Shallow

Rating: 7/10 (22 July 2007)

In every generation, there's usually a film that explores new grounds. Way back in the 60s, Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" changed the film medium and, theoretically, paved way for the MTV visuals. Lucas's "Star Wars" continued this by launching the Force of endless possibilities on visual sci-fi effects. In the 90s, Wachowski Brothers' "The Matrix" was the "it" movie--philosophically and visually brilliant. Fast forward to this decade--after Peter Jackson wowed us with his epic trilogy, almost every blockbuster attempts to have the gargantuan spectacle of "The Lord of the Rngs". Watching the theater trailer of Snyder's adaptation of Frank Miller's "300", some people thought that this movie will break new grounds in cinematic history. Unfortunately, "300" might have to settle under the shadow of "The Lord of the Rings" (that is without even mentioning the presence of Faramir, the gollum look-alike character, oliphaunts, trolls, and millions of Middle-earth-like warriors marching on in Sparta).
While being visually stunning, the cinematography of this movie just wants to be noticed. Every picture or every scene in the movie seems to want to say, "Hey! This shot is epic!" True, almost every scene in the movie can stand as part of a series of beautifully composed paintings--add some perfect abdominal muscles and hard feminine nipples to boot--you have a full-scale work of art. Yes, it's an adaptation of a graphic novel--and, unfortunately, it seems to be merely a graphic novel in motion, if not a video segment in a very complicated PC or virtual reality game.
The overused slow/fast motion technique can be effective if used sparingly yet appropriately. Ironically, the perfectly composed scenes just drag the viewer from one scene to the next, expecting more beauty, more mythical images, that in the end, it's just exhausting to the wide-eyed viewer. The movie makes no apologies for its raunchy, sexually arousing scenes which fittingly juxtapose the ultra-violent bloody war segments. Sex and violence in the Greek times, as depicted in different mythology stories, can be understandable if interpreted with consideration to their cultural richness. What fascinates and repulses me at the same time is how this film has taken those two aspects and made them modern--way TOO modern that sex and violence in "300" can leave the audience desensitized.
The script and its execution by many of the mediocre actors here are not even worthy to be given a criticism.
The one important thing missing in this film can be summed up by one word: depth.
Movies can be picture perfect, but there is more to the cinematic language than its flawlessly composed and enhanced visuals--the movie, ideally, must tell a story which paves way to understanding our human nature, psyche, and soul--if not, it poses more questions on human morality, aesthetics, and beliefs.
"300" flexes exceedingly perfect muscles that are mostly found below the head. Thus, in an amusing way, the movie has beheaded itself and all that remain are those pornographic, visually amazing torso and legs, which like AND unlike the 300 Spartans, eventually would fall--buried and forgotten.