It was amazing to be the Spartan 300 warriors before. The bloody and violent scenes, the fist-to-meat fights, the highly personalized style, as well as the amazing art and composition aesthetics, all make people feel that watching this kind of film is to enjoy.
Although Master Miller still signed on to write the screenplay, the sequel did not reproduce this stunning feeling.
The dark comic style of the previous game is not acceptable to everyone. Therefore, this work has weakened this type of expression style to a certain extent, and quoted pictures similar to oil painting style. Although the dynamic performance of the picture and the movie storyboard are still in the form of comics, the color of the picture is better and richer.
On this basis, in order to further increase the expressiveness of the picture, this work has further strengthened the special effects shots, especially the large-scale battles of the three naval battles. The creativity of some shots is impressive (especially the first naval battle, the vortex array of the Greek coalition forces, against the Persian navy diving down from the top of the stormy sea, which is breathtaking). But I personally think that the result of this compromise to the public's aesthetics is that the performance of this film is far less than the previous one.
The real disappointment of this film is the plot.
The plot of the Spartan Three Hundred Warriors in the previous work is very focused, that is, the details of the battle of the Spartan Three Hundred Warriors Hot Spring Pass are restored in a legendary way. The main creator of the previous work did not pave the way for the sequel of the previous work, which made the logic of this film as a sequel to inherit the previous work very far-fetched.
This work focuses on the Battle of Xibo, but in order to reflect the connection with the previous work, the main creator extended and related the main plot regardless of size. But this kind of extended connection undermines the integrity of the whole film to a certain extent.
The protagonist of the Greek side in this battle is Themistocles, a real Athenian military strategist in history. In order to echo it, the Persian side also created a character Artemisia. In order to illustrate the awesomeness of this character, the creator took the trouble to apply the story line index to the first battle of Hippo, and explained the life of Artemisia in great detail. He and Darius, he and Xerxes, His tragic past. . .
At least I find this narrative boring. This way of interpreting history is also a bit speechless.
The main line of the film is the naval battle, and the relationship between Artemisia and the king has no substantial connection with this main line, and spending all the content here dilutes the theme of the film. The film overemphasizes the ruthless belligerence of the female villain, but lacks any indication of his strategy as the commander-in-chief. On the contrary, several of her decisions ended up killing herself: 1. Losing her body without gaining the surrender of the Greeks. 2. The entrustment was not human, and the first battle failed. 3. The final decisive battle rashly attacked and was killed
The female villain is the key to the success of the film. The main creator wanted to show the domineering and indomitable female villain, but the interspersed various clues, including the meaningless sex scene, greatly weakened the character's character, and instead made people feel that the character was very stupid.
In a movie about war, if the villain is too weak, then the show will not look good. Sure enough, the male protagonist killed the villain without any suspense. In the final decisive battle, I was not thrilled at all, and I felt like the rest of my life after the catastrophe.
The occurrence of the four naval battles did not explain the configuration, strategies and tactics of the enemy and us, and all of them were fighting each other. That scene was no different from the young and dangerous street battle. If you win, you don't know how to win, and if you lose, you don't know how to lose. . . Especially in the third naval battle, since there were already such powerful lethal weapons, why did Persia not use them in the first place? Since the female villain has a hundred steps to pierce through Yang, why not shoot the opponent's commander directly? In the fourth battle, isn't the scene where the good Greek man rides a horse and shuttles between warships a bit too much nonsense. Could it be that your white horse is the third prince of the Dragon King of the West Sea?
Speaking of the final battle, I thought of the Spartan forces. As a clue related to the previous work, this film also gave Sparta a lot of space. In the final battle, the Queen of Sparta led the navy against Persia. Seeing this, here comes my question. There are so many people in Sparta, why did they send a mere 300 people to die with the king? ! (In history, Sparta fought with the Greek coalition forces. Sparta dragged the Persian army at the hot springs pass, which objectively formed favorable conditions for Greece to win the sea battle in the Gulf of Salami)
The progression of the plot is very slow. The main creator likes to waste time on meaningless details: meaningless conversations, meaningless jokes, meaningless sex scenes. The preparation time for the final battle is too long. For about a quarter of the entire film, the narrative outside the film is used to explain the background, advance the story and gain insight into the psychology of the characters. On the one hand, such a method is blunt, on the other hand, it inevitably makes people drowsy.
View more about 300: Rise of an Empire reviews
