Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Interesting Factoid about 300's success...

first? by pavemental	Mar 15th, 2007 06:39:49 PM
best thing about all this is that it basically guarentees a greenlight for WATCHMEN and hopefully a nice big budget too
Hmmmm by QuinnTheEskimo	Mar 15th, 2007 06:40:00 PM
We have the power!
But I saw so many commercials for 300 by Domi'sInnerChild	Mar 15th, 2007 06:40:31 PM
I think I saw more for 300 than any other movie since Batman. Maybe I was just watching the "target audience" shows, but there was A LOT more commercials for 300 than even your typical mainstream movie. I don't see how you can claim it as an internet phenom any more than Spiderman 2.
pavemental by QuinnTheEskimo	Mar 15th, 2007 06:40:40 PM
IGN says Watchmen is looking at a $150 million budget.
300 > little miss sunshine by troutpencil	Mar 15th, 2007 06:41:18 PM
But it's not as good as Apocalypto was
Big Fat Cunt by The Equalizer	Mar 15th, 2007 06:41:50 PM
Taking all the credit for your fat old self! Go eat a kebab!
300 was enjoyable by slone13	Mar 15th, 2007 06:43:00 PM
Kind of like a really snazzy looking ancient Braveheart. Without the heart.
IMAX is awesome but... by GobBluth06	Mar 15th, 2007 06:43:54 PM
It would be great if IMAX would release more films from other studios. They are loyal to Warner Bros and Sony. You don't ever see any other studios anymore. The last non WB or Sony movie was probably Star Wars Episode II. IMAX 3D will beat out Digital 3D anyday. It actually comes off the screen whereas Digital looks like looking through a window.
But can the internet do the opposite? by TORTURE PWN	Mar 15th, 2007 06:45:44 PM
Can we use it for leverage to get an ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK SEQUEL instead of a remake.That's what I wanna know.
GobBluth06 by QuinnTheEskimo	Mar 15th, 2007 06:45:46 PM
I really thought that the 3-D on Superman Returns IMAX sucked. Regardless of what you think of the film, the airplane sequence is fantastic and I couldn't tell what was happening in the 3-D.
I never get any love by talentless	Mar 15th, 2007 06:46:10 PM
I have a site that will remain nameless, and I begun posting about 300 after last years Comicon, but of course no one reads my site, but I do and I heavily credit myself for making myself go see 300....if I went to see 300 that is :( Yeah, I am VERY lame!!!!
YTMND deserves credit, too by Beastmanseventy	Mar 15th, 2007 06:50:16 PM
Editing the "SPARTAAAA AAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAA!" scene from the trailer into hilarious spoof versions is a big thing on that site.
INTERNETS GOTTA EAT!!!! by darquelyte	Mar 15th, 2007 06:54:00 PM
I think the internet "vibe" for this film really helped, but I have to say that when they aired the trailer during Heroes when it came back from hiatus...that REALLY clinched this movie for a LOT of people. I had been talking about this movie for quite some time, and nobody seemed to know what I was talking about. The day after Heroes, I got 12 emails from friends and family about 300, and I started seeing people talking about it on web forums. So, well placed tv ads are still the king, but clearly the internet buzz that came about from those ads certainly didn't hurt. ~ÐL
I saw this movie because of AICN. by warp11	Mar 15th, 2007 06:56:19 PM
THere are a lot of films that I wasn't sure if it was worth over $20 to see these days.. But if a ton of fan boys like myself get hype, seriously, it does affect me. I just didn't realize that so many people really do the same thing. good post Harry.
I saw this movie because I thought it would be good. by El Scorcho	Mar 15th, 2007 06:58:25 PM
It wasn't.
Internet = exposure by supermarch	Mar 15th, 2007 07:00:24 PM
TV will die a slow and painful death. Let's make sure the same people who ruined the content on TV don't segway into ruining online content.
Am I The Only One That Hated 300? by brons0n81	Mar 15th, 2007 07:04:37 PM
This movie sucked balls. Bad writing, bad acting, bad effects and probably the gayest bad guy in the history of film. What about the use of the word Sparta. The used the word Sparta (or variations of it) 890 times in this poor excuse of a visual effects reel. Yeah great writing. Oh and the battle speeches were so cliche. It's like they watched every war film ever and just stole lines. The only reason Harry likes the film is because they paid him for advertising. Save your money, see Zodiac.
THIS IS...THIS YEAR'S LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE!!! by Err	Mar 15th, 2007 07:08:26 PM
Tonight we dine in the VW yellow bus.
300 : Worst movie of 2007 by AvengingFist	Mar 15th, 2007 07:09:11 PM
The rhino scene will forever haunt me....
DON'T THANK ME, THANK AL GORE: HE INVENTED TEH INTERWEB by Pound Sand	Mar 15th, 2007 07:11:25 PM
or, the interets, if you will.
AICN's GOTTA EAT... SO THEY POST THIS SHIT by moto	Mar 15th, 2007 07:13:00 PM
Give me a break. Let's get one thing straight... the producers and executives have stated that internet marketing was strong with "300", however let's not start sucking AICN's dick because they also stipulated that the focus was on MySpace, which has something like $100 million-some members. So no, it's not fanboys people. Fanboys and AICN tried to get Snakes on a Plane and Serenity going, to no avail. "300" focused on the MySpace community that holds a huge percentage of the demographics. BIG difference from that and some fanboy TB community. Plus, the best marketing ploy that "300" did were the ads stating that this flick was the next Matrix (not exact wording, but you get what I mean). Top that with the visuals in the trailer and people were enthralled. Seriously, it's great that we all love the movie, and rightfully so, but to say that AICN TBers drive any type of major decision making for a studio AND/OR make a huge dent in a film's box office gross... um, no.
No brons0n81, you aren't the only one. by Clonetrooper	Mar 15th, 2007 07:13:51 PM
You can call critics "old fogeys" if you want to Harry, but they hit the nail right on the head for this one. It's visual entertainment with absolutley NO HEART. Kick-ass? Bullshit. Slow motion fight scenes, ridiculous visuals, a WAY TOO SERIOUS tone, pontifications about "freedom"? It's horrible. The Onion AV Club (hardly "old fogeys") got it exactly right. The incident is interesting because it really happened, and it really defined heroism. But this movie is SO far removed from reality that all of that is lost. I know that everyone's all hyped up on the fucking visuals, and granted the backgrounds and the cinematography look good, but after an hour of slow-motion fighting, I just wanted them to act like real people. At least when Quentin Tarintino glorifies violence it's fun and tounge in cheek. 300 actually thought that it was a historical epic.
Oops by moto	Mar 15th, 2007 07:15:20 PM
100 million... not $100 million.
Videogames are entertainments black sheep in the family by AvonBarksdale	Mar 15th, 2007 07:22:10 PM
'300' critics cling to consoles Video game comparisons create discussion By BEN FRITZ-Variety '300' Reviews for "300" were across the board, but those who disliked it shared a derision that reveals at least as much about today's film critics as it does their thoughts on the movie. "Once the newness of '300's' look wears off, which it inevitably does, what we are left with is a videogame come to life," wrote Kenneth Turan in the Los Angeles Times. " '300' will ... be talked about as a technical achievement, the next blip on the increasingly blurry line between movies and video games," added Slate's Dana Stevens. "[T]he excitement amounts to little more than a video game on the big screen," wrote USA Today's Claudia Puig. And in the New York Times, A.O. Scott said he would rather play "the video game that '300' aspires to become." Those were all negative reviews, of course. For today's movie critics, videogames are the new MTV musicvideo, a shorthand insult for any movie deemed too heavy on effects and visual panache at the expense of plot and coherence. Anyone who has spent much time playing videogames -- a category in which, it seems safe to assume, few established film critics fall -- knows the comparison is both artistically demeaning and substantively wrong. First off: What's wrong with a movie being similar to a videogame? While it's a young medium compared to movies or literature, any culturally literate person in the year 2007 should be able to see that videogames are creative productions, not mere pieces of software. Those critics who complained that "300" is short on narrative and long on mind-numbing violence implied that videogames are the same. Popular videogames like "Gears of War" and "Mortal Kombat" do fit that description, but there are many other games that don't. Even the much-derided "Grand Theft Auto" features relatively complex storylines and large casts of characters. In reality, videogame developers have created acclaimed works that span genres. Few horror pics are able to instill the bone-chilling terror of "Resident Evil 4." A dramatic filmmaker should aspire to reach the epic scope of "Shadow of the Colossus." And those looking to make the next great franchise should should only hope their movies engrossviewers half as well as "World of Warcraft." Stereotyping games as based on a brainless, violent subset is as fair as dismissing the art of moviemaking based on "Wild Hogs." What "300" does share with most videogames are the digital effects that created the backgrounds, action sequences and, yes, blood. But it's fundamentally wrong to suggest that "300" structurally resembles a game. Yes, you can use an Xbox for virtual stabbing and killing. But no decent videogame would take place in one location and feature soldiers who use just a handful of moves to kill similar enemies over and over and over again. Perhaps that's why "300: March to Glory" for the PlayStation Portable -- the videogame based on the movie that supposedly might as well be a videogame -- got universally mediocre reviews.
SPARTANS GOTTA EAT -er- DINE IN HELL!!! by jolaz	Mar 15th, 2007 07:22:54 PM
Sweet.
IT'S THOSE DAD-GUMMED INTERNETS AGAIN ! ! by Pound Sand	Mar 15th, 2007 07:26:45 PM
Jimminy Crickets !
pro-war propeganda bullshit. by Lane	Mar 15th, 2007 07:27:36 PM
i was surprised there wasn't a gaggle of recruiters lined up to take names at the exit.
There was also a huge 300 YTMND fad by Bean_	Mar 15th, 2007 07:28:45 PM
Still is one, actually. That website has a big fan base, I'm sure it helped..
You're welcome. by purplemonkeydw	Mar 15th, 2007 07:29:44 PM
What kind of geek doesn't own a next gen console. C'mon Harry. Gah!
THIS TOPS BEING NAMED TIME'S "PERSON OF THE YEAR" by Pound Sand	Mar 15th, 2007 07:29:48 PM
Wow, what an honor !
Recruiters? by slone13	Mar 15th, 2007 07:29:56 PM
For what, the Spartan army?? Please. Leave the politics at the door.
Damn Pro-War Crowd... by TheGhostWhoLurks	Mar 15th, 2007 07:34:05 PM
Promoting their concepts of freedom, loyalty and fighting to protect land, country and family from tyranny! We'd be better off if we'd just let the dictators of the world do what they want. STOP PROMOTING WAR WITH YOUR SELFISH IDEALS!!! Slav — I mean, peace at any cost, not matter how great. :P
Dark Knight Returns by chavee	Mar 15th, 2007 07:35:07 PM
I just unpacked Dark Knight Returns from a box that's been packed away for a couple of years. Funny as I read this that I can't help but wonder if the Dark Knight Returns would work in 300's stylized palette.
why has no one mentioned myspace by BadMrWonka	Mar 15th, 2007 07:36:23 PM
300 bought out their front page for weeks, not to mention peddled a weird promo where if you added their official mspace page as a friend, you could upload 300 pics to your page. I saw it, and I liked it pretty well, but I still think a huge key to its success was the fact that guy were going for the action, and girls would go for the abs. perfect storm. conversely, if they made a romantic comedy with shia lebouf in it, but also giant kickass robots, that would also have crossover appeal....oh wait...that sounds terrible actually...
Best damn trailer ever by CBWolf	Mar 15th, 2007 07:36:25 PM
The reason I saw 300? Because it had the best damn trailer ever. I downloaded it in HD from Apple's quicktime site and have watched every few days since. The cut down TV trailers frankly left me underwhelmed. I wouldn't have gone to see that movie. The internet trailer left me with the impression that I MUST see this movie at all costs.
I KNOW 'BOUT THE INTERNETS! I'VE BEEN ON THE GOOGLE. by Err	Mar 15th, 2007 07:36:34 PM
President Bush blows.
It's simpler than that Harry. by Orbots Commander	Mar 15th, 2007 07:37:29 PM
The merits of the actual film aside, 300 owes much of its opening weekend box office success to its fantastic coming attractions trailers; it was one of the better ones I've seen in quite a while. It gave people the idea that 300 was an epic bloody action flick with echoes of GLADIATOR. Couple that with a large marketing push to its target young male audience--and blam! Instant cinematic fortune. I don't think it had much to do with Gerald Butler, who audiences wouldn't be able to pick out of a police lineup on a normal day, or exclusively online pop-up ad-trailers.
Here comes John Carter, baby!! by ebolamonkey	Mar 15th, 2007 07:40:35 PM
300 was bombastic and boring. Beautiful to look at, amazing fight choreography, and not a genuine moment to be found. Ideals shouted at the audience with no emotion to back it up. Love the big box office, though, gives me hope for John Carter!!! I consider 300 an early mock up of Warlord of Mars.
jaCKie_O by AvonBarksdale	Mar 15th, 2007 07:40:43 PM
I know. I just cut and pasted it from Variety. Then after it posted I saw how it looked. Apparently they don't like spaces in the TB. I guess you need html if you want a paragraph break. And no edit option. This is probably the TB's here use the best technology 1999 had to offer.
wait did i miss Harry's review of 300? by newc0253	Mar 15th, 2007 07:50:57 PM
sure, those old guard film reviewers might have thumbed their noses at 300, but at least they actually reviewed it, right? they didn't just write a piece about its marketing success while noting its 'awesomeness' as an aside...
brons0n81 and Clonetrooper by jasper Stillwell	Mar 15th, 2007 07:51:34 PM
Thank you, thank you, thank you, at last someone else sees through this shite - to also quote Robert Altman: “Last summer trying to find a picture to see I went to two multiplexes. There wasn’t one picture that an intelligent person could say, ‘oh I want to see this film’. It’s just become one big amusement park. It’s the death of film”. I love comic books and I love spectacle but 300 really is a new low in 'brainless'. If video games and cinema are the new version of cinema then this and 'Ghost Rider' is where I get of the pop culture gravy train. What's wrong with aiming high here?
persiawontwin by iwontwin	Mar 15th, 2007 07:55:23 PM
300 IS ZIONIST PROPAGANDA, THE FIRST FRONT IN THE INVASION OF IRAN BY THE OCCUPIERS AMERICA AND ISRAEL!!!! -IRAN WORD ON THE STREET
300 was ok by iwontwin	Mar 15th, 2007 07:57:59 PM
not that great, the characters were not well developed. Just because a movie makes alot money, that doesnt mean its a good film...
AICN should get a cut of 300's profits by DynamixRo	Mar 15th, 2007 08:00:32 PM
1% seems reasonable.
I still don't understand why 300 opened so big by darthflagg	Mar 15th, 2007 08:01:18 PM
It has no stars and the trailers made it look like Sin City meets Gladiator. If it was the graphic novel fans turning out in force, then why didn't Sin City make as much money? The film may be great, but I'm baffled at how it got so much interest from the general public.
YOU WANT A COOKIE, INTERNET? by iwontwin	Mar 15th, 2007 08:01:31 PM
GOOD JOB.
The internets - more than meets the eye! by JackPumpkinhead	Mar 15th, 2007 08:02:05 PM
300 snakes on a survey!
Interesting Factoid about Harry's success... by iwontwin	Mar 15th, 2007 08:05:50 PM
HE POWER IS FUELED BY THE LONLINESS OF NERDS!
Nice try though Harry... by moto	Mar 15th, 2007 08:05:56 PM
I know you mentioned myspace and youtube, but to throw AICN in the mix at the end, thus implying that the film's success had fanboys and co. to thank in the long run... priceless. Again, it was the 100 million plus members of myspace to thank. Internet does not equal AICN.
IRAN IS MAKING A SEQUEL.... by iwontwin	Mar 15th, 2007 08:08:56 PM
HOW I LEARNED TO LOVE THE NUCLEAR JIHAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!
it was 300 pics on myspace... by whenin_tokyo	Mar 15th, 2007 08:09:47 PM
All my preppy friends and babies mommas have myspace and were thrilled when they got to put 300 pics on myspace. It took them a while to realize 300 was a movie since they normally hang out at trendy bars instead of watching TV. I waited w/out spilling the beans. FUN!!!
Oh Look Harry the Hutt thinks he matters by DonMurphysTool	Mar 15th, 2007 08:14:01 PM
fucking pathetic
Patting yourself on the back by Rupee88	Mar 15th, 2007 08:24:04 PM
I guess self-promotion is a very successful way to get money and fame and power, but it is still somewhat distasteful.
"300" was based on Miller's story true, but... by Uncapie	Mar 15th, 2007 08:25:10 PM
...it could also be considered a remake of "300 Spartans" which both films were based on the factual battle of Thermopolye.
Damn it, Harry by MikeTheSpike	Mar 15th, 2007 08:38:30 PM
You know damned well the Playstation is up to number 3.
Oh look, PharteGoddPrime thinks he matters by Beastmanseventy	Mar 15th, 2007 08:40:21 PM
But he doesn't run the most popular existing website that gets tens of thousands of hits a day and he hasn't appeared criticising films alongside Roger Ebert. Hm. If you've got problems with Harry as a person, fine, but you've got to be fucking delusional to think his influence is not relevant. Why in the fuck do you think high profile directors keep inviting him to do set reports?
This is a no-brainer factoid... by genro	Mar 15th, 2007 08:41:31 PM
The movie's target audience perfectly overlaps with the internet's spending audience - high school/college males, mainly white suburban. Since this group spends more time on-line than anyone, or doing anything else, where else would they be more likely to get 300 info? This is not an example of the internet audience, mainly the geek faction, exerting some type of influence over a movie's success. It's a sign of how deep the web audience has become since 2000. The true AICN geek faction is still only good for a 25-30M dollar opening.
Lane: HAHAHAHAH by Sir Loin	Mar 15th, 2007 08:45:28 PM
No, really. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA. You need to move to Frawnce, pronto. In closing, AHAHAHHAHAH!
Bad Wonka, Moto & Whenin Tokyo are right... by genro	Mar 15th, 2007 08:46:34 PM
MySpace had a huge effect on this film. WB knows that. but no studio exec is going to openly claim that since it's Newscorp property. Murdoch will bump the ad rates through the roof.
Factoid or Fact? by Sloppo	Mar 15th, 2007 09:01:45 PM
Why does everyone always get the usage of that word wrong?
HALO 300 by antonphd	Mar 15th, 2007 09:05:35 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =hOFwmVM8g8E This is amusing enough to watch.
300 Ruled by calnorso	Mar 15th, 2007 09:06:34 PM
Fans of movies REALLY needed this movie. We've been subjected to the shitty PG-13 Marvel sellouts for too long damnit! We needed a movie that didn't hold any punches and 300 is that movie, it did what the first Matrix did when it first came out. Its telling the studios that we want to see the gore and the violence, we don't want to sit in the same theater with 14 year olds
Venom in Spider-man 3 by kintar0	Mar 15th, 2007 09:09:48 PM
You assholes have seen this picture, already, right? http://tinyurl.com/23hmmm
even bigger by kintar0	Mar 15th, 2007 09:13:00 PM
http://tinyurl.com/2c3bj9
Your Network: 163,209,802 by Jaka	Mar 15th, 2007 09:43:47 PM
MySpace definitely helped.
And I'd be willing to bet... by Jaka	Mar 15th, 2007 09:45:27 PM
...this site gets in the millions of hits per day.
I had to sit in the front row, corner seat... by cornponious	Mar 15th, 2007 09:45:54 PM
when I saw 300 at the theater, and I still enjoyed it immensely. I hardly even noticed my neck at a 90 degree angle.
I'm hungry by THE KNIGHT	Mar 15th, 2007 09:46:59 PM
Too lazy to get up... but damn, I gotta eat!
Seconding the 300 Spaces Theory by ye olde shiza	Mar 15th, 2007 09:50:12 PM
That was the second round of advertising I'd seen for the movie besides AICN ... and it was friggin' brilliant. People on MySpace ... myself included ... love to post pictures, but unless you hacked it, you were only allowed about 24. 300 comes around with its banner ads and all of a sudden, every single user of the 100 million total has the movie to thank for being able to post 276 more pictures. I don't know how much they paid off FOX for that amount of additional bandwidth, but it paid off. Same thing with Borat ... he had a MySpace page and did 24 "Black Carpet" showings nearly two months before the flick hit theaters. Every theater that I read about had to turn people away. I was standing in line five hours just to get a peak of the insanity. TV? Phllppttt. How many people watch the Superbowl? I bet nearly five times that amount check their MySpace pages once per day, if not more ...
300 was the Anna Nicole Smith of movies... by BurnHollywood	Mar 15th, 2007 09:52:43 PM
Brainless, it looked good for a while, but then became weighed down with excess. After it's gone, you might realize what a tragic wreck it was, but you'll keep hearing about it like it was something special and worth giving a shit about.
Re: This is a no-brainer factoid... by abcdefghijklmnop	Mar 15th, 2007 09:53:46 PM
"It's a sign of how deep the web audience has become since 2000." Exactly. 300 broke a March record that was set...a whole year ago! (Hell, didn't Wild Hogs just set the bronze medal record a couple of weeks ago?) Yes, ten years ago, this would've been a huge geek victory. But today, the internet has simply made films more accessible than ever. As a result, the audiences continue to grow along with the box office numbers. These records used to be a really big deal- and usually illustrated that a film was something special. Now the records seem to get broken every year, but unfortunately, no longer have to accompany a great film. (No offense to 300, which I enjoyed, just a statement in general.)
We!! Are!! Geeks!!!! by ATARI	Mar 15th, 2007 10:03:16 PM
Man, just got back from seeing 300 a second time, and I think it kicked my ass even more. This is an automatic DVD buy -- especially if they go all unrated extended edition with it!!
"Gotta eat" my ass! 300 was great! by Mandolorian	Mar 15th, 2007 10:06:47 PM
That's all I gotta say about that!
You aint my brotha fat ass by tHEmOOG	Mar 15th, 2007 10:08:22 PM

YTMND 300 clip by darquelyte	Mar 15th, 2007 10:08:40 PM
One of the funniest things I've seen in a long time. I never get tired of that yell! http://whitehousehell.ytmnd.co m/
Ack by darquelyte	Mar 15th, 2007 10:09:38 PM
Obviously, remove the space between o and m so that it is .com
I wonder how many hits AICN gets per day by THE KNIGHT	Mar 15th, 2007 10:10:28 PM
Anyone have any decent guesses?
HARRY... by moto	Mar 15th, 2007 10:20:32 PM
Good question Knight. But here's the much more important question. How many UNIQUE hits do they get? We all visit the site probably a few times each day. You count each of those hits, yeah, it does add up. But UNIQUE hits will say everything. I'm sure it's still a big number compared to most. Harry, you've earned that over the years. But is it in any way large enough to account for a majority of ticket sales for a big movie? Or even a large minority? I think not.
SoaP Should have Been Huge by cabsau	Mar 15th, 2007 10:25:07 PM
It's the movie that drives the audience. The advert ops on the net just sell what's already there. If it were you guys driving people to movies then SoaP, everything Jack Black or Robert Downy Jr, most horror and Asian imports would be huge. Hugh Grant and Tom Cruise would be washed up, or would have been longer ago and rom coms and family drivel would never be made again. There's some wierd chemistry to what drives audiences to film, but I'm sure the power of the net is not that force. You're just a resource for advert for something that has appeal anyway. I'd venture to say a replacement at that. A lot of folks are replacing television and print for the internet.
Harry, I hate bashing as much as the next... by moto	Mar 15th, 2007 10:36:29 PM
... in this case it's Harry bashing. You've created a wonderful site and community over the years. Fun info on the movies we wait for. Even though I still think AICN (as well as its copies)has contributed greatly to the downfall of the movie theater experience for genre fans with early set reports/visits that are filled with AICN's personal viewpoints good or bad, leaked deated scripts, set pics, concept design pics, etc. The magic of going into the theater not knowing what to expect (i.e the Star Wars years, etc.) is virtually gone for genre fans that visit these sites. But hey, we all have free will, right? I just think that this post was arrogant, taken out of context, and a bit embarrassing for AICN. You've done great work Harry and I respect you for it. Just remain humble.
They Never Convinced Me There Were Actually 300... by Buzz Maverik	Mar 15th, 2007 10:36:39 PM
...Spartans. I mean, it looked like there were about a billion-point-two Persians, but the problem with reproducing Miller's panels is that we never saw more than the few Spartans that a guy could draw in a comic book panel. They should have called it THIRTEEN...oh, wait, somebody used that number. Still, a good time was had by all. Although, I must admit, I am so sick of these chick flicks...
Successful without internet by #1 Zero	Mar 15th, 2007 10:38:43 PM
You can read 60% and 68% reasoning of going to the movie because of the internet as 1)more people who use the internet went to this movie more than they went to other movies, 2) they spent a lot more money on internet advertising than other movies or 3) as Harry seems to suggest the internet caused everyone to see this movie. First, I think this movie would have been successful if it wasn't advertised on the internet, it was basically a summer blockbuster two months early and having said that it probably wouldn't have been as successful during the summer or pushed back to a late summer release like Snakes on a Plane was last year. As for defending the video game aspect of this movie I don't think you can say it wasn't like a video game. Basically they faced a different wave of people to kill along with a "Boss" every ten-fifteen minutes and since the backgrounds and cinematography were cleary enhanced using cgi (I don't think the gold and brown tones and enhanced shading of pecs and abs were just the lighting and filters the dp chose)it was like a digital background of a video game. I'm not saying the filmmakers said,"Let's make this like a video game" but the end result could easily be compared to a video game especially by critics who aren't soley there for the niche (geek) audience. And when the preview said it was the most groundbreaking movie since the Matrix, I disagree. The most intersting visual element was slow motion with some zoom ins at precisely the time of an impact of a sword or shield. There was no Bullet Time that the Matrix innovated back in 1999. And I do believe the cgi backgrounds and enhancements were there largely because of budgetary reasons. If Zach Snyder had the clout to make a $100-$200 million dollar movie I bet this would have been shot on location with a lot more extras and maybe a star other than Gerard Butler's chest and stomach. And I liked the movie. I just don't like all the over hyped mystique of "a groundbreaking movie"
I thought 300 was one big giant commercial! by Grinning White Skull	Mar 15th, 2007 10:48:01 PM
Nothing but over-rendered shots that didn't trust the story to sell the message but instead used purty pictures to sell it like purfume and automobiles. OBSESSION anyone?
As for myspace and youtube by #1 Zero	Mar 15th, 2007 10:50:40 PM
The only reason I would create a myspace account is to promote something. And we all know that is what those celebrity myspace pages are: Promotion. They want you to buy something of theirs. The same with videos on youtube. Lazy Sunday, 300, and whatever other entertainment manufactured by corporations that appear on these community spaces are just looking for your dollar or your ratings. Don't think that they're part of your community or they are really reaching out to you personally through these websites. Being Jenna Jameson's myspace friend is a lot different than being her real friend, for example.
DARN YOU INTERNET by MCHAMMERTIMEUHOHUHOHUHOHUHOHUHOH by Acne Scarface	Mar 15th, 2007 10:52:27 PM

Harry thinks movies are like video games to by #1 Zero	Mar 15th, 2007 11:05:35 PM
read this exact quote from Harry's "Ghost RIder" Review: "I like Mark Steven Johnson – I watched the film and completely saw what he was attempting. He was making a GHOST RIDER movie for the Junior High set and younger. The film played out like a Video Game where he had a series of opponents that represented Air, Water, Dirt and he was fire. Then he was onto the big baddie of the bunch after clearing these earlier stages. And just like in bad video games, there’s a character, whose sole purpose is to explain shit and take you from stage to stage." You can go back and read his review yourself. It's still on the main page. WTF. He compares a movie to a video game but when someone else does it for an R rated movie, they are old fogeys. Jesus. By the way, Air, Dirt and water, are like Rhino, Giant Guy, Elephants, Ninjas and Bombers, and finally Xerxes in 300. Don't pretend they are not
Zack and Fantastic 4... by whenin_tokyo	Mar 15th, 2007 11:13:27 PM
Can you imagine Fantastic 4 by Zack? We all should...Daredevil? We should too. All balls, no bullshit.
This story bugged me by #1 Zero	Mar 15th, 2007 11:14:47 PM
There is something about this article that really got to me. See my posts above. But the last thing I have to mention is Harry is getting his numbers from "top secret Warner Brothers polls". Well, glad you know about them Harry. Also, if the internet is the biggest reason for this, then the downward spiral of in theatre movie grosses should be curbed just by advertising on Myspace and giving people the ability to print 300 pictures. Which of course probably won't happen. There is more to the success of 300 than the internet.
300, chicks and The Last Boy Scout... by whenin_tokyo	Mar 15th, 2007 11:20:36 PM
I took my girl and 5 of her chick friends and they LOVED IT!!! They said it was like the Last Boy Scout but cooler and with a lot more blood a lot less Damon Wayans...I like Damon. They like hardcore action movies I guess.
Hey Harry can I ask you a question PLEASE! by Rogue_Leader	Mar 15th, 2007 11:33:24 PM
I keep hearing wor on this movie getting a sequel. Have you heard anything of this? I am not sure how it would be possible, buit apparently the studio AND Frank Miller want to do it. Supposedly rumors are floating around it has to do with a period of Greek history AFTER the Thermopylae battle. I'm not sure how that would work. I mean after the Greco-Persian War the history of Greece was not anywhere near as epic as before. AT LEAST until Alexdander the Great came around.
A brief aside... by TheFutureDirector	Mar 15th, 2007 11:41:58 PM
I was at a midnight showing of "300." In the middle of one of the first truly loud action moments (bass thumpin', etc.), a baby starts wailing in the audience. A BABY?!? It's freakin' 12:30 at night, a rated-R movie, and someone stupid numbskull of a parent brought a damn BABY??!?! Nearly brought me out of the whole thing. Okay, rant over. Carry on.
Correction: by TheFutureDirector	Mar 15th, 2007 11:43:34 PM
SOME stupid numbskull. Really love the editing button this site has, very cutting-edge.
bronson no you are definitely not the only one by slappy jones	Mar 15th, 2007 11:44:03 PM
it was a ridiculous load of garbage....it wasn't a comic book come to life as I don't think it looks like the comic book at all...i also do not for the life of me understand how people talk of this film as if it was beautiful visually..it was drab and fucking ugly. the acting was terrible...every single role...the dialogue was shit - and don't use the "IT CAN'T BE SHIT IT WAS FROM THE COMIC" argument with me either - all that means is the comic has shit dialogue too....awful film which actually makes me dispair for the future of film if this empty hollow shallow weak trash is the sign of things to come...but it isn't snyder sfault...300 is an awful book....bring on watchmen though...much better source material for a potentially great film
Mindless Entertainment Scores Big by Professor Krapp	Mar 15th, 2007 11:45:51 PM
Visually appealing, but it was soulless. Already fading from my mind...
GORE'S INTERNET ALSO REVEALED MANBEARPIG! by J-Dizzle	Mar 15th, 2007 11:56:13 PM
Gore is super cereal! If it wasn't for his internet no one would know about ManBearPig, Excelsior!
"Top secret" polls... by DarthCorleone	Mar 16th, 2007 12:16:00 AM
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." I'm not claiming the internet wasn't a factor. Maybe it was even a big factor. I just know I saw a hell of a lot of TV advertising for this, and the audience I was in on opening night seemed more like the standard fun Friday night crowd than internet buzz acolytes. I would want to know the exact nature of these polls. Where did the sample come from? Test screenings before the advertising blitz even started? How big was the sample? Etc., etc. I don't know why Warners would spin this in the internet's favor, and I'm sure they have the money for accurate studies, but maybe this was a case of sloppy mathematics and/or unfounded conclusions.
Power! Unlimited POWER!! by beerbaby	Mar 16th, 2007 12:20:55 AM
So is it our time, the time of the internet nerds. See our power, our UNLIMITED POWER!! Power to make people watch... Comic movies?? Come to the dark side.
It IS a video game...and, dare I say-- by Zeke25:17	Mar 16th, 2007 12:22:46 AM
--Snakes on a Plane was a better film. Was 300 entertaining? Sure! Was there eye candy? You betcha! Was there a story? Yeah...and it coulda been told in ten pages, or about the length of the average cutscene in a well-produced game for the 360 or PS3. In fact, why not simply call the movie "360"? I'm sure there were sixty or so Spartans that didn't get counted accurately; after all, all those dudes look alike once their helmets are on....I had a similar problem with Passion of the Christ, by the way. Photographed beautifully, loved the Aramaic language...but the whole story was, Jesus gets the shit kicked out of him. For two hours. At least with that one, though, you didn't feel as if you should have a wireless controller in your hands to help Christ carry the cross up the hill.
diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks. by Cotton McKnight	Mar 16th, 2007 12:23:04 AM
First of all, I say "baloney" to Harry's assertion that he doesn't pay attention to/write about the box office. That is a HUGE part of this site. After all, isn't it he who bragged about how Batman and Robin (or whatever the last one was) was a bomb, thanks to his review? So yeah, Harry's full of it. Secondly, I didn't see this movie last December, I saw it LAST WEEK and I have forgotten most of it already. I'm not trying to be "too cool for school"- it's just that I had a friend see it this week and I honestly had to be reminded of some of the things that happened. I really have no desire to see it again. It's good, don't get me wrong. And I did enjoy it. But i'm not aching to see it again by a longshot.
is it interesting that is the key by skiff	Mar 16th, 2007 12:30:24 AM
I only go to movie's that interest me snakes on a plane did not interest me 300 did. Like going to the home world of aleins I find that very interesting. a heavy machine world startrek the machines that helped veger. Id4 was not a great movie but it was interesting.
But, according to Lucasfilm, we suck like $5 ho's by Doctor_Sin	Mar 16th, 2007 12:32:48 AM
Didn't Rick or Steve say something like they just don't care what we online geeks have to say? I know Lucas said he didn't care.
Yep....I agree: Overrated film by PenguinSlide	Mar 16th, 2007 12:44:10 AM
How many death-blows from Spartan swords and spears can you watch before you start hoping for something new? 300 doesn’t just refer to the number of Spartans – it also refers to the number of slow-motion shots we get of a sword slicing another masked, unnamed Persian. You need more than a charismatic lead and a bunch of beautiful scenery to hold eyes for two hours. You can only revel in the wonders of these aforementioned qualities for so long before you’re forced to ask “okay….and now what?”
The Critics are right. by Jed	Mar 16th, 2007 12:48:45 AM
When I say 300 was a heapin' mouthful of hairy balls, that's obviously because I've never had a mouthful of balls. Video Games are predictable. collect the keys, open the door. fight the underlings, fight the miniboss, fight the level boss. cutscene. new level. Sound familiar? Consider Children of Men: It uses many of the same techniques 300 does to immerse the audience in the action, but where CoM did this to further propel the story, in 300 it becomes the story. Incontrovertible evidence that a filmmaker can copy style, but never copy substance. I will be amazed if Zach Snyder's Watchmen succeeds on any level.
300 actually refers to... by Jed	Mar 16th, 2007 12:49:42 AM
the cumulative IQ of the cast and crew.
300 is al hype by GunsForHands	Mar 16th, 2007 12:52:53 AM
Its basically a high budget B action flick. Its not bad in that sense. But come one, 60 minutes of slow motion fighting is fucking boring. Every scene with that dumb chick back at Sparta was horrible. The blatant Pro-Iraq war connotations of the flick were puke inducing. The acting of the shitty guy who played Leonidas and can only scream his lines was disgraceful. The script was a piece of crap. This movie really disappointed me, I don't consider myself as part of the 'old guard' or whatever the hell you said. I consider myself a fan of awesome action films, but this film was just plain pretentious and it tried to shove too much shit down my throat when it should have just been fucking cool. Basically it thought it was the new matrix when it was just another Matrix copy. A shame, considering it had a shit load of potential and was living up to it untill it got stuck in the repetition of slow motion battle scenes.
I dont know what the fuck you're talking about Harry by Turd Furgeson	Mar 16th, 2007 12:54:33 AM
I was watching the TODAY show this week, and Gene Shallot (sp?) is one of the "Old Fogey's you are talking about and he practically sucked the movie's dick right there on camera... He loved it and I was expecting him to hate it being as old school as he is. Matter of fact, the only negative review i've read at all about this movie is one of your employees from this site... I haven't even seen it yet (yes I am one of 9 people left who hasn't seen it) but I'm going based on all the good press.
NEW RULE: If you like 300, you're gay by Bill Maher	Mar 16th, 2007 12:55:17 AM
I haven't seen so much gayness on the screen since "Can't Stop the Music" starring the Village People. People who liked this movie must whack off to Antiques Roadshow and have cock-flavored chapstick. If 300 was any gayer it would think Margaret Cho is funny and try to guess the flavor of a popsicle by sitting on it. So what if it's based on comic books? If you're into comics past the age of 12 you're a homo anyway. It's just page after page of dudes in pantyhose. Like baseball cards -they're just pictures of men. Nothing wrong with you gay guys sniffing pickle and stabbing poo, but don't try to tell me it's "cool" or "badass". The only thing you pansies know about badass is when a sailor rams it in too hard. So fuck you.
Rogue_Leader... by Uncapie	Mar 16th, 2007 12:58:33 AM
The only way I could see a sequel to this is where the Greeks go into Persia and after King Xerxes, who if you remember, ran off like a little girl and left his family behind though they were treated with respect. There are similar comparisons with the battle of the Alamo and the secondary battle with Sam Houston's army and Santa Ana. Thermopyle and Alamo were both holding actions and bought time for the secondary armies to advance and take out their enemies.
hahahahaBillMaherhahahahahahaha by Turd Furgeson	Mar 16th, 2007 12:59:09 AM
Dude, now that's fucking funny!!!! What, you mean dudes in leather underwear and red capes is gay????
What did you expect? by readingwriter	Mar 16th, 2007 01:05:51 AM
I'm trying to figure out what the haters of this movie expected from it. Someone mentioned The Passion of the Christ, and like that movie, this was about one event--and the criticism is equally pointless. Some of the film's critics are saying the movie focuses just on this one battle...so what? Yeah, it does, as did TPOTC--and your point is...? It's like criticizing a comedy film for BEING a comedy. The movie isn't beautiful if one's definition of beauty is limited to pretty, rainbow-colored Lucas/Spielberg candy. It's beautiful the way Giger and Goya are beautiful, and no I'm not saying those two are of equal value, I'm saying there is more to visual beauty than lotsa candy coloring and stuff. I hate video games, I'm a lot older than the target audience for them, and I found here, unlike with The Matrix, the FX and slo-mo were properly used, to put us in the thick of the action, to give us the FEEL of the action. Saving Private Ryan and Gladiator seem to be the biggest influences on adventure movies these days, and in this case, the tools and tricks learned from those movies were put to interesting use. The one thing that didn't work for me was the hugely derivative score, but for what this was--a B movie, which isn't a crime when that's all it was advertised as being--I enjoyed it. And I can't help thinking that the haters just get off on saying something sucks. I can't believe someone saw ads and read about this movie and paid for the ticket and was subsequently shocked by what they saw. It's certainly different from everything else out there, and that's enough of a distinction to make 300 notable. The haters can go watch Cameron Diaz movies or argue about respect for "canon" in superhero adaptations.
FLASH: MALES 13-25 are gay fascists. by s00p3rm4n	Mar 16th, 2007 01:11:36 AM
That's all that need be said.
I want to see Snyder do original material by #1 Zero	Mar 16th, 2007 01:24:32 AM
Dawn of the Dead: Remake 300: Comic Book Adaptation Watchmen: Comic Book Adaptation When Zach Snyder comes out with something that isn't directly out of someone else's ass, that is where the real test will be and we'll know if he is really worth our time. I feel the same about Spiderman era Raimi and Peter Jackson. These guys did great original work now they're stuck using other people's material. Not that they don't do it well but let's get away from built in audience blockbusters and do something original.
I want to see Snyder do original material by #1 Zero	Mar 16th, 2007 01:24:34 AM
Dawn of the Dead: Remake 300: Comic Book Adaptation Watchmen: Comic Book Adaptation When Zach Snyder comes out with something that isn't directly out of someone else's ass, that is where the real test will be and we'll know if he is really worth our time. I feel the same about Spiderman era Raimi and Peter Jackson. These guys did great original work now they're stuck using other people's material. Not that they don't do it well but let's get away from built in audience blockbusters and do something original.
Readingwriter, as well-written as your post is... by Zeke25:17	Mar 16th, 2007 01:56:18 AM
Not sucking the figurative cock of "360" does not necessarily make one a hater. And as far as "sucking" goes, I never once used that term in reference to the movie. My "point" is, since it has to be spelled out, simply this: if a story can be told in under a half hour--which most "single-event" stories can--why do we need a two-plus hour epic film devoted to it? Was I shocked by the limitations of what I saw? No--the trailers looked cool, and I had a pretty good idea Shakespeare wasn't gonna be up there onscreen. But far as I'm concerned, Frank Miller wasn't up there either. Spartan rushes at Persian, Spartan slashes/stabs Persian, lather, rinse, repeat. That's the film, folks. Hey, a lotta people get off on violence, surprise surprise...fundamentalist Christians came in their pants when POTC graced the screen, after all. Me, I just happen to like a bit of substance up there, too--and sometimes, despite the inherent limitations of the subject matter, I'm pleasantly surprised. And lastly: Cameron Diaz in The Mask, as well as There's Something About Mary, is one of the loveliest things one can gaze upon...though I'll grant ya, I wouldn't be dragged to In Her Shoes, The Holiday, etc.
Nice try, Harry... by RetroActive	Mar 16th, 2007 02:37:10 AM
I noticed that you didn't quote actual stats when quoting these numbers and, as usual, tried to take the credit for the numbers. Internet influence could refer to a large number of factors, including the other 1,000 sites who advertised this film...so don't act like your 320 posts on the subject signifiy a contribution to the bottom line beyond a few thousand dollars.
Harry... by Boba Fat	Mar 16th, 2007 03:18:32 AM
When you see Godzilla Unleashed for the Wii you will, like myself, crumble and shell out for a games console. You move your freakin hands and Godzilla takes a buliding out!! Good article by the way
Zeke by readingwriter	Mar 16th, 2007 04:14:51 AM
"if a story can be told in under a half hour--which most "single-event" stories can--why do we need a two-plus hour epic film devoted to it?" I don't understand this sentiment. A movie tells a story at its own pace. ANY movie could be told at longer or shorter length depending on the approach--ANY movie. (One could tell the history of the human race in 5 minutes or 50 hours.) I don't see how this one could have been shorter for what it did--what, exactly, should they have done to shorten it--cut out all of the queen's scenes, which set up the larger story of the war which this is just one part of? Then critics would be complaining about there being no change of pace, no relief from the fight scenes. Should they have eliminated some of the battle scenes? Which ones? And...why? People pay money to see a movie like this to see The Show. Story points don't have to be delivered and then BOOM we're on to the next one. What's this need to run run run through every movie? The reason film editing is an art is because the editor doesn't just doggedly cut the film to the script. He or she gets a feel for the proper pace to tell this specific story. Who really wants to go to a movie like this and have the build up to the fight scenes lead to twenty seconds of fighting and then the narrator daying "Well, you get the idea..." and then we cut to "Later, after the fight..."? Answer: No one. And I don't expect anyone to suck the cock of "360" (you're clever enough not to reuse that already lame 'gag'); I just don't understand the vehemence levelled at this movie. I generally loath all "post-modern" or "high-tech" post-MTV movies, but in this case I found the technology used for good reason. Do I think this is another Citizen Kane? No. But I'd rather this kind of film be made than another ordinary, PC movie. TPOTC is about a specific incident, and while I didn't care for it I appreciated what a daring production it was. These days, few people have the balls to stick to a vision, and it doesn't much matter to me whether or not I agree with that vision--that visionaries are allowed to make movies is a good thing. Seeing how Hollywood is so fearful of anything with an individual voice, I can't get too upset about this movie not being everything it might have been, when all it seems to have ever been intended to be was an adaptation of a graphic novel. That's all it is, and I applaud it for being a very good adaptation, from a creator who doesn't always mouth the party line in Hollywood.
TONIGHT WE TROLL IN HELL!!! by spud mcspud	Mar 16th, 2007 05:08:04 AM
It's nice to know that we talkbackers have more pull to us than just the superability to bitch and moan about DAMN YOU GEORGE LUCAAAAAAS!!! and each other's views on LOST (which has "LOST" its way this season, yuck yuck!). It's also about damn time the execs realised that you can't just go talk to kids on the beach anymore - they're all on the net! And when that penny drops, maybe the fuckers at Warner Bros will eventually fire the assclown who canned it and release GLOBAL FREQUENCY on DVD. When it is a massive direct to DVD hit, then they'll commission the series for a proper run, and my life will finally be complete. And although it's not out in the UK yet, I cannot WAIT for 300 to open over here! Zack Snyder is everything Eli Roth wishes he was. Troll on, assclowns!!!
#1 Zero - I want to see Zack do original too by spud mcspud	Mar 16th, 2007 05:10:55 AM
I think it's fair to say, based on the quality of his stuff thus far, that his first original movie should be awesome. I'll be very surprised if it isn't. But PLEASE let's see WATCHMEN first - I can't wait!
Damn you Michael Bay by MCMLXXVI	Mar 16th, 2007 05:19:29 AM
Damn you Michael Bay
DAMN YOU MCMLXXVI!!!! by spud mcspud	Mar 16th, 2007 05:21:07 AM
Why can't you just leave us alone?!?!? WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY?!?!? >;p
In the 300 trailer... by spud mcspud	Mar 16th, 2007 05:23:11 AM
...There's a shot where Gerard Butler really looks like Snake Plissken. And if you zoom in to the far, far top right, you can actually see John Carpenter walking off with a big fat check, a T-shirt that says FUCK THE ESCAPE REMAKE, and his middle finger raised way, way up - while laughing like a bastard. DAMN YOU JOHN CARPENTEEEEEER!!!!!!
hated 300 as well by We	Mar 16th, 2007 05:52:32 AM
Hadn't this film been so gloriously hyped, I might have been able to enjoy it on a pure visceral level, in that brainless guilty pleasure sort of way. However, the internet reviews had set my expectations on such a level that after viewing the film I was utterly enraged (knowing it makes a billion dollars at the box office doesn't help matters either). Really, what the fuck were they thinking? The only direction on display were the cheesy slomo shots (that became old about 10 minutes into the film) and the horribly uneven tone - they should've stuck to the over-the-top cheekiness from the trailers and ditched the Gladiator-wannabe vibe altogether. And the writing sucked.. Don't bring up the retarded faithful-to-the-source-materia l argument. When you adapt something from another medium, you make whatever changes are necessary to make it work as a movie. If I made a two-hour Tetris-movie that was faithful to the source, that wouldn't be considered a filmic masterpiece either. /rant.
Zeke - condensing classics... by spud mcspud	Mar 16th, 2007 06:01:07 AM
... for your convenience, I have shortened several classics to their barest, sub-30 mins essentials. MOBY DICK: Whale chases Ahab. Ahab chases whale. Whale prevails. (Read that on a postcard somewhere) THE DOORS: I'm drunk, I'm nobody. I'm drunk, I'm famous. I'm drunk, I'm fat. I'm drunk, I'm dead. (Apologies to Denis Leary) STAR WARS EPs 1-3: THEY SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!
Why should Zack Synder do "original" material? by Walterego	Mar 16th, 2007 07:01:22 AM
How many directors write most of their scripts? We all agree that Martin Scorcese is a fairly good director, right? Are you aware that the only movie Scorcese ever was credited with both the script and story for was Mean Streets? And he co-wrote three screenplays from stories by Nicholas Pileggi and Edith Wharton. Every other movie he has done he was "only" the director. Would you have advised Scorcese after Mean Streets to not use the scripts from Paul Schrader or Jay Cocks or not to remake Cape Fear because the original was already a classic and it would be blasphemy to make it again? Synder is two for two right now and that is pretty good.
Rock Star 2 by spud mcspud	Mar 16th, 2007 07:29:06 AM
I think we need Zack Snyder for ROCK STAR 2. Jennifer Aniston's hotter than ever, we could get Wahlberg back as the older-but-wiser rock star turned manager, get any young actor EXCEPT Shia LeBoeuf (seriously, as an actor he sucks balls!) as the new rock star, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead (the new Lucy McClane) for the new girlfriend. Seriously, all ROCK STAR lacked were some trulyt bodacious slomo rock fuckface fretwanking shots, and I think Snyder can bring the chops to it. And we aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall diiiiiiiiiiiiie yooooooooooooooooooooung!!!
Tonight We Can't Get A Reservation in Hell! by HCEarwicker	Mar 16th, 2007 08:17:28 AM
The problem with the critics and 300 is that they're just flat-out wrong. Movie critics have forgotten what heroism in the cause of freedom is. They forget the old Clint Eastwood, the old John Cassavetes, heck, the old Henry V. This is people FIGHTING FOR WHAT'S RIGHT! And men and boys like that. And what's wrong with that? I don't care what the critics' sexual orientation is, but the fact is that they're all GAY. Not gay in the Freddie Mercury sense, the kickass leather in your face fuck you gay, but gay in the straight, go home and say "yes dear" wives gay, the listen-to-your-film-professors gay. Gay.
They say people don't believe in heroes anymore. by Mace Tofu	Mar 16th, 2007 08:25:43 AM
Well damn them! You and me, Max, we're gonna give them back their heroes! All 300 of them...
The critics by Power_Girl	Mar 16th, 2007 08:45:15 AM
Were always going to be divided on this. Some were going to expect a historically accurate Gladiator type film and reject it if it weren't. The others sew the film for what it is AN AWESOME COMIC BOOK ADAPTATION or just a great film!
This site is a huge part of that by godzillasushi	Mar 16th, 2007 08:48:00 AM
I wonder how many hits this one gets.
Overrated by kilik777	Mar 16th, 2007 09:25:41 AM
Movie was good but definitely overrated. I could have waited for dvd. http://tinyurl.com/pv8do
300 rocked hard, but... by Mr Whatever	Mar 16th, 2007 10:10:25 AM
The movie is overrated, but still better than most movies this year so far... But what was the point of that fat fuck with knives as arms? Didn't get why he was in the movie, did I miss anything....
"historically accurate Gladiator type film" by chrth	Mar 16th, 2007 10:32:01 AM
I really hope you weren't suggesting Gladiator was historically accurate. If so, the deities Marcus Aurelius and Commodus are laughing mightily at you.
Harry...I give you REALITY 101 by onemanarmy	Mar 16th, 2007 10:47:04 AM
I wouldn't give the success of the movie 300 internet full credit for the success of 300. As much as I want to, I can't honestly consider the "fan-boys" as more of an influence, than of course the internet. I actually find myself leaning for the unconsidered, the unexploited, the uncontrollable, the underdogs. Yes...I'm talking about the geeks. Considering the fact that most comic book fiends (same as gamers), be it old school or new school, develop such a strong following for their vice that they'd stop at nothing to make sure it doesn't meet it's demise at some shitty producers hands. I'm willing to bet that if not at least 80% if not most of them are very AVID users of the internet. Doing whatever it takes to stay as close as possible to what they hold dear. Furthermore, complying to the cliche' predominantly known as "Geek-hood." The power of the "Fan-boys" is highly under-rated and underestimated. No matter what the subject matter is, a true fan boy will stop at nothing to support, endorse, flame and/or destroy what they so hold dear in order to preserve its integrity. Geeks, however rule the internet. Geeks being so closely associated with fan-boys in the stereotypical sense, & geeks being the new age beasts of burden, are finally getting credit for what has forever been the punch line of every egotistical football team captains jokes. Wherever your affiliation lies with the aforementioned three historically shunned stereotypes, officially people have taken notice of the influence bestowed upon the e-world. This of course doesn't apply to this movie alone, but it's Saturday morning in Korea. I'm half Irish, and I'm pretty much intending on killing the two cases of Guinness in my kitchen before I go to sleep. /end drunken & hopefully sensible rant
My appologies... by onemanarmy	Mar 16th, 2007 10:53:49 AM
I had that all nice, neat & spaced out in paragraphs and whatnot. Much to my demise I forgot to add the silly "Shift comma, p, shift period" nonsense. Cheers & Erin Go Braugh.....less!
AICN and box office effects by mjbok1	Mar 16th, 2007 03:27:25 PM
Being extrememly generous I would say that this site might bump a film's box office take $1 million. If you take $7.50 as the average admission price (I know it's not accurate, but I had to pick some figure) that would be 133 thousand people going to the movie that otherwise wouldn't because of this site. The biggest example of this site not making huge box office profits for this movie is the already mentioned SOAP, which more or less bombed. I would add to this Rocky Balboa (70 million, not a bomb, but not a blockbuster), Serenity, Clerks II, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, The Iron Giant, but probably most notable Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. All of those films were hyped to holy hell on this site, and none of them did huge numbers (I'm not factoring in budget to gross numbers, just raw box office numbers.) Yes, people from this site get set visits, there are banner ads, etc, but what could a set visit cost? 10 grand tops. A good review should return that investment easily. Is there an impact, certainly. Is it large? Most likely not. I like the site, but the ego about its impact in the larger scheme of things is sometimes laughable. After all I still haven't seen that "great unproduced screenplay" Amusements in theaters yet.
While I Generally Don't Agree With Harry's Reviews... by kevinwillis.net	Mar 16th, 2007 09:01:04 PM
That fat, lazy bastard is too good for 90% of the jackasses on this TalkBack. No wonder his reviews read like he phoned them in. You guys don't deserve any better. Hell, you don't deserve half-as-good as you get here. You cubicle-monkeys talking like AICN and Harry are as small and irrelevant as you are, in the great scheme of fandom, are dumb-asses. Harry is certainly more important to the Internet phenomenon than Al "Do as I Say Not as I Do" Gore, and AICN has been around longer than ultra-lame MySpace. Harry has a legitimate point, and you jealous jack-offs trying to make your own small lives seem more meaningful by minimizing Harry's contribution to the world of online entertainment geekery are just capital-L loooozers. Just so you know. And it's not that I don't think that Harry's reviews mostly suck (as they mostly do), but you Harry-haters suck twice as hard, and there's no happy ending when you're done. So go back to MySpace, jackasses, but stop trolling your friends list for underage boys. That's really uncool.

Talkbacks

Interesting Factoid about 300's success...

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks