t just focus on the negative, realize that there will be some negative things, but look for the positive as well. The acting is well done, and more than just an action movie, this film has some very touching performances as well. I really cannot say enough about the incredible fight scenes, they are reminiscent of the best scenes of gladiator but only much, much better. They are breathtaking to behold, and the slow motion technique used brings out the maximum impact, it’s just breath taking, there are no short cuts taken by the filmmakers, the fight scenes rock. Positive - Do not see this movie if you have issues of sexual addictions or just simply want to protect your eyes from female nudity and/or male bodies in thongs and lots of guy thigh. Anyway, this movie was shot in a warehouse, but you wouldn’t think it while see the amazing imagery. It looks like a comic book, but like Sin City did (which was also written by Frank Miller). A very, very beautiful comic book. The action is intense and perfect. You know you hate it when an action scene is shot all crazy so you don’t know what’s going on? Well, this is not like one of those movies. It’s like a nature film where they try to show you something amazing that happened too fast at normal speed. However, this is not a knock off of the Matrix. The action in “300,” in my opinion, is way better. Besides the morally questionable items (one sex scene, and two very weird scenes involving nude women), there are some interesting moral themes. One is the idea of going against gods, and their priests, who don’t seem to have the best in mind for their people. Another is simply laying down one’s life for a friend, or, rather, an entire nation, and not wanting to be bought off. Positive - I think one of the reviewer’s problems with this film, can be summed up in this quote. 'Personally, I prefer my realism to be realistic.' The “300” wasn’t ever intended to be realistic, it was based on a graphic novel. The monsters were meant to embody the persian army as the Greeks saw it, overwhelming and monstrous. Indeed believe it or not cultures very rarely look upon invading armies in objective, rational ways, to expect a Vulcanesque rationality to be portrayed in ancient Spartans when this is something we have yet to achieve in the 2500 years since this event is wholly unfair. besides this point, one should not go to comic book or graphic novel movies expecting realism, everything is blown out of proportion. Neutral
Neutral - Film-Making: “300” was a brilliant movie in so many ways. Although once was enough for me, it was an incredible viewing experience. It evoked a visceral response from me, and as an art historian, I found the filmmaking to be beautiful. The movie really heightens your senses. When the battle first begins there is a shift between slowing the action down and speeding it up. Personally, I liked it, although some may find it fake and overdone. For me, it gave the experience of the chaos of battle and how time would seem nonexistent. One moment could feel brief, another like eternity. The choreography was well planned, there was strong contrast between light and shadow, and great use of color. My only complaint as a history geek was the addition of a rhino and elephants to the battle, which wouldn’t have been there, but I’m sure a lot of people found it enjoyable. There were also a few parts of soundtrack that seemed out of place with electric guitar, but somehow it all seemed to work with Frank Miller’s spin on history. The actors delivered a good performance, as well, especially Gerard Butler as King Leonidas. He is very stoic and represents the Greek ideal well. I was pleasantly surprised by his unexpected wittiness and it helped ease such a serious situation as the Battle of Thermopylae. I found myself wanting to cheer for Leonidas from the very beginning, and he has a lot of great one-liners, although some viewers may find them cheesy. Neutral - I went to see this yesterday with a group from my office. I must say up front the film is gorgeous! It’s amazing to look at from a production standpoint, perfectly crafted in every way. And the war scenes make you take a breath and hold it while you watch! Kudos to all involved on that front. Neutral - Through circumstances I won’t go into, I saw “300” without first reading the reviews here. Had I known how much nudity was going to be in it, I would have passed on seeing it. On that count I have damaged my reputation and regret seeing it. However, from a movie making quality point of view “300” is outstanding. I enjoyed the stylized tone of the movie and appreciate the self-sacrifice of Leonidas and his men for their country. On that count the movie deserves high praise. As war movies go, this one delivers all the war you could want, which is not gratuitous to me, but magnifies the sacrifice of the men who fought and died for their freedom, their families and their homeland. Thus, I give it a neutral instead of a negative. Neutral - I had mixed emotions about the message of this movie, but the visual effects were amazing. I’ll start with the good. I loved the use of slow motion and still pictures in the movie, mostly because I could watch more than 1 fight at the same time. The unrealistic fighting style where 2 people take out forty thousand people in less than a minute is on one hand horribly goofy, but a lot of fun to watch! Some of the monsters were very disgusting, but that, too, made the movie fun, I wasn’t expecting anything different, since I saw the trailers for the film. The barrage of arrows really DID blot out the sun, and it looked amazing, though again… very goofy! Neutral - …Frank Miller …isn’t known for “historically correct” literature. I like his graphic novels a lot, and they are in no way attempting to portray history as correct. He takes things that have an interesting base and expands them into something to be exciting. The way he portrayed the Persians was not attempting to be historically correct, he was trying to make them hateable-which is not something many moviemakers do correctly. He also tried to make the heroes-the Spartans-likeable. Both of which he does astoundingly well, better than most I’ve seen. Remember that Frank Miller doesn’t do Historical Fiction, this needs to be looked at as a Fantasy Epic-A battle between good and evil. Neutral - I must say that I truly enjoyed this movie, yet I think though people don’t realize that it is based on a Frank Miller Graphic novel not on actual history so much. I cannot contest the nudity or sexual overtones in this movie, while I do believe they were unnecessary, it is an 'R' movie and plainly says in the box what’s in the movie. Which begs me to ask this question 'Why do I read review after review about how horrible the content is in 'R' movies?' It would seem to me that history has proven that it just gets worse content wise in movies. So why the general surprise when there is high content of nudity and violence? If you see a movie that is 'R' read the content if it says violence, sex, language or nudity then one can be sure there is just that in the movie! I don’t think Hollywood is for christians and most movies are made for christians in mind, so it really comes down to how liberal are you and can you look past it all to the story underneath? “300” has it’s inspiring moments and is a visual treat, but there is a lot to muck through as with most 'R' movies. Ask yourself first before seeing any 'R' movie 'Can I turn a blind eye to the content for the story and acting?' If not then well. maybe seeing 'R' movies isn’t a good idea! Negative
Negative - …my wife and I decided to have a date night tonight and watch “300.” After seeing the previews a few times, I thought it would be an alright movie; I was thinking it would be along the same lines of “Braveheart.” The quality of film making this movie has is amazing: very well written, acted, filmed, and produced, but could have done without some of the scenes, especially the orgy scene. This scene just about made me leave the theater. With my head lowered and eyes closed, just the sounds were gut-wrenching. Nudity, lesbianism, implied homosexuality, graphic violence-although not as bloody as I expected-not to mention the numerous references to Xerxes as 'king of kings' and 'lord of hosts' and flat-out calling him 'the only true god' is just about all the 'bad stuff' in the movie, and more than enough not to recommend this movie to be viewed unless you have a movie-filtering DVD player such as Clearplay. The story is awesome from a historical perspective; typical Hollywood ruined it for me. Negative - The entire film is riddled with an atmosphere that gives the viewer a very dark feeling. From the very beginning of this movie and unto the end, I felt that I had only wasted my time. This movie isn’t even historically based, as its artistic license generates even more bizarre interpretations of Greek mythology. I’ve seen plenty of questionable movies, such as the Departed - which, by the way, I would give an “average” moral rating, since I could take something from that particular film. This film, is simply for those who devour themselves into the filthy mindset of grisly violence for the sake of entertainment. I hope you enjoy yourself, Doc! Negative - …“300” was one of the worse movies, content-wise, that I have ever seen. I am very ashamed to even say that I went to see it. There is a very graphic sex scene that leaves absolutely nothing for the imagination. A few other scenes are shown that expose a woman. There is also a scene one will see that involves Xerxes, nude women acting extremely provocative, and even two women kissing. As far as the battle sequences, the movie was good, but it was heavily overshadowed by the filth that it contained. I would not recommend this movie to any individual. Negative - Apart from the obvious issues regarding the sexual content and nudity in the movie “300” (which is readily available to teens through disregarded rating systems in video rental shops), I can sum my views up in addressing the one semi-subliminal statement made by the main character in which he deters putting trust in a “man-god.” While it is a portrayal of a time far before the appearance of Christ in history, the movie is relating it’s message to a generation far past His resurrection; the message of which will be used by the anti-Christ spirit to strengthen his hold on a generation of non-belief. Amazingly, whether fantastic in its retelling of history or not; or even total fiction, there are an overwhelming number of movie-goers who still accept movie script as doctrinal truth. Look at the after effects of “The DaVinci Code” for instance. Negative - The review of this film is simple …'a little levin ruins the whole lump'. To excuse such perverted sexual content on the grounds that the movie has some sort of 'redeeming value' is misguided, at best. To say it is accurate historically is inaccurate as well. There were not only 300 Spartan soldiers at the battle of Thermopaly. With them there was at least 1000 Thesbian soldiers who fought along with them. I do understand that even with this help they were still sorely outnumbered and that they still fought to the death, but nonetheless, it is not historically accurate. The only way an uncompromising Christian should see this film is if you can find an edited version after it comes out on DVD. Then you might be able to enjoy any entertainment value it holds with out the compromise of all the sexual content. As far as the violence goes this is certainly only for mature audiences. This is the nature of war. Sex is different. Sexuality is meant to be kept in the privacy of the bedroom between a man and a woman. Sex is not for the viewing pleasure of a movie audience. Negative - I lived in Europe in the 80’s and was aghast at what the public felt was OK in films produced there. We have now descended to that low of a level where relativism reigns in the place of God in our hearts. I ask myself the question, 'would Jesus go see this movie?' and the answer is an emphatic no. Barb has said it beautifully, read her review. Do you go to a restaurant trash can to pick out the 'good' stuff left in it and discount what else you have to wade through and then give a high rating to the contents of the can? Will you allow your children or worse, do you teach them to judge what they participate in based on whether other children or the culture are doing worse? Based on that relativism, it is OK to be hooked on cough medicine because others are addicted to heroin. I only reason I did not leave the theater at the first sex scene is to be able to review it. At points I did close my eyes and start conjugating verbs in Japanese it was that offensive. I agree with Barb, the film would not have been harmed at all if the sex and extreme violence were left out. I doubt I will ever go see an R movie again. Negative - This is another film which has a deep passion to ignite/instill anti-Christian, blasphemous views. It is neither historical nor accurate in its content. The subject matter is very interesting, but so often exploited by those who have personal agendas. Negative - This movie was one of those…that I highly regret having seen! It appeared to be designed in such a way as to show as many topless men and women as possible. The lines were very cliché. Before any of the dramatic lines, I knew exactly what the actor was going to say, almost to the exact choice of words. I thought that the “video game”-type effects trivialized death and turned something serious and sad into something comical. However, it did serve to make the violence slightly less gory. My reaction after walking out of this movie was: “Why should I even bother going to the movies anymore?” This movie only confirmed my philosophy that 99% of movies are unedifying and leave me regretting having wasted my time in such a fashion. Negative - I went with a few mates to watch this, knowing there would be fighting blood, dismemberment, etc. First bit was okay, showing the passage of a spartan boy to being a king. Then the Persians arrive and the messenger is swiftly kicked down a big hole. Little bit of blood, but we knew this, so not a problem. Sadly, this is where the negatives come in. My friends and I are not really weak in the conscience, bear this in mind. Firstly a prophetess girl dances virtually naked, that’s bad, but we thought let’s give the benefit of the doubt. Then, within five minutes, a sex scene between Leonides & his wife starts off, and this was way too passionate for a 15 rated film. At this point we left the cinema, as the film seemed to have more pornography than anything else. So to emphasize the important: THIS FILM IS PORNOGRAPHIC …PLEASE AVOID. Remember, as I said, I am not a person that squirms away from 15 rated material, but this should be put in the pornography section as a DVD when released. Comments
There is a difference between being mature enough in your faith to handle an incidental exposure to immoral situations, and purposely going into those situations. It is entirely possible to be a strong Christian and accidentally come in contact with immorality and by the grace of God not be harmed/tempted/whatever, but when you CHOOSE to expose yourself to that, God is not honored. In fact, I believe you are sinning. Read the reviews; if you know a movie contains something that doesn’t honor God, don’t go. If you do go, aren’t you basically saying, “God, I know you well enough that I can sin, and it won’t really be sin, right?” I once heard a great analogy, a couple invites another couple over for dinner: Comments from young people
Positive - Since this is a review supposed to be a 'Christian' based review, let me say what I liked/disliked about the movie. …In this move their are several sex-related scenes, excessive violence, and blasphemies. I will split those up each into categories: Negative - This movie is too much of a mixed bag for me to give it a positive review. Though it is almost excellent in moviemaking quality, it is so lacking in moral quality that I simply couldn’t give it a positive review. But for your benefit, I’ll layout the positives and negatives of this movie. Positive - “300” is pretty much the equivalent of seeing something blow up in the most awesome fashion right in front of your face. Everything about this movie is insanely cool, from the battles to just hearing Leonidas talk. I was pretty sure that the trailers for the movie would let people know that this could be a bit violent, maybe even have some sexual situations in it, but I guess not! I mean, it’s not like the rating and description tell us anything about it either, so I guess we as Christians should just all walk into a movie about a Spartan war and suddenly be extremely offended when it’s violent and has nudity! My goodness! What?! Violence and sex with Spartans?! Who would have thought?! So yeah. If you can handle things that are intensely awesome and make you feel like you could punch a bear in the face, go see this movie. If you can’t decide on what to see because you failed to read the big gigantic R-rating or watch any trailers for the movie, then perhaps you’d be more into “McGee and Me.” Positive - I had very high expectations for this movie, and had been looking foreword to it for a very long time. This film met every one of them and more. Sure there is plenty of objectionable content, but a mature Christian audience should be able to handle it. The violence is excessive, and at sometimes exaggerated but is very stylized, similar to Kill Bill or Sin City, giving it a comic book-like feel. The visuals are absolutely stunning and beautiful. They are accomplished through green screen technology and CGI animation, giving it a dream-like appearance. The acting is fantastic, and Gerard Butler practically is Leonidas. Partnering with that is a solid, well written script. The simplicity of the plot is its main strength. Instead of trying to overwhelm the audience with politics, like many movies do to seem more complicated, the journey of Leonidas and the brave 300 is simple and frank. Neutral - The movie was very good, but had its morally objectionable moments. The love scene in the beginning was a little disturbing. I thought that the fight scenes were gory, but not nearly as bad as I had expected. The graphics were pretty good (except for the part where the king touches the 'god’s' face, you could literally see the blue screen). Overall, though, it was a fun movie. Do not go if you are offended easily. Comments
After reading the reviews of this movie - our family has decided to purchase the 1962 movie 'The 300 Spartans'—thus avoiding the extreme violence and hopefully, all nudity! |
E-mail this page to a friend