More Brilliant Visual Storytelling from Frank Miller.

Rating: 9/10 (11 March 2007)

This movie has brought back the epic for me. It takes what you want from an ancient war epic, cranks it up on steroids, and removes what you don't want.
First and foremost you will see some of the best action in film history. Overall the action flows while maintaining an epic and gritty feel. This, combined with the crazed energy as Spartans smash down opposing troops in unison, gave me something fresh and wholly satisfying to grab on to that I normally don't find in action movies.
The second most apparent aspect of the film is it' visual flair. The film is brilliantly stylized, and holds over the same artistic flair that you get in Frank Miller's graphic novels, just as you got in Sin City. This stylization is both in it's storytelling and in it's aesthetics, which yields a unique and brilliant look and feel.
The parts of the film that drive the plot forward in between battles are kept pure, short, and too the point. Like the battle scenes, they help maintain the true feeling that all of our 300 heroes are bad asses, and that the people they oppose are slimy, corrupt, arrogant, or all of the above. This makes the characters one dimensional, but this proves to be a good thing. It creates a legendary feel for the movie, and dosn't bore us with random niceties about the various character's feelings. Now this may make me seem like an action whore, but honestly, why are you seeing this movie? You're seeing it because you want to see bad ass battle scenes. That was the problem with movies like Flyboys, where you had to sit though monumental heaps of poor attempts of humanization before you got to the next aerial battle; 300 keeps your attention by staying stylized and focused on what it dose best.
Now this movie has been criticized for being overly violent, being conservative in politics, and being historically inaccurate. The first should be addressed by asking: If you don't like violence and fighting, why the hell are you watching this movie in the first place? What do people expect this movie to be? It's based on a Frank Miller Graphic Novel, of course it's going to be violent.
Having liberal politics would not be fitting to the Spartan image either. The Spartans are supposed to be the definition of war and glory, and the basic message of the Battle of Thermopylae is one of war and sacrifice. The movie maintains a basic good/evil battle fitting for the idea of an epic. It's nice to see something without the usual "war is hell" politics for a change. I may not agree with it, but it works for the movie as a whole.
Lastly, why on earth would anyone expect historical accuracy? You see the preview, and it says it's based on a graphic novel, you see it's exaggerated color scheme, you see ancient warriors and kings who look like they should be on the cover of some fantasy hair metal album, and you see the Persians have a giant. People should be able to figure out right off the bat that this movie is not intended to be historically correct. All the criticisms stem from people expecting this movie to be something it was never intended to be.
If you want another dull and boring war epic telling you that war is hell, puke when you see blood, and have a cow at historical inaccuracy, don't see this movie. It's not for you and wasn't intended for you. But if you love Miller's visual style and stylization, want some good and unique action, and want to see a grand story of glory in battle, Go out and watch this movie right now.