DVD Review HTF REVIEW: 300: Two-Disc Special Edition (1 Viewer)

[JeffMc]

If you're looking for the trailer, I know it's on the DVD release of "TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING" as that's where I first saw it. It's probably on some other WB/New Line releases, but that's the only one I know. The trailer is very cool.

 

[Don Solosan]

Just finished watching this with my front projector, and I feel it pretty much faithfully captured the movie as I saw it in theaters. Didn't notice any noise.

By the way, there is an additional extra which the reviewer missed (at least it's on my movie-only edition -- I suspect it's on the two disc as well): on the special features menu, push up and highlight the 300. Press enter and watch a short piece about the efforts they went through to get this green-lit. Included is a short test scene they shot to convey how the speed changes would look during a fight.

 

[ToddJ]

Did anyone buy the version at Best Buy that comes with the miniature Spartan helmet?

i was very disappointed in the transfer of 300.... the beginning parts are almost unwatchable....although this will give me more incentive to buy a Blu-Ray player sooner rather than later

 

[Don Solosan]

"i was very disappointed in the transfer of 300.... the beginning parts are almost unwatchable...."

Wow. What did you watch it on?

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Actually, while the battle of Thermopylae did occur, this film does not at all delve into that but is instead based upon Frank Miller's graphic novel (which is a fancy way of saying comic book). History is not at all the focus of the film and it does not attempt to recreate it. In fact Miller did not base his comic book on historical events. He created it because he was inspired to do so by the film "The 300 Spartans." So, it's fairly obvious this is not at all meant to be historically accurate but instead just one big kick ass comic book battle. The whole film is played to be over the top so if:

"The dumb dialog and over-emoting pretty much ruined the film for me."

then I'd have to say you missed the point of the film. It's a popcorn fable, a fairytale for guys who are still boys at heart...it's supposed to be big, dumb, and loud. It's probably as deep as a conversation in the huddle at any NFL football stadium on a fall Sunday afternoon. If you were looking for something deeper than that you were watching the wrong film.

As far as a gay subtext goes, well, it's certainly there but other than Xerxes red hot come on to King Leonidas I don't think it was an important part of the film. Sure, there's plenty of beefcake on display for people who dig that but let's face it, Alexander had a lot more of a gay angle than 300. Farrell and Leto seemed to be in a different movie than the rest of the cast most of the time and it was annoying as all hell to watch. I'm not gay so perhaps I'm not the best person to comment on this aspect of these films but to me it was more of a central theme (and historically accurate) in Alexander. I did read a review of 300 in the local paper and the reviewer seemed to feel the film was made specifically for the gay community but the reviewer was gay and perhaps that was what he saw in it. I did not find 300 to be a "big gay action flick" but hey, if that's how some people view it and it enhances their enjoyment of the film...well...great for them.

I think the only fair comparison for this film is Sin City and maybe Constantine because they are all "comic book" films that are dark and gory. They are not great films (Hey, I prefer Peckinpah, Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia, The Getaway, The Wild Bunch, Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, when it comes to action) but they are attempts to bring comic book style to the screen. I can't really look any deeper at them than that. Sin City and 300, to me anyway, did an outstanding job of doing that. I don't think they were setting the bar low. They were shooting for a certain style (over substance) and they hit their marks.

I think Frank Miller is going to be seeing a lot of his work on the big screen and the "comic book style" of filmmaking is hot right now. I don't much care about it but you can't deny that fact.

Hey, if you want to talk about setting the bar low, Grindhouse is your film for that conversation...

Now, tonight I'm going to watch "Blow Up" again because Antonioni just died. I had just watched "The Passenger" again only a couple of weeks ago...

 

[JeffMc]

Well, it definitely succeeded in being big, dumb, and loud - so you are right on that count. And, yes, it is the wrong film for me as I prefer a little brains in the films I watch, even in a big mainstream popcorn flick. I've always hated the excuse "it's just a popcorn flick" as if that excuses any film from having any smarts or quality to it. You know, some "popcorn flicks" can have some cerebral matter in there as well to make things a bit more interesting. Popcorn flicks don't have to wallow in the lowest common denominator. I personally felt 300 was laughably dull and doesn't even work as a comic book film. It's "big, dumb, and loud", just as you said. I want more than big, dumb and loud. If it was "big, dumb, loud, and smart", I may have liked it a bit more. On the opposite side of the equation, I really liked SIN CITY a lot as it offered clever dialog, a much more interesting story and characters, and a more intricate interweaving plot. Something to look at and something cerebral to hold your attention.

Good choice on THE PASSENGER. Great film - my personal favorite of Antonioni's.

 

[Brett_M]

I just finished 300 and had to report: it looked EXACTLY the same on my 51" RPTV as it did in the theater, where I saw it three times (once digitally projected).

The transfer is fine.

The look is intentional. There is no "noise," "macroblocking," "shimmer" or "problem with the compression."

I would liken its appearance to an LCD display. It looks like it has texture.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

For one specific contrary example, the heavy grain in the background of the scene where the Persian emissary arrives early on looks to be incompletely rendered and contain digital noise. I am sure this is not an issue with the HD versions, but it seemed pretty clear to me with the SD transfer on my set-up (Samsung upscaling DVD player fed at 720p to a Panasonic LCD projector pointed at a 100" screen).

Regards,

 

[Brett_M]

Fair enough, Ken. I don't remember seeing your example when I watched last night or from any of my theatrical experiences for comparison. I am bothered by noise and bad transfers in general -- it had no problems with this transfer at all. Perhaps my eye (or HT) is not as good as yours

What I was referring to was the overall look of the film which could be construed as a bad transfer by someone who passed on it theatrically. After your review was posted, many readers jumped on the "what's the problem with WB transfers these days?" bandwagon. It looks exactly the same at home as it did in the theater.

By the way, I'm using an Oppo 971 upconverting to 1080i.

 

[Nathan V]

A very entertaining cheesefest of a movie, with some very remarkable, if repetitive, visuals. Gerard Butler was very good; this sort of role can be more difficult than appearances would suggest. I must say that given the outrageousness of the movie, I was hoping for an even more outlandish climax.

As for Alexander, I urge anyone judging that film to see "Alexander Revisited," the final cut of the film, which is so much better than the other cuts out there it isn't even remotely funny- that version is the film we all expected from Oliver Stone- a wild, lurid, ambitious, excessive, stupefyingly violent monstrosity of a picture. The disjointedness is all gone, and for some reason the casting and dialogue doesn't bother anymore; it all seems to make sense. Further proof that editing makes or breaks a movie. It should also be noted that this was an independent film, and not really aspiring for the mainstream character and story arc we're familiar with in this genre. I apologize for going off topic, but the film deserves better.

I'm off to watch L'Eclisse

Regards,
Nathan

 

[Mike Frezon]

I'm surprised there has been very little discussion about the sound mix of 300.

I figured this disc to have a kick-butt mix...but with all the discussion about the video transfer, my sites were set low.

I ran through a few scenes yesterday and was pleasantly surprised. This may be tempered somewhat by the fact that I am getting used to a new subwoofer, but the LFE was terrific and the use of the surrounds during the battle scenes was aggressive...making for quite an immersive experience. IMHO, that is.