300? I Just Don't Know

So there's this new movie out, you've probably heard of it: 300. It's about the 300 Spartans who "single"-handedly defended Greece against the million-man army of Persia under Xerxes around 480 B.C. There's the story line. Now, the movie is ostensibly based on a graphic novel of the same name, but we can safely assume that the graphic novel is "based" on the account in Herodotus, the Greek historian. So we have a movie based on a graphic novel based on an ancient history based on some primary sources.

If I can overlook all the historical confusion the movie might cause (let's say the movie is only related to an ancient account in that we know about the "event" that the movie claims to reflect through an ancient source - there is no relationship beyond that, and no such claim is made, so far as I know), I think my main problem is that the movie attempts to recreate the graphic novel in mood and cinematography, and consequently we are left with a rather flat, cartoonish movie. The narration is perfect for those little rectangular boxes in the corner of the frames, but is bland and uninteresting as a film technique. When a few thousand Persian soldiers get hacked up, slashed open, and impaled, we hear sounds like "splat," "squirt," and "crunch" - Batman tv series, anyone? Kapow! Oh, and these sounds are all accompanied by the blood splatters that decorate the movie logo.

I'm still trying to decide if I can like this movie. I certainly didn't enjoy watching it, but maybe I'll figure out that I just didn't get it the first time around, and eventually I'll learn that I should think it's a good movie (usually, this approach just leaves me more convinced that the movie's not a very good one). I'd be interested to hear what other "real" people thought of it, but mostly I can only find these "film critics" and their gushing reviews, so that just makes me feel more like I'm better than this movie.