300 Accoding to yash

I just don't know where to begin. There are just so many people voicing their opinions about the movie and so many different opinions on it that its not easy to be original. I am trying to think what are people who are reading this, trying to get from this.. But me being an aspiring animator and also knowing a lot about sfx, I am basically gonna be looking at the technical/visual aspects. Also, the thing that I heard last night in the 4th year animation studio is gonna help me guide myself through this.

So, lets begin. I will start with what's most obvious first. The film employs a lot of use of the particle system. With the start of the movie, you see extravagant and totally 'out there' depiction of snowfall. Its moving even when the rest of the frame is still. Nothing could make it look more fake. No hint of any attempt at simulating it to look natural. The film makers wanted it that way. Maybe to keep it easy for the sfx team. Yes, there are a lot of cutting corners. And by the way, whatever I just said about snow, also goes for the fire thingys. the little sparks.. I am not exactly sure if that's the accurate word for it. Flares? fiery specks? Oh well, never mind.

Next thing I'm gonna talk about is in the movie logo too, perhaps you have noticed it. (if you're not colour blind that is!) I'm talking about the blood splatter! There's just so much splatter when they're in combat, cutting people's limbs and heads but I didn't see that much blood actually flowing or accumulated anywhere. When you say bloodbath, you expect to see people covered with blood but that was hardly the case. People with arrows through their bodies or stuff are totally clean and the wounds surprisingly don't seem to be bleeding at all! In almost every scene, the backdrop or the ground is totally clear of any blood. What the heck?!!!

I suppose there's just one more thing to say, The backgrounds. In certain scenes, they actually had depth to them and had depth and were awesome! But in other places, there just didn't seem to be any connection of the background to the actors and people. One case in point, a scene where the kind is giving a speech...(yeah right that's so exact!) oh, well, I don't remember what he's saying in that particlar scene, but the camera pans with him and one part is a blue stone wall and the other, you see the orange sky. THAT particular sky looked as it it was painted and put back there. There was no suggestion by means of the lighting on the king or the army there that said that they're in the same place. Now if you get what I mean and agree, well and good. If you don't, I don't give a damn so don't comment.