Papa Shango
Frontman of the WZ Band!!
The Wrestlezone Movie Tournament, 2000's Bracket;
Round 1, Match 1-
Round 1, Match 1-
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
vs.
300
vs.
300
2000's bracket; Round 1, Match 1- 1) LOTR: The Return of the King vs. 32) 300
- Thread starter Papa Shango
- Start date
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
Let me get this out of the way to start. I like Lord of the Rings. The books and movies were both excellent. They are classics, well written, well acted, and the special effects are superb.
But nothing tops the feeling I had walking out of the theater after 300 (let me digress, as I watch the news, Sarah Palin looks hot in white). I was ready to battle. I wanted to test my loyalty to all my friends. I had had a bad streak of movies that I paid to see, but this one broke it. It delivered everything I wanted. I would vote 300, knowing I would lose, and feel fine about it.
But nothing tops the feeling I had walking out of the theater after 300 (let me digress, as I watch the news, Sarah Palin looks hot in white). I was ready to battle. I wanted to test my loyalty to all my friends. I had had a bad streak of movies that I paid to see, but this one broke it. It delivered everything I wanted. I would vote 300, knowing I would lose, and feel fine about it.
HBK-aholic
Shawn Michaels ❤
No way is 300 losing to the biggest piece of overrated crap in the world. Because that's all I can describe Lord of The Rings as. It's boring, it's stupid and it's shit. There is physically no way I can sit through this film again. I attempted the book - that too was awful. And I can't get my head around why people got so hyped up about it.
Then you have 300 - which is a great film in comparison. May not be to everyones tastes, but certainly better than LOTR. The seedings of this bracket are way off in my opinion. 300 deserves to go far in this tournament - it does NOT deserve to be beaten out by LOTR.
Then you have 300 - which is a great film in comparison. May not be to everyones tastes, but certainly better than LOTR. The seedings of this bracket are way off in my opinion. 300 deserves to go far in this tournament - it does NOT deserve to be beaten out by LOTR.
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
Honestly, both of these films missed the mark for me. I struggled through 300 and I didn't care for any of the Lord of the Rings series.
But I cannot vote against LOTR here. I mean, come on, the evidence is there. The effects, the costumes, the music, the atmosphere, etc. Peter Jackson directed this film masterfully, and captured the essence of a book that so many HUGE fans have glorified, studied, and exalted for years.
Not me, of course. I was having sex at the time.
But I cannot vote against LOTR here. I mean, come on, the evidence is there. The effects, the costumes, the music, the atmosphere, etc. Peter Jackson directed this film masterfully, and captured the essence of a book that so many HUGE fans have glorified, studied, and exalted for years.
Not me, of course. I was having sex at the time.
Papa Shango
Frontman of the WZ Band!!
I want it on record that the ONLY reason I allowed 300 into the tournament was so that it's fanbase could watch it be torn to shreds... by me.
I was heavily anticipating this movie. I loved Sin City, I love Frank Miller. But this was a major case of style over substance. I understand the desire to be faithful to the graphic novel, but EVERY SINGLE ACTION SHOT IN THE MOVIE IS DONE IN SLOW MOTION. Too much. Then to couple it with the awful primal techno-music or whatever the hell it was that they tried to pass off as a "musical score". The most refreshing moments were the ones where the characters were allowed to just talk. No slow-mo. No loud music. To steal from NorCal, the movie is laborious.
I know that a lot of people might say that about LOTR simply because it's three hours long, but there is an enourmous difference between a movie that's long in running time, and a movie that's long as an experience. While the ending to Return of the King is scrutinized by some, there needs to be a realization that you can't just end a movie of such grandeur, without closure. A lot of people don't even realize that there is an entire subplot removed, involving the Hobbits returning to the Shire and finding it overrun with Orcs. The movie POSSIBLY could have ended with all the humans bowing to Frodo and his friends. But I think that after such an epic, a calm ending was just what was needed. Mostly because, the saga starts so calmly. There needs to be a return to normalcy for the heroes. Otherwise, there's no closure. And that's something the movie really needed.
Add on top the breathtaking scenery, the state-of-art effects, the riveting battle scenes, the fantastic adaptation and direction of Peter Jackson, who may very well be the bastard son of Steven Spielberg's imagination, and there's really no question which is the better movie.
11 Oscars. It deserved every one of them.
I was heavily anticipating this movie. I loved Sin City, I love Frank Miller. But this was a major case of style over substance. I understand the desire to be faithful to the graphic novel, but EVERY SINGLE ACTION SHOT IN THE MOVIE IS DONE IN SLOW MOTION. Too much. Then to couple it with the awful primal techno-music or whatever the hell it was that they tried to pass off as a "musical score". The most refreshing moments were the ones where the characters were allowed to just talk. No slow-mo. No loud music. To steal from NorCal, the movie is laborious.
I know that a lot of people might say that about LOTR simply because it's three hours long, but there is an enourmous difference between a movie that's long in running time, and a movie that's long as an experience. While the ending to Return of the King is scrutinized by some, there needs to be a realization that you can't just end a movie of such grandeur, without closure. A lot of people don't even realize that there is an entire subplot removed, involving the Hobbits returning to the Shire and finding it overrun with Orcs. The movie POSSIBLY could have ended with all the humans bowing to Frodo and his friends. But I think that after such an epic, a calm ending was just what was needed. Mostly because, the saga starts so calmly. There needs to be a return to normalcy for the heroes. Otherwise, there's no closure. And that's something the movie really needed.
Add on top the breathtaking scenery, the state-of-art effects, the riveting battle scenes, the fantastic adaptation and direction of Peter Jackson, who may very well be the bastard son of Steven Spielberg's imagination, and there's really no question which is the better movie.
11 Oscars. It deserved every one of them.
To be completely honest, I'm not really a fan of either, but I sat through "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King". Even if it was one time and something I'll most likely never do again, I did it. I didn't do that for "300". Qnd that piece of shit is an hour and a half shorted then "The Return of the King", but I just couldn't bare it after thirty minutes. It's so fucking over the top and ridiculous. I hate it. In fact, I don't think there's a film I hate more. And hatred is a feeling I usually don't feel for anything, but I feel it for this movie, because it’s complete and utter garbage, yet there's a large fan base for it. Fuck “300”. FUCK IT!!
Paul Revere
Step In The Arena
Yeah 300 is completely overrated. It's a CGI-infested shit movie. The scenes are waay overdone and the dialogue is just loud, with no substance.I am a Frank Miller fan as well, but this movie made me mad it was unentertaining. Like Roger Ebert said: it's like a night a CGI-Fridays.
LOTR is a good movie that I have watched twice. Even if I don't like the movie as much as most do, I can understand why others do. It is fantastical, with the costumes and effects used to the right effect. LOTR doesn't live up to the hype for me either, but it's not a shitfest like 300 is.
LOTR is a good movie that I have watched twice. Even if I don't like the movie as much as most do, I can understand why others do. It is fantastical, with the costumes and effects used to the right effect. LOTR doesn't live up to the hype for me either, but it's not a shitfest like 300 is.
Are you fucking serious that people are actually trying, trying to make an argument that a War Porn movie like 300 has anything at all better then a masterpiece of a movie like Return of the King. The only thing that these two have in common are the fact that they are both movies, everything else is a complete wash for Return of the King.
Let's take a look, RotK is a fucking epic. Not only is it an epic, it's a movie that has to live up the universal hype and praise of the two predecessors, but it had the least amount of source material to work with as opposed to the other films. From the story, to the resolution, the the special effects, to the battle scenes, Return of the King has severe ownage over 300. 300 is nothing more then Frank Miller fan boy crap that was made into a film.
Let's take a look, RotK is a fucking epic. Not only is it an epic, it's a movie that has to live up the universal hype and praise of the two predecessors, but it had the least amount of source material to work with as opposed to the other films. From the story, to the resolution, the the special effects, to the battle scenes, Return of the King has severe ownage over 300. 300 is nothing more then Frank Miller fan boy crap that was made into a film.
Father:_Polley
Fun's my Chinese neighbour's name
300 is little more than a non-stop fight scene. There's no real meaningful story behind it, it's not a classic piece of literature, it's just a remake of a film that had been made before.
I watched this film and was left halfway through thinking 'Ok, they're still fighting, this is getting boring'. ROTK, while ridiculously long for my backside to have to contend with the less than ideal cinema seat, at least it left me interested and interupted the fighting with the main point of the story to keep it interesting.
Add to that the fact that the fights in ROTK were far more engaging than the constant inuendo of having topless men thrusting and hiding behind shields. It didn't get boring half as quickly as 300...just as well really, as there still would have been half a film to go.
I watched this film and was left halfway through thinking 'Ok, they're still fighting, this is getting boring'. ROTK, while ridiculously long for my backside to have to contend with the less than ideal cinema seat, at least it left me interested and interupted the fighting with the main point of the story to keep it interesting.
Add to that the fact that the fights in ROTK were far more engaging than the constant inuendo of having topless men thrusting and hiding behind shields. It didn't get boring half as quickly as 300...just as well really, as there still would have been half a film to go.
Monkey_Mania
I Am The One Who Knocks
I hate every single Lord Of The Rings movie ever made. I loved 300. Call me simple minded if you wish, but I loved it. To me it was far more entertaining. I can see why people hate the movie, but once again I loved it. I dont see why people loved LOTR though. Just never got into it. Another unpopular choice by Monkey, but I am going with 300 on this one. I know LOTR will win this match, but I dont care, please dont hate me.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
I'm taking 300 as well. LOTR to me is the epitome of nerds and fanboys hyping a movie to no end, and that is coming from a comicbook, cartoon, star wars and wrestling geek. There is one appealing thing in these films to me and that is Liv Tyler's beauty. Other than that, they are long, overdrawn, and too confusing to try to keep up with for 9 hours. 300 is good on many levels. Good lines, good plot, decent fighting, muscular men nearly naked, what's not to like?
Wow. Just wow. Did you just call Lord of the Rings the "biggest piece of overrated crap in the world" as a defense for the film 300?
ROFLMAO!!!!!
300 is the most overrated piece of shit ever created. How anyone over the age of 12 can watch that film and call it quality filmmaking is beyond me. Every single thing about that film is atrocious; the acting, the directing, the writing, the dialogue, the battles, the ending, the begining, the middle, the WHOLE FUCKING THING is just a GIANT train wreck. People who like this movie remind me of the people who like the movie The Butterfly Effect. They have no fucking clue of what makes a quality film, and think that the Butterfly Effect or 300 is what critics like. Wrong.
Wow. Just wow.
Let's see here....300....the most overrated film abortion to ever be created....or a film that won 10 Academy Awards. Wow, that's a toughie.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Simply no idea.
300 = The Boy Band of Cinema. All style and image, absolutely no substance.
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
The Lord of the Rings was a great story, and the trilogy captured that very well. What really struck me about the film was wow everything was played up. Mordor was built up to be this unbeatable empire that nothing could beat, the rest of Middle Earth had to band together and put their personal differences aside if they had any hope of survival. So the movie explored unity, and brotherhood working towards a common goal. This joined by a number of mini stoylines - Frodo and the Ring, Denethor and his corruption, Arwen and forbidden love to name a few- explores a number of different concepts.
300 is a good film and deserves to stand out on its own, at least for its historical value, but even with that importance I feel that it is outmatched here against LOTR. There is a reason why LOTR is so widely heralded and praised in so many categories, and in my opinion, the quality of the storyline, the acting, the plot devices speak for themselves
I vote Lord of the Rings
300 is a good film and deserves to stand out on its own, at least for its historical value, but even with that importance I feel that it is outmatched here against LOTR. There is a reason why LOTR is so widely heralded and praised in so many categories, and in my opinion, the quality of the storyline, the acting, the plot devices speak for themselves
I vote Lord of the Rings
I will have to go to Lord of The Rings. I am not just voting for The Return of the King, I am voting for all three together. I would pick the Fellowship of the Rings as my favorite from the set. Return of the King was impressive in so many ways, and they are ways that 300 is impressive. Both were movies I just knew I had to see in theaters, and both were movies I was impressed with. Lord of the Rings was just the Wrestlemania of the movies, while 300 was the Survivor Series. (Harry Potter I guess would be Summer Slam, and you can choose what is the Rumble) Everything that 300 did, Gladiator had done years before, or Lord of the Rings did to a better extent. I hope Lord of the Rings doesn't go down to a good, but not the great movie that 300 is.
My$terio_Fan
I can do whatever I want
300 is style of substance. People like 300's overall style and are voting for it. Either that or they just dont get LOTR, or don't like the magic aspects. 300 is a good movie, but it is not a Oscar winning film, nor does it stand up against LOTR. In a film aspect 300 has great art direction but lacks everything else. Even though I fell asleep through LOTR, because I hate the subject matter, 300's overall package just lacks too much for me to vote for it.
What is The Return Of The King on it's own? It's just the ending. If you take the whole series into account then obviously The Lord Of The Rings is far superior. But this film on it's own is nothing. It just doesn't make any sense.
300 is entertaining at the very least. Is ROTK if you've not watched the previous two instalments?
300 is entertaining at the very least. Is ROTK if you've not watched the previous two instalments?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Locked