[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by nature scene

Blade II? Seriously? I'm a guillermo del toro fan and a blade fan, but that movie was terrible.

well, that simply means that we have different tastes. for me it was quite a fun piece of visual entertainment. blade II >> blade I by far. i haven't dared see the... blade trinity or something. see, sometimes i am in the mood for a little action entertainment & this one really hit the spot. it's very well made. the cinematography was awesome-- if you have some training in watching film you'll spot the brilliant use of chiaroscuro throughout the film. the action was great, especially the different fighting choreographies. there was a lot of visual humor & there was a little of everything. no deep lessons in life however. no transcendental plots. i wasn't looking for them. but del toro rules.

Originally Posted by nature scene

To complain about the historical accuracy of a movie based on a graphic novel is a little absurd, especially since it wasn't that inaccurate. It actually follows the writings of Herodotus rather well. Sure, it skips the naval part - because the naval battle was at Artemision. This movie is simply a focus on the Spartans that fought at Thermopylae. All in all, the inaccuracies of the movie are not damaging, and I found the movie rather entertaining - which is what movies are supposed to do. It's not the best movie of the year, but it's certainly not a terrible movie. Blade 2 was a terrible movie.

look, mang, in real life leonidas didn't "break the law" and "defy the council" to go on a little cowboy adventure of his own, like george bush. the prophecy didn't say "do nothing". the prophecy said that a king had to die to save sparta, and so leonidas went knowing he'd die.

i don't know if the whole "breaking the law" was a part of the 1998 comic, which i haven't read, but it's quite naive to play it in 2007 and pretend there will be no echoes.

also, the spartans did not fight alone. they did NOT. they did hold the pass sending most of the other armies back, but they were a portion of a much larger army. other city-states took part in greater numbers.

also may i say they weren't stupid enough to fight in their loinclothes like a bunch of chippendale dancers. jeezus. but maybe that was in the comic. i just find it utterly laughable & mentally retarded.

this bullshit is all like "america goes to invade iraq in spite of everyone's disapproval, but they are right to do it, cos "freedom isn't free", and they stand for reason and freedom!. (as if the spartand didn't have loads of slaves. but i digress....).

Originally Posted by nature scene

I'm a little more sympathetic to your "freedom isn't free" rant, but I think people have been saying stuff like that before Dubya came around. In fact, it's probably foolish to assume that rhetoric like that wasn't used in ancient Greece.

sorry, that's a load of cocks. you can't be a screen writer living in the XXI century and not have an ear for dialogue, and not know what this expression means in your contemporary environment. please! pleeeeease!! that excuse just doesn't fly-- this was a VERY conscious statement written in 2006. the greeks may have said a lot of things and there was a whole paraphernalia of expressions to choose from-- considering especially that that part of the story about the wife was totally fictional and made for the movie.