Good but it could have been great

Rating: 10/10 (25 March 2007)

Voted 10 because of all the ludicrous one star reviews, most of which seem to come from people residing in Iran.
Just got back from seeing it. It is a good movie but could have been a great one.
It is easy to see why I read so many hostile reviews from (mainly American) critics. 'Noble' Greeks fighting barbarous Asians and all without pensively meditating on the futility of war. Even if this had been a masterpiece it would have still got a critical hammering. Ridley Scott only got away with doing a movie on the fall of Jerusalem by making the Knights Templar the bad guys.
But sadly just because a movie is being sniffily condemned by 'right on' movie critics does not make it a great one.
They seemed at first to be trying to capture the essence of Spartan society and made a far better job of it than most would have. But sadly any movie that has Spartans proclaiming that they are fighting for liberty and civilisation is losing allot of credibility. It is comparable to the defenders of Iwo Jima going to their deaths saying that they are fighting for liberty and democracy.
The battle itself is better than most Hollywood battle scenes (a very faint compliment) but does seem to be taking place on a stage rather than a mountain pass. Most of the time you never really get the sense they are fighting against a million strong Persian army and after the first engagement they give up on showing how the Spartans actually fought (in Phalanx formation) in favour of a mass brawl.
All in all the movie is only saved from being a poor one by the performance of Gerard Butler in the lead role.
When you finish there is a sense of disappointment, of an opportunity missed. Many scenes are very good indeed and with better scripting and a longer running time this could have been a great movie.