Not so much an historical epic as one long, flashy fight scene with just everything thrown into the mix.

Rating: 7/10 (20 October 2007)

300 is a film that is so full of so many things that it burns the eyes to watch it and burns the mind to recall them all. The film is an adaptation of a graphic novel that depicted a true event and is also a remake of a 1960s film about the same thing; this is enough evidence from the outset to suggest 300 is going to borrow, recycle, update and generally make a nuisance of everything we think we know about the subject.
The film plays out, in the long run, like a multi-million dollar financed Rugby match between two sides that are allowed to include swords, shields, arrows, spears and.........elephants. The opposition are even allowed to call upon some help from some seemingly un-dead friends to aid the cause, perhaps ideas for monsters that were rejected from director Zach Snyder's first film Dawn of the Dead at risk of it becoming too much like Resident Evil and not enough like its 1978 original. The reason I say 300 burns the eyes and the mind is that it puts so much on screen in the form of actual content and visuals but also makes room for undertones, undercurrents and thus creates a massive boiling pot of genre fusion, computer generated imagery and enough cinematography to get even the most harshest of CGI critics raising an eyebrow in either awe or appreciation.
I don't think 300 is a film you watch for its plot. There have been many historical epics over the last few years depicting true events from centuries gone by such as Braveheart, Apocalypto and Gladiator and all of them have at their core, a story which is either heart whelming or engaging to the audience; in 300, the things we engage with the most are the battle scenes and amazing visuals we are treated to. The film tries to get us to focus on the king, his queen and their love for one another but we don't really care much about that, likewise the film tries to open up a little twist about twenty minutes to the end regarding a rouge in the kingdom and his accusations of the queen's faith or whatever but again, we don't care. Unlike the three examples I gave; 300 plays around with the setting of the film, it toys with the 'look' every film has thus contains issues of spectatorship and plagiarises (sorry, 'references') Henry V in its closing monologue and Gladiator with its shots of fields and heather, again at the end.
What sticks out in 300 doesn't make it a bad film more so a funny one without actually meaning to be which to some, is bad. The scene in which the 300 Spartans are lining up before any of the battle scenes and are being inspected by King Leonidas (Butler) contains strong undertones of homosexuality as captains and troops 'look' at one another; raising eyebrows and faintly smiling. There is also the issue that even when they are at home, in their village, the males still walk around bare-chested with their muscles bulging in an attempt to perhaps come across 'better equipped' than anyone else. This sort of content is the exact opposite to Laura Mulvey's argument that women are the object of the gaze since the females in this film are pretty well clothed in comparison. I also couldn't help but notice all the constant references to sadomasochistic clothing. At some point in the film; people are seen wearing leather straps around them, a group of servants are whipped, another group of servants have to kneel down as Xerxes (Santoro) walks all over them and uses them as steps; Xerxes himself is covered in chains and piercings and an entire wave of enemy troops are actually wearing masks during the battle (surely they would've struck more fear into the Spartans had they been barefaced). Like I said, this doesn't make 300 a bad film so much as it does make it interesting to read into.
Despite its suspension of reality in the form of mostly mutants and not humans being the bad guys, the fight scenes are still impressive and remain whatever anyone says the reason you're going to watch the film. The inclusion of dinosaurs and ninjas begs the question when the film was set but in my opinion, you can suspend belief if you figure it's set in an alternate reality of some sort although elements of science fiction was the last thing I expected to be in 300. However whatever I did expect to be there was there and it was good for what it was.