Originally posted by: C3PX
Yeah, I don't see the premise being so flimsy. It was based on a real event and adapted from a comic book. Sure kicks the pants off crap like Troy and Alexander. It did a lot better of a job depicting Greeks than they did (Persians are way off though). I think it is funny how bad the reviews for this movie are compared to the crap load of money it is pulling in.

I'd have to agree. The premise really isn't flimsy. It doesn't depict it very accurately, but it does what it sets out to do. Make a kick ass film and show the courage of these 300 men. And I think the way persians are are depicted is actually kind of symbolic of what the greeks must have thought of them; cold, heartless bastards. The movie is obviously shown from the Greek perpective, which is why it shows so many fantasy elements as well, like the guy with swords for arms. Greek myths exaggerate things, and the movie gives you hints of this. That's what makes 300 so great; it shows a battle from the perspective of the Greeks, the "heroes," and shows it from thier myths and legends.

And I think that it is a testament to Frank Miller's genius that a movie based off a comic "kicks the pants off crap like Troy and Alexander." Those movies must have had 3 times the budget 300 did, along with more professional, seasosoned filmmakers attached. But 300 flys miles ahead of them. I'd say comic have come a long way since the 10 cent Superman comics of the 40's, and Frank Miller had a huge influence in that. (If anyone here hasn't seen Sin City yet, go rent it ASAP. It's about as good as 300, but in a totally different way.)