What was 300's overall rating, star-wise?
How did it do in the box-office?

The ratings will naturally vary from reviewer to reviewer.
Below are a few I found.

RottenTomatoes.com
62%
62%
Reviews Counted: 190
Fresh: 117 Rotten: 73
Average Rating: 6.2/10

imdb.com
User Rating: 7.9/10 (98,397 votes)
User Comments:

This movie was a pleasure for the eye.

I have been at the World Premiere of 300 in Berlin where I watched this fantastic movie – a movie not only for MEN! I got sucked in from the very first moment!

After seeing a 99% complete 300 at a 24 hour film festival i was amazed by the accuracy and beauty before my eyes.This film is an adaptation of Frank Miller's (Sin City) graphic novel 300 and wow is it ever accurate

Much worse than the trailer

One of the Best So-Stupid-It's-Funny Movies of the Year!!!

300 takes itself so seriously that it becomes hilarious.


New York Times
“300” is about as violent as “Apocalypto” and twice as stupid. Adapted from a graphic novel by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, it offers up a bombastic spectacle of honor and betrayal, rendered in images that might have been airbrushed onto a customized van sometime in the late 1970s.

Los Angeles Times [Kenneth Turan]
Once the newness of "300's" look wears off, which it inevitably does, what we are left with is a videogame come to life.

The Village Voice [Nathan Lee]
At once homophobic and homoerotic, 300 is finally, and hilariously, just hysterical.

Rolling Stone [Peter Travers]
And fanboys will thrill to the carnage and presumably forgive the puffed-up dialogue and regrettable lack of characterization. 300 is a movie blood-drunk on its own artful excess. Guys of all ages and sexes won't be able to resist it.
*************************
I'll pass. - DG

Roger Ebert's Review gave it four stars. While I often disagree with Ebert's fine points, I appreciate that his perspective is one of a movie's enjoyability. My selection is often based on whether the Mrs. and I will enjoy seeing it together and I, too, will likely pass on "300."

As of April 22 the estimated box office was at $204,657,000 (domestic) and $203,500,000 (international), a total of $408,157,000 worldwide, according to www.boxofficemojo.com.

Fuse, the review you linked to is that of Richard Roeper, not Roger Ebert. When I posted earlier, I tried to find Ebert's review (I generally agree with him), but failed.

Ebert is recovering from cancer of the salivary glands. He'll be reviewing again soon, but he has been out of commission for months.

It is definitely NOT the Citizen Kane of graphic novels. That's just stupid. Watchmen by Alan Moore would be a better choice for that comparsion - not sure when that will be made into a movie... 300 is NOT even comparable to Citizen Kane. Roeper is a dummy.

I enjoyed the movie but found some parts very irritating - how many close ups of arm hair can we endure in one movie? Okay, how about chest hair and sweat?

There were some beautifully composed frames, and the effects were amazing, but the story... oh the story... not the best IMO. It was a good show and very entertaining but something was a bit weird about it.