300 was better in my opinion. I don't really have much to say about this film. To me, it just feels as if they made this because they know millions of people the world over loved the first one and they could make a quick buck off a sequel. I'm sure they made a ton of money too but that does not mean it is a great film in the least.
On the good side I can say that I like the way the film looks, which is exactly the same as the first one. The pausing of time and the slow motion makes it look kinda cool but also stretches out the length and without it would lose about a half hour of the total length. And that means that the movie isn't very long at all.
For the most part we do get to see most of the characters from the original but also it is more like only a cameo. Gerard Butler, who played the lead in the first and had a slew of memorable lines, is in it for about 5 minutes, if that. Lena Headey, who played his wife is in for about 10 minutes. The lead roles are given to Eva Green and Sullivan Stapleton. The acting is decent if maybe a bit too masculine at times but that's the way the first one was as well. Eva Green is very good on the eyes no matter what she is and she can act too but Sullivan Stapleton is the lead role and when compared to Butler's awesome part one role this guy falls flat. He did not impress me in the least.
The story is not a sequel, nor is it a prequel but it takes place before, during and after. So, I don't really know what that classifies it as. I can't really put my finger on it but it would seem that the battle from the first and the first battle in this take place at the same time. And why did the writers do that? It makes no sense that the first movie a group of 300 went against 1 million when it could have been alot more. Even the weak excuse they used in the film it still makes no sense to me. I guess the quick and easy way I should have said it was I think they never should have made it.
No comments:
Post a Comment