Originally Posted by WirelessGuru
What? You prefer a Transporter trans Natural Born Killers rip off with the sole plot intention to be as disturbing as possible?
For the record, I found Crank to be deliriously vapid and a whole hell of a lot of fun. It never, for a millisecond, takes itself too seriously.
300 is, in the end, a bit too earnest, but I was not underestimating that my appreciation for the film did grow while going through the extras, listening to Frank Miller in particular discuss what shaped his take on the tale. 300 is silly fluff, with a veneer of history over a timeless, hyperbolic tale. I don't even really like the Matrix that much, but the comparison is pretty valid: If the Matrix was all bang and flash with a bit of Descartes thrown in to make it seem more "deep", then this uses history to tell the tale of underdogs overcoming great odds to carve out the winning of a war while losing a particular battle. Wasn't there a Bad News Bears film that told the same tale? Or was that a Mighty Ducks film? Battle of the Bulge? I dunno, they all blend together.
So, to summarize - Crank = silly fluff, kinetic fun that gets bandied by some BD fanboys as the ultimate in PQ, pissing on actual -films- shot on, um -film-.
300 is sillier fluff, taking itself a mite too seriously, but in the end it's as decent as the source material that it slavishly replicates on screen.
ps. Gladiator sucked A$$, the worst close-up shot battle scenes with no desire to catch the odd wide shot in recent memory, with the abysmal Transformers being the evil spawn of Scott's bombastic ineptitude.
pps. Now, Spartacus, -theres- how you do dudes in Togas...