comment #1

Chris Molanphy says ...

What a bitch. And for a movie you probably won't even like.

Some might say you're a diva for not doing lines, but I don't blame you. I hate that cattle-call shit.

comment #2

Mike Schaefer says ...

Yes, it will be huge. Here in SF, the Metreon will be playing it on 4 screens (3 regular, plus the IMAX) and the Friday nite IMAX shows are already sold out.

Intersting to note that while 300 has 75% on Rotten Tomatoes, it's only got a 44 on Metacritic. Tomatoes uses a lot of fanboy/geek website reviews that Metacritic does not.

comment #3

Dublin101 says ...

To be fair, there seems to be a few fangirls in your photo.

comment #4

christian says ...

btw, ZODIAC has been doing line around the grove business. many of my friends have been unable to se it because of this. this is known as "legs" so perk up jeff.

as far as "homoerotic, washboard-stomach fantasy" are you talking about MIAMI VICE again?

comment #5

RoyBatty says ...

"...asked if I could just slip in and see the remainder of the 6:30 show."

And accomplish what? Seems more than ever you're just looking for a justification to trash the film no mattter what. Look, any regular reader knows this thing isn't your cup of grappa, so why bother? Simply to have iconoclastic bragging rights?

Besides, 300 is the runaway freight train of spring releases this year. And it's not just fan boys. With so many sequels coming out, I would have to say at the moment this is the most eagerly anticipated film of the year. Ever since that trailer with the Nine Inch Nails music hit last fall, pretty much everyone I know says they want to see the film on one level or other.

If GHOST RIDER did, what, $53M then I would say your $40M prediction is a tad conservative. Anyone know what the March record is? Is $60 - $70 too high?

comment #6

MASON says ...

It's a lot of fun and I dug it.

But it's also quite possibly the gayest movie I've seen in a long time. More than Brokeback, but a little less than Jarhead.

Who knows? Since I liked it, maybe I'm half a John Edwards or Actionman myself.

comment #7

Devin Faraci says ...

You showed up at 7:30 for a 6:30 movie? Come on. Anyway, they keep lots of seats empty... up until the movie starts, when they let the overflow fill those seats.

And then you showed up a couple of minutes before the next screening? I know that you don't actually want to see the movie, but if you couldn't be bothered to show up 15 minutes early to secure a seat, you're sabotaging yourself.

comment #8

RoyBatty says ...

Here's a modest proposal, instead of this search-and-destroy mission you've set for yourself, why don't you go see the other genre picture that's opening this weekend that could probably better use the boost if you were to like it: THE HOST.

Anti-American Korean monster movie, seems right up your ally, no?

comment #9

actionman says ...

as much as I loved 300, a $40 million opening seems a little out of reach...I just can't see it crossing over with female audiences considering the violence. But it'd be sweet if it did that well opening weekend.

comment #10

DavidF says ...

DEVIN said:
"You showed up at 7:30 for a 6:30 movie? Come on. Anyway, they keep lots of seats empty... up until the movie starts, when they let the overflow fill those seats.
And then you showed up a couple of minutes before the next screening? I know that you don't actually want to see the movie, but if you couldn't be bothered to show up 15 minutes early to secure a seat, you're sabotaging yourself."

Here here! Exactly what I was thinking.
You'd think that, having been shut out of the early screening Wells might have given himself more than 5 minutes advance to get into the late screening.
Jeff - own up: Are you one of those people who shows up at 9:29 for a 9:30 movie on opening weekend, forcing everyone to stare at your sillhouette and listen to your "Is that a seat?" requests as the movie starts?
Talk about elitism.

The only people worse than those people are the ones who stand in line for ten minutes then get to the front and stare at the board trying to figure out what to see.

comment #11

Mr. Buckles says ...

Let's just hope the Spartans don't also kill Zodiac which I have already vowed to buy on DVD which is still with me after seeing it on opening day.

comment #12

Craig Kennedy says ...

I don't know tracking numbers from Shinola, but Actionman, is it possible the 'gay' content some folks are so obsessed with is aimed at the female crowd and that it might boost the demographic range for the movie? It might not be a girls' night out kind of film, but maybe guys will have an easier time dragging their girlfriends along.

As for Jeff's review...well my interest in the movie is moderate but my interest in Jeff's opinion of same is tracking negative.

comment #13

AlexG says ...

I went to a promo screening last night and the smart thing was I did was to get there an hour before the film began. There was already a huge crowd that must have been there for hours. By the time the film started I heard they had to turn away hundred of geeks. And don't get mad for calling the geeks. Let's face it, after seeing the film I just don't get it. 300 was a load of crap with annoying, one dimensional, BOOORRRRRRING charcacters who scream all their dialogue at the top of their lungs. And if the enemy are supposed to be Persians, then why are so many of the characters dark skinned Africans? I can only assume that that main appeal for this film will white 30 year old virgins with very small dicks

comment #14

Devin Faraci says ...

Anecdotal evidence is worthless, but I have been surprised by the number of women I know who are interested in this movie. And I took a female friend to see it on Imax the other night and she LOVED it. The naked men are a pretty big selling point, and the women like the very manly, understated love between Leonidas and Gorgo.

comment #15

actionman says ...

anything is possible cjKennedy...I hope you're right.

comment #16

Earl Hofert says ...

Come on, people. Everyone knows that in certain film-culture circles, showing up on time for a movie is so old media.

comment #17

DavidF says ...

EARL HOFERT said:
"Everyone knows that in certain film-culture circles, showing up on time for a movie is so old media."

I remember a couple of years ago Roger Ebert got in a snit at the Toronto Film Festival becase he was denied entry to a screening. He'd just hauled ass from another movie and made the point (valid, I think) that everyone benefitted from someone of his stature getting into more screenings and touting more films.

This isn't the same because Wells had already missed the early showing (by, like, an hour) and was AT THE THEATRE and still missed the late showing. So he already knew the score.

And he ain't Old Media so there's no excuse. I don't know the last time I really wanted to see something and got shut out - not even midnight screenings for things like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. If you care, make an effort and you will be rewarded.

As it stands now Wells has made like 15 posts about how 300 may or may not be good but he still hasn't see it. Well, SEE IT and then make a post about it.

comment #18

rocco says ...

I won't trash Jeff for saying "I don't 'do' lines" two days after openly wondering if critics are out of touch with average filmgoers? The irony of his...nope, I said I'm not gonna trash him...

comment #19

Earl Hofert says ...

The "old media" reference was just a joke and not a particularly good one--I almost said that standing in line was so red state instead.

That said, Wells's complaints about being shut out are so whiny that they make me long for the days of taking down Eddie Murphy. Sure, when I go to a press screening that is a public preview, I don't like to do lines either. However, I'm willing to actually show up on time so that I can get a seat in the press row.

As for 300--kind of a drag and this is coming from someone who normally likes highly stylized films of this type

comment #20

Thrudvangar says ...

I guess I'm a Firefox fanboy. And a Ford fanboy. Whoo hoo!
Thanks Wiki.

But not a Michael Mann fanboy.

comment #21

berg says ...

what can one say about a movie where the actors have more prominent nipple placementswhat can one say about a movie where the actors have more prominent nipple placement than Lena Headley

comment #22

PanTheFaun says ...

Yeah this posting offers, like, six different examples of why Wells is a douchebag.

Nonetheless, I saw '300' last night and was the only one in my group who didn't like it. It was very pretty, but there's really nothing there-- and I don't just mean it's hollow entertainment, that would have been fine. I just was bored by it after 5 minutes-- it's about as repetitive as movies get and there's virtually no story or connection to the material.

I even sort-of liked "Gladiator" and "Troy" because at least there was something to chew on in those other than guys plunging their swords into one another for two hours.

Oh, and I LOVED "Sin City."

comment #23

Wrecktum says ...

Why the obsession with seeing this film in IMAX, Wells? It's a digital movie converted to film and then digitally uprezzed to IMAX 70mm. Basically the worst quality imaginable.

To see the movie in all its glory you should insist on digital projection. Movies shot digitally look better projected digitally instead of having to be rendered out and color timed to film.

(but you already knoew this because you're smart, right?)

comment #24

Craig Kennedy says ...

Speaking of digital projection...was anyone who saw Zodiac over the weekend at the Cinerama Dome in LA disappointed with the quality?

I'm not one of those video nerds who obsesses about this sort of thing (not that there's anything wrong with it), but I went out of my way to see it in what I thought would be the best presentation possible and the darks seemed a little...I don't know...mushy? Like the brightness was turned up a little too high?

To those nerds who are obsessive about this kind of thing, is that just a fact of the current state of digital presentation or was I robbed or was Fincher doing something intentional?

comment #25

Craig Kennedy says ...

And of course I use the term 'nerd' with the greatest respect, utmost affection and with the full knowledge that many of my own habits and behaviors would indeed be classified as 'suspiciously nerdlike' to anyone who doesn't share them.

comment #26

Jeremy Smith says ...

That's interesting, cj, because I walked out of the 4:30 Saturday showing when they announced they'd switched to a film print after having trouble with the digital projection (I've already seen the movie, and only anticipate seeing it once more theatrically, so I'd like to see it digitally if at all possible). That they aren't presenting it digitally on the other screen - where I'd rather watch it, since I hate the dome - is also curious.

comment #27

Craig Kennedy says ...

I saw it Sunday afternoon and I'm pretty sure it was digital, though I can't say for sure. They didn't say anything about it if it wasn't. I was thinking of catching it again on film just to see if there was a difference.

It had no effect on my enjoyment of the film (movie?). Mainly I was just curious.

comment #28

rocco says ...

cj, I saw 'Zodiac' Saturday at The Ritz in Philly, part of a small chain of theaters emphasizing quality (usually smaller) pictures and an enjoyable movie-going experience...I wouldn't expect them to be dimming their lamps, but there was much of the movie that was way too dim...Ebert has railed against bulb-dimming for years...so was 'Zodiac' deliberately murky or is my "prestige" theater futily attempting to extend the life of their bulbs?

comment #29

Craig Kennedy says ...

I don't recall the movie being dim to where I felt like I was missing details I was supposed to be seeing. I'd suggest what you were seeing was an artistic choice on Fincher's part but that would be pure speculation.

My issue was one where it seemed things that were supposed to be true black were more of a grey or a muddy brown. Truth be told, by about 30 minutes into the movie I'd forgotten about it and was just enjoying the show.

comment #30

Geoff says ...

Hmmm...I enjoyed the digital projection at the Dome and thought it was excellent. I tried to pay as much attention as I could to see if the black level was good before I was lost in the film. I felt it was able to project true blacks, but perhaps the moments where the blacks appear lighter is a good thing--it's able to truly represent the dynamic range that the digital camera can present, whereas a film projection may have appeared darker in those scenes. It seemed in keeping with other good digital projections I've seen, (the last one i saw was Superman Returns at Grauman's.) Side note: they said this was a 2k projector, but I hear the latest and greatest that sony developed is 4k.

comment #31

Craig Kennedy says ...

A 63% chance I'm just out of my mind, but that's why I asked.

comment #32

Movie fan09 says ...

SIn City had alot of potential.
but it got bogged down by robert rodriguez's ego and testostorone.

comment #33

LYTrules says ...

Jeez, at least you got a screening invite, Jeff.

I'm probably more prone to like this movie than 90% of the LA critics I could name...and I got nothing.

comment #34

christian says ...

women are goig to eat this shit up.

i just talked to a decidely non-geek older women who went to a dga screening of 300 and has vowed to see it again.

when i said, "as a straight guy, i won't be so awed by all those naked fighting men."

she said, "that's why i loved it."

hit.