Flip wrote:Tessian wrote:The Seeker wrote:Ah, I despised Kill Bill, it was a movie I disliked for many of the same reasons I disliked 300.
You hated Kill Bill for its historical inaccuracies??
Nono, the best parts of both movies were the titty scenes. Oh wait, Kill Bill didnt have any of those....
Im only kidding, i understand what you are saying Seek, but i'll have to completely disagree. It looks like you hate the over-the-top violence and easy plots. To me, the ridiculousness of Kill Bill vol 1 and 300 is an art form in itself. I thought both were well directed and the special effects for both were top notch. Were they special effects to make it look as real as possible? No, but thats why 300 is essentially a tall tale made into a movie. It was trying to depict the legend... not the actual event. I think they did a great job with it.
Anyways, if you dont like these movies, you'll hate Grindhouse.
Essentially the reason I disliked it can be summed up as because I found the movie to be repetetive without much really happening. I also did not find either movie very artistic, more like simplistic; I didn't find any of these movies to be anywhere approaching Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, for an example of a movie which I found used violence and scenary as an art form. The New York Times review of 300 sums up my feelings quite well "As violent as Apocalypto and twice as stupid."
That's just my opinion though, I'm not trying to force or convince anyone to share it.
There are plenty of movies I enjoy which are quite inaccurate: Last Samurai, Braveheart, Gladiator, among others. Though the inaccuracies in those movies made sense since it made for great story-telling, but I didn't think they did in 300. Though as far as how I would describe the movie, it is like another story which tacked on the gimmick of the battle of Thermopylae, inaccurate is kind of an understatement. The legend itself was historically inaccurate due to documentation we have from the Atheneans which state the numbers of Persians in all other battles (and they're always in the tens of thousands). It was written by a Dorian (the nationality of Sparta), Herodotus, who was famous for his exagerations and heavily scrutinized by other Greeks of his time. It became popular because when the legend passed on to the Latins, they loved it. The legend, of course, would be more interesting than a Hoplite Phalanx holding off a tiny pass from an army of tens of thousands for a while before they were solved and defeated.
For example of a major issue with 300 and how it relates to the legend: they even got the purpose of the legend reversed. 300, as best as I could get, was Spartans battling for Greek freedom. The legend was quite the opposite though, it was about how the Spartan way was superior to the Athenean way during the Peloponesian which pitted Sparta against Athens. The defeat of Persians was not even relevant to Herodotus, as it was not the Spartan's who actually won the war against the Persians, but the Atheneans. In short: the Spartans supported Oligarchal dictatorship and tyranny, whereas the Atheneans supported freedom and Democracy. Spartan society was essentially a fascist dictatorship, they disliked freedom. This reverse is the equivilent of the movie of Lord of the Rings being about Frodo on a mission to take the ring from Mount Doom rather than destroy it there.
So I wouldn't say they were trying to depict the legend, rather than just using things from the legend as a marketing scheme, in order to make another generic violence flick filled with poor CG; ever see the Christopher Lambert movie Beowulf? Just like that. I would not be surprised if the reality was that they wrote a completely unrelated story and just decided: "Hey, lets tack on a few Greek names and make it about Sparta. This will sell!"
Grindhouse though, I don't know if I would enjoy it or not, if it is like Kill Bill, I won't. If it is like From Dusk Til Dawn, I would see it as worth watching, but I wouldn't have anything special to say about it.
