Either you understand 300, or you don't.

Rating: 10/10 (9 March 2007)

This movie is so remarkable that I registered with IMDb just to praise its brilliance. I won't add to the discussion by summary or repartee; however, I will share an observation about the wide variance in user comments.
Admirers of this film understand the mythos and ideals it embodies. Critics, however, point to the trite speeches and apparent mindless acting and, worse yet, its inaccuracy--saying it "could have been better" or that the director overreached. Moreover, most comment upon the physique of the actors, saying how they idealize some homo-erotic vision. A.O. Scott of the NYC based his entire review on thissoldiers are sexy.
To this latter group I can only say: you have sadly become so jaded by a passionless existence that you can no longer even fantasize about that which stirs the soul.
It's only a movie, yes, but its magnificence is in how it captures passion. History is replete with examples of such devotion. We don't remember the hard facts, but we feel the reverberations of famous actions and understand them through abstraction and ideals.
In short, we communicate the sublime through mythand 300 is both mythic and sublime. However, some people are so divorced from authentic feeling that it doesn't matter how 300 was made. The point would be inexorably lost.