CGI Battle Scenes Star--But No Shivers for the Story or Characters

Rating: 6/10 (17 March 2007)

Because of the breakthroughs in CGI, there has been a surge of epic films set in the ancient world such as Troy, Gladiator, and Kingdom of Heaven. This trend is very similar to the time when Cinemascope made its debut in the 1950's with movies also set in the ancient world such as The Egyptian, Spartacus, Ben Hur and The Ten Commandments. Now "300", based on comic book legend Frank Miller's graphic novel of the same name, has entered the list of action movies set in ancient times, and the very short list of feature films that exclusively uses CGI. If amazing battle scenes with blood-running spectacle is what you enjoy, 300 is for you. In many ways, 300 puts you in the middle of every battle, a bit like computer and video games put the user the into the middle of the action of a situation. At times, the movie felt like a computer game in a movie theater. The CGI battle scenes are the star of the show, and worth the price of admission if no-holds-barred sword-fighting is what allows the warrior within to feel some momentary gratification.
However, complex thematic story-telling is not what this movie is about. The characters are more caricatured icons than real people. Leonidas as the King of the Spartans is the warrior-king who is, well, a warrior-king, nothing more, nothing less. He acts as the devoted savior of his people with the selfless agenda of a demigod. The kind of person you wish would run for president of the United States, but can't because no such person exists. His wife is equally as iconic, feminine but strong-willed to defend her husband's resolve. Have people like this ever existed? And when these icons are not spearing their enemies, they are making speeches about how great it is to spear their enemies.
A couple of moments had potential for interesting story development. Two supporting characters, a hunchback who is refused by Leonidas, and Theron, a member of the Spartan council who is not as grateful for Leonidas' battle campaign, divert the story a little from its predictable track. Unfortunately, these characters' stories, their motives, and their destinies have little development, and it was frustrating that more unpredictable situations did not occur. As much as I did enjoy the spectacle, I found I didn't much care about the characters. It's not that they were as blood-thirsty as their enemies, but there was little to about them that made me feel that these characters had enough flaws to feel like they were real people.
The portrayal of Xerxes was over the top, even for a baddie. He is not just arrogant and hedonistic. He is also a sloth, watching as his people die for his vanity. And when he sustains a superficial flesh wound, he reacts like the teacher's pet that got punched in the nose for his insults. Did the Persians real pick this guy as their leader? (Even Darth Vader had proved himself as a warrior.) The portrayal of the Persian warriors are also caricatured as unskilled amateurs. The Persian troops have about the same fighting skill as your average first-round combatants in a video or computer game. They die at the first swipe. Each Spartan cuts down about 50-60 Persian combatants per battle! And when they are not getting their clocks cleaned by the Spartans, the Persians are engaging in hedonistic sex with deranged and deformed concubines. (I can understand why people of Persian ancestry have become offended by this movie.)
I compare this film to Excalibur. Both have iconic characters with bigger-than-life themes based on mythic stories. Both are set in ancient times with an emphasis on battle and warriors where the good guys and the bad guys are clearly defined. But Excalibur had more heart and more mystery. We know Arthur is doomed in Excalibur as everyone knows the story of Camelot and the Knights of the Round Table. However, the way in which the tragedy unfolds and how the characters deal with their destiny is what makes the journey worth taking. Even Arthur has moments of vanity when he first meets and battles Sir Lancelot. Mordred is evil but he cunning and intelligent, not just vane and slothful. And its hard to beat the portrayal of Merlin. In 300, I never felt that I was close enough to the characters to find I felt or for that matter understood what the characters were up against. And with each successive wave of battles, I found it a bit less compelling than it should have been.
When the last remaining warriors of the Knights of the Round Table go to fight their last battle against Mordred, even though I know what's coming, I always get shivers up my spine, even after 25 years. The knights riding through the lush countryside making their last tragic stand, knowing the outcome will not be in their favor, with their pennants that represent their code of honor flowing behind them in the wind, is what knighthood is all about. When the Spartans made their last stand, I was intrigued, but not moved. No shivers.