WHOAAAA!
“300″ *rocked*!!!
…they got the martial-stance/worldview *right*
…they got the training *right*
…they got the martial arts / fighting *right*
…they got the battlefield dynamics *right* — even *better* than LOTR
…they got the politics *right*
…they got the religion/fight-the-gods *right*
…they got the existentialism *right*
…& they even got the relationship [strong-female] *right*
…basically, they respected the Warriors:
-what they believed,
-what they stood for,
-how they lived, &
-how they died.
…iow, it’s not about personal glory; it’s about doing what’s *right*.
…so, so-what if they were a little silly re. the ‘reason vs. eastern mysticism’ part; i’ll spot them that, & they gave me 3 sex scenes & 3 decapitations. 
DD
…as far as the filmmaking itself, I found the following instructive:
1) the Project started w/ a *great* story: the absolute *Classic* martial story
2. -then- got some great writing & imagery from Frank Miller
3. [but] the Director ignored Miller, -&-
a) pumped-up Gorga, & made her a main character
b. gave Leonidas a son, which made him human
c. created several totemic images, including the ‘Villager Tree’ & ‘goodbye in the wheat-field’
hmmmm.
so Yes it’s true– a writer who also writes core imagery is an auteur (ie, Miller)
-but- he still can be (successfully) re-written, & the story taken to the next level.
…which isn’t usually the case; most times an auteur is re-written, ugliness (& hackdom) ensues.
So yeah– as a long-time martial artist, I really appreciated the care the filmmaker(s) took to get the martial sensibilities right… from physical fighting-form to the mental philosophy. But even the CGI VFX was superb, very much a ‘character’ in the piece, shifting (styles) from scene to scene to augment the storytelling. And finally the storytelling itself was perfect: sparse, direct, like a gut-punch… but (knew) enough to slow-down occasionally, & ‘ease’ into the character scenes.
& finally– Re the IMAX experience (or rather, IMAX projection of a 1:1.85 film)– hm. Bright, new print? Great. Lots of loud speakers? Fine. Large projected print at the upper curved screen? Dunno… this wasn’t ‘IMAX’; it was just ‘big’. (Real IMAX films are shot from POV of lower-third of screen, & biased inwards left/right as well, so all the surrounding imagery creates the IMAX ‘immersion effect’.) I’m wondering– my Toshiba widescreen at home has a ‘fake anamorphic’ mode which digitally stretches the farthest left/right to create the surroundings… while leaving the center-cut the same. Maybe if something similar was done here(?)
…all I know is I saw LOTR in a widescreen theatre at the Metreon, & the experience was v. similar… but cost 1/2 as much. I know that H-wood is trying desperately to get us to come-out to the theatres, but charging $15 for ‘fake-IMAX’ isn’t doing it for me. ‘Real’ IMAX is amazing, & well-worth the cash…
If they really need more ‘eyeballs’ in the theatre, ‘buying seats & eating sugar’, then maybe they need to provide something a lot more compelling… hot & cold running blondes, perhaps?
Tags: film-making