Arty and cartoony, and just not enough of a story.

Rating: 5/10 (10 March 2007)

First off let me state I never read the comic books, so whether 300 remains true to Frank Miller's vision I can't say. As to impressions throughout the film, it wasn't something one should expect historical accuracy as it's largely visual effect and setting with a lot of over the top comic rendering of characters. The good guys (assuming you side with the spartans) all look like they stepped out of Charles Atlas ads, have too much adrenaline and speak like they could bark out 'Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!' for a monster truck rally coming up on the weekend. The persians are depicted as decadent and monstrous, as if they just finished their last engagement at Jabba the Hutt's palace.
I found the return visits to Sparta, to see what was transpiring there while Leonidas and his hunky warriors took five, distracting. Sort of unnecessary 'Meanwhile back at the ranch...' goings on. What was going on was pretty farcical at best and distracting if you mostly just wanted to see more battle. The plot, that there was didn't gain much from whatever antics.
Battle scenes, well, gosh, I mean if we're going over the top, why isn't there more blood? When a limb or head gets lopped off, did the heart stop beating already? When there was any it looked like it came out of a squirt gun. Fighting with swords and spears is extremely bloody business and with all this testosterone running amok, why so little blood? It had a World Wrestling Ensemble sort of look and feel -- fighting but no serious injuries sustained -- like some were actually just rubber suits or sommat.
All in all, it may be comic fare, but I didn't think an epic historical battle of such significance was treated respectfully. So, is this back to comics being for juvenile minds or can we expect artistic representations of more world history to come?