300

[Tonaci Tran]

Man, I just watched 300. After RED is unleashed, I can't imagine what Grant Freckelton could do with it on his next project.

A cool article about 300.
http://www.studiodaily.com/main/technique/tprojects/7807.html

[luis bustamante]

how was it? I'm dyin' to see it

[Chris Gearhart]

It was amazing. The colors and look were incredible. A must see.

[Rick Darge]

300 blew my mind away!!! I can't believe they shot that in a greenscreen studio - F---ing amazing

[Michael Schrengohst]

Go download the 1080p trailer....
The look and compositing were stellar.
Perhaps a feature shot like this with a RED
will be seen on the big screens in 18-24 months.

[Joe Carney]

Excellent movie. For a change, well worth the ticket price.
btw, Maybe I'm mistaken, but those mountains surrounding the valley look a lot like the south side of Maui, very other worldly.

Joe C.

[Tom Lowe]

Yeah it was a landmark film, visually speaking. Very audacious and impressive!

[Shawn Nelson]

One of the few movies to actually fullfil my expectations that were set by the trailer (trailer 2 on quicktime site). Wow. The critics are all wrong on this one, they can't take a movie that's unapologetically unambiguous. None of this whiny "maybe the good guys arent good and the bad guys arent bad" crap (see Kingdom of Heaven, Troy, King Arthur, etc.). Just no-holds-barred we-have-to-kill-them-all bravery. Spartans!

Oh, and what did you guys think of the sex scene? I loved it, and thought it was beautiful, erotic and creative. One review said it was "laughable" which I couldn't disagree more, I think most Hollywood sex is, but this wasn't. In my midnight screening I heard a bunch of teenage boys giggle, but I think it was from a bunch of boys who don't know what it's like to make love to a woman who loves you and knows what she's doing.

[IAN SUN]

One of the few movies to actually fullfil my expectations that were set by the trailer (trailer 2 on quicktime site). Wow. The critics are all wrong on this one, they can't take a movie that's unapologetically unambiguous. None of this whiny "maybe the good guys arent good and the bad guys arent bad" crap (see Kingdom of Heaven, Troy, King Arthur, etc.). Just no-holds-barred we-have-to-kill-them-all bravery. Spartans!

Oh, and what did you guys think of the sex scene? I loved it, and thought it was beautiful, erotic and creative. One review said it was "laughable" which I couldn't disagree more, I think most Hollywood sex is, but this wasn't. In my midnight screening I heard a bunch of teenage boys giggle, but I think it was from a bunch of boys who don't know what it's like to make love to a woman who loves you and knows what she's doing.

Once Again I have to disagree with you Shawn. 300 is a landmark film, but only for its visual style, and production techniques. As a story, it is a hollow shell. The film gives nary a hint that it is aware of it's moral ambiguity. The fascistic worship of the Warrior King and his unshakable belief in the purity of violence, is justified by the portrayal of the Persians as single minded automatons driven by a twisted despot.

It's one of those things that remind you, history is written by the winners. ( Based on a true story...right :shifty:.)

Then of course there is that cute little speech at the end , where we learn it is the burden of the Greeks (Western Civilization) to conquer mysticism and defend the rule of Law. Never mind that the hero broke the Law and ignored the Senate. But hey who's got time for weak kneed lip flappers? Deciders rule!

Pretty shallow movie, unless you choose to read it for ironic subtext.

[Shawn Nelson]

"Once again I have you disagree with you Shawn"...lol, I am not aware of our first disagreement. I agree that the real story of 300 may not have been so black-and-white but I appreciate the story of this movie being so. I love the story. There is such a thing as good and such a thing as evil and a time where evil must be stopped, a time where you must stand and fight and give everything you have to stop something, and I appreciate a movie that tells of such a time.

[IAN SUN]

Hi Shawn I was reffering to testy reply I made to a post of yours from a couple of months ago, that really kinked up my hair.

I mean I did enjoy the movie, as popcorn fare.
It's not that I can't enjoy films which promote a chauvinistic worldview I object to.
LOTR, another much superior fantasy (obvious guy here :ohmy: ) had much the same message, but those films had the advantage of Tolkin's depth of thought.


http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/228_1173566638.jpg

[Shawn Nelson]

Oh, I remember that. If you are an African-American I meant you no offense, I was simply cracking about the reverse-racism in the American college system. but before I get this thread locked let's go back to 300. I can understand you not liking that it was a one-sided story (which I appreciated) though I don't think chauvanistic is a good descriptive phrase, as the movie showed a very powerful queen who was really kick ass at fighting the chauvanism she faced. The council scene with her was awesome!

LOTR did have a similar good-vs-evil story and I really liked that too. There is a place for a "let's question what side is what" type of movie, but there is also a place for a "that's evil and this is good and let's fight evil" movie. And it doesn't have to be a WW2 nazi movie either. I can understand the Persians not liking 300, but they also have a right to make a reverse movie where they show what bastards the Greek were and then some Hollywood type can also make the movie where everyone is both good and bad and that's totally ambiguous about everything. It will have a low box office take but then there'd be balance. No offense to you Bro, just tossing ideas here. Maybe we can agree that the Oracle was hot? :-)

[IAN SUN]

I don't think chauvanistic is a good descriptive phrase, as the movie showed a very powerful queen who was really kick ass at fighting the chauvanism she faced

I was reffering not to male chauvinism, but to ethnic/national chauvinism.

We can definitely agree that the Oracle was smooooking!

[Rogelio Salinas]

Great Film. Very artistic, creative, and original. There wasn't too much depth in the storyline, but I think most people are going to watch the movie for the action and the visuals. I don't know of too many people intending to be moved or learn any life lessons from it (except for filmmaking ideas). It had some of the most incredible action sequences I have seen in a long time. You can tell the target audience are young males, but my wife really enjoyed it as well. Highly Recommended.

[Joe Carney]

I have to agree, the story was flat, but it was derived directly from the comic book. It was all about the visceral look. Give me some ideas for my own movie.
The ORACLE was filmed in a water tank in front of a blue screen at 250fps to get that incredible look.
fxguide.com has a couple of podcasts, the first one with the folks at screaming death monkey who did the oracle shots using LightWave and Fusion 5.1.

[Joel Kaye]

I have to agree, the story was flat, but it was derived directly from the comic book. It was all about the visceral look. Give me some ideas for my own movie.
The ORACLE was filmed in a water tank in front of a blue screen at 250fps to get that incredible look.
fxguide.com has a couple of podcasts, the first one with the folks at screaming death monkey who did the oracle shots using LightWave and Fusion 5.1.

I thought it was a water tank when I saw it but I wouldn't have guessed 250FPS. I wonder what Lightwave was used for in that shot.

Overall very cool movie. The story was simple but the characters were interesting enough for me. The guy who played the "God" character had an amazing look and voice. I might have to see it twice - though I'm actually looking forward to seeing it on my TV as now I'm really tuning into theater projection flaws.

BTW - I didn't really recognize any stars. I'm sure these guys are all established actors that industry people might now - but are average folks going to this movie based on "star power"?

[Matt Gottshalk]

Lightwave was used for the smoke around the oracle.

And as for the historical accuracy, as was mentioned earlier, it WAS based on a graphic novel.

those of you who want to dig deeper into the HISTORY of the battle of Thermopylae should read "Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield.

Here's a spoiler: The outcome was the same!

[dewman]

I thought it was a good film...a little slow in the beginning, I was ready for action from the start, especially after seeing the previews....all in all good stuff...didn't know about the oracle being filmed in water...nice effect. But I did keep thinking what this film would look like filmed by RED...I'm getting a little snobish on the image presented on the big screen nowadays :)

[Shawn Nelson]

I just saw it a second time yesterday and am lining up a 3rd screening for hopefully Wednesday. I'll have to pay more attention to the Oracle scene, everything did float but it sure didn't look wet. For the effects my least favorite was the floating heads, looked very, very fake. Interesting note, on my second viewing my wife was with me and she really enjoyed it. So this movie may do well as it expands past 14-24 yr old males.

[Joe Carney]

I think had it been filmed with RED instead of film, the vfx folks would have had a much easier time pulling keys. Apparently there was so much grain from the film stock they had some real problems.

Joe C.

[Ken K]

I don't know of too many people intending to be moved or learn any life lessons from it
I learned that I should kill all those who oppose me. :biggrin:

I saw this Saturday night on one of those newfangled DLP projectors (Regal Bridgeport, Shawn) and it was stunning. While I really enjoyed the movie, I kept getting distracted by the "look" of the movie. Now, this is the first time I've seen a movie projected like this, so I'm not sure if it was the DLP projector or what. The best way I can desribe it was a moving dithered look. Think of an image heavily dithered in Photoshop, but those dots are all moving. I'll be seeing this again in a regular film theater, so I'll compare it then.

Anyway, it was just something that kinda stuck out and it took awhile for me to ignore it and enjoy the movie. Anyone know why that was or is it also present on the film version?

[Shawn Nelson]

Chazmo, I wasn't aware that Regal had any projectors. I'd be curious the quality. I'd love to hear a report about how it looks up at Cinetopia in Vancouver, WA where they have nice 2k projectors.

[Dan Blanchett]

Apart from the incredible look of the film, the movie also worked so well because of the strength its lead actor, Gerard Butler... something my girlfriend had to keep reminding me of. That dude has a cool voice and amazing screen presence. And the fact that he’s such a chameleon in his film roles, and therefore hard to recognize, just adds to the immersiveness of the story. Thank god they didn't try to cast Tom Cruise or, worse, Ben Affleck.

[Shawn Nelson]

Yeah, I was as impressed with Gerard as a straight male can be :-). He really worked as Leonidas. My wife was swept away ;-)

[Tom Lowe]

I was thinking the same, that guys like Cruise would have been a disaster, and that they are probably jealous of how well Butler pulled off this career-making role.

[Hitman Jr]

[QUOTE=Bro Anansi;15994The fascistic worship of the Warrior King and his unshakable belief in the purity of violence, is justified by the portrayal of the Persians as single minded automatons driven by a twisted despot. [/QUOTE]

While history is written by the victors, Persia's war mongering and hunger for conquering under Xeres and his father is well documented. As for the the Spartan's, you pretty much nailed their outlook on life. To die in battle was a preferred glorious death.

The biggest trouble with the movie was the underlying reasoning on only 300 soldiers. I was the time of the Olympics and the majority of Greece preferred to play games than defend their land, including the Spartans. There was no duplicity in the council chamber. And the really funny thing since the sex scene was mentioned, there was no Spartan word for whore since the women were encouraged to sleep with other men, as most of the time their husbands were our chopping off heads.

Otherwise fantastic movie, very enjoyable.

[J. Bernard Vallon]

I think had it been filmed with RED instead of film, the vfx folks would have had a much easier time pulling keys. Apparently there was so much grain from the film stock they had some real problems.

Joe C.

Was it really shot on film? My first impression was they shot with the Phantom65 and added grain. The depth of field in some scenes looked so shallow i thought medium format film, and 3/4 of the movie was shot at 120fps or faster.

What made my wonder was the shot of someone being stabbed at the begining: Blood flies through the air towards the lens, and the frame rate ramps to >500fps, so the blood is caught midair, and they focus throw THREW it. i know it must be a completely digitally fabricated effect, but the thought lingered: what if they really did that? what if they threw fake blood through the air and shot it at 500fps, and just let the lens fall out of the camera, or something?

Anyway. I thought phantom65. Great movie, anyway. On the way home from seeing it with my brother i nearly lost my voice screaming about it.

[Shawn Nelson]

Was it really shot on film? My first impression was they shot with the Phantom65 and added grain. The depth of field in some scenes looked so shallow i thought medium format film, and 3/4 of the movie was shot at 120fps or faster.


It sure was, go see some BTS shots and you'll see the big film mags attached to the camera.

[Alexander Nikishin]

300 blew my eyeballs out for a few days after seeing it. Visual joy, eyecandy! Not to mention I saw it at the greatest theater known to man, the Grauman Chinese, DLP is awesooome.

[Thomas Mathai]

Was it really shot on film? My first impression was they shot with the Phantom65 and added grain. The depth of field in some scenes looked so shallow i thought medium format film, and 3/4 of the movie was shot at 120fps or faster.

What made my wonder was the shot of someone being stabbed at the begining: Blood flies through the air towards the lens, and the frame rate ramps to >500fps, so the blood is caught midair, and they focus throw THREW it. i know it must be a completely digitally fabricated effect, but the thought lingered: what if they really did that? what if they threw fake blood through the air and shot it at 500fps, and just let the lens fall out of the camera, or something?

Anyway. I thought phantom65. Great movie, anyway. On the way home from seeing it with my brother i nearly lost my voice screaming about it.


It was shot on film, but all greenscreen.

This means that all backgrounds were created, all sets virtual. So they can completely build their own depth of field as they wanted.

There was a lot of slow motion and speed ramps done. Most of the blood was probably digital or comped in.

[Joe Carney]

I read that the blood splatter was created with balsamic vinegar, photo'd and comped in with additional color/light effects in post. They used Fusion quite a bit for compositing.

[Chris Gearhart]

Most of the blood was probably digital or comped in.

All of it was. Mike Curtis linked to this article touching on the 2-D effect for the blood.

http://www.studiodaily.com/main/news/feed.rss/7807.html

[ColinSmith]

A video showing some Lightwave making of and FX interviews on Newtek's site
Lightwave in 300 (http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/profiles/300/index.php)

[Ralph Oshiro]

Oracles are HOT!

[Paolo Tinari]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416449/trivia
Some more interesting infos, for who didnt read them already

The trailer looks incredible.

[Mark Thorpe]

This is just way too crazy to digest,

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL2131809120070321

300 is a movie. 300 is a work of fiction. 300 is big screen entertainment. 300 is not policy setting. Are fact and fiction really that hard to separate with this movie?

This is taking the ever increasing sensitivity issue a bit too far.

Mark

[chuck colburn]

I liked the 1962 original better.