10,000 BC=Terrible

[Groundbeef]

This movie sucked. I rented it on a whim from Netflix. Waste of time.

I enjoyed Apocalypto, and this was no Apocalypto.

The acting was sub-par, and the effects relied WAY too much on blue-screen/CGI.

It seemed to try and pull from other "historical" movies, and I'm pretty sure it took lines directly from The Last of the Mohicans. One is particular is the "I will find you" scene where Danial-Day Lewis left his love interest under the waterfall. I laughed out loud about that one.

Anyone else agree/disagree?

[Mr Peabody]

I liked it. I thought it was a pretty good story and like the mammoth hunt and giant ostriches. The soundtrack had some decent sound and effects too which gets some points. I haven't seen Apocolypto. Maybe I should put that on my list.

One hole for me was how Dulay could just sneak into and out of camp but the slaves never did. Maybe it was because they thought they were trapped between the ocean and the desert.

[emaidel]

The movie was awful. Just plain awful. And why was it that humans (who didn't exist at such a time period) spoke such flawless English? And, when coming across a tribe with one member who also spoke English asked, "How is it you speak our words?" Who writes this stuff, anyway?

[topspeed]

One of the worst movies I've seen. We just picked up a PS3 and wanted to test the BR capabilities so we rented it last night on a whim.

Ugh.

A couple of interesting observations:
* It's 10,000 BC but they speak perfect english
* Their captors have the ability to forge steel to make swords and cages...in 10,000b.c.
* Poetic, indeed inspiring, verbosity is displayed such as when one man attempts to draw his blade only to met with the stunning reply of: "Just Try it." Wow. Sends shivers down my back just thinking about it.
* Dr. Dolittle has time travelled to the past because apparently the lead can talk to the animals.

The list can go on and on, but I've lost enough of my life on this movie already. Let's just say as far as prehistoric movies go, this one was more accurate and certainly more entertaining.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a8/Caveman_Movie_Poster.jpg/410px-Caveman_Movie_Poster.jpg

[Mr Peabody]

Why would they have to speak broken english just because they are 10,000 years ago? They may have progressed past grunts and no one really knows what they spoke like. It's a movie not a PBS documentary. Why would anyone question the curiosity of wanting to know how some one speaks your language? If you went to the Amazon and some native walked up and started speaking english to you, you'd be a bit surprised too, I'd think. The bad guys were ahead of the curve, there's an incenuation they are from space and why would some one be building pyramids? I do have to wonder why there weren't any dinosaurs, maybe they came later in history. You all will be eating ostrich when this movie walks away with Academy awards. A bunch of arm chair critics I tell ya, I don't see how you enjoy any movie with all the dissecting. Oh, Batman is real.... but, oh my, we can't have the prehistoric guy speak english. Perhaps you'd be happier with subtitles. You ever wonder how prehistoric men characters or those who have been out wondering always have hair down to their butt yet some how manage to shave. Is it that they could cut their hair as well as shave but choose not to. Maybe long hair is more the norm and Crewcuts are the real rebels.

10,000 is awesome!

[Groundbeef]

Why would they have to speak broken english just because they are 10,000 years ago? They may have progressed past grunts and no one really knows what they spoke like. It's a movie not a PBS documentary. Why would anyone question the curiosity of wanting to know how some one speaks your language? If you went to the Amazon and some native walked up and started speaking english to you, you'd be a bit surprised too, I'd think. The bad guys were ahead of the curve, there's an incenuation they are from space and why would some one be building pyramids? I do have to wonder why there weren't any dinosaurs, maybe they came later in history. You all will be eating ostrich when this movie walks away with Academy awards. A bunch of arm chair critics I tell ya, I don't see how you enjoy any movie with all the dissecting. Oh, Batman is real.... but, oh my, we can't have the prehistoric guy speak english. Perhaps you'd be happier with subtitles. You ever wonder how prehistoric men characters or those who have been out wondering always have hair down to their butt yet some how manage to shave. Is it that they could cut their hair as well as shave but choose not to. Maybe long hair is more the norm and Crewcuts are the real rebels.

10,000 is awesome!


Well Mr Peabody, you have convinced me. The saying "There is no accounting for taste" is TRUE.

I'm glad you enjoyed the film.

BTW, when did dredlocks become the fashion dejour in caveman times?

[L.J.]

Well I'm glad somebody liked it :D

I just got this in from Netflix. I'll be sure to turn off my thinking cap before pressing play :lol:

[Mr Peabody]

Well Mr Peabody, you have convinced me. The saying "There is no accounting for taste" is TRUE.
I'm glad you enjoyed the film.

* LOL, thanks

BTW, when did dredlocks become the fashion dejour in caveman times?

* How do you know they weren't? Your basing your image on prior films. Do you think you had to be born in this century to think of dreds? Are you going to refuse to recognize Christ because he may not look like the painting depicting him as a European with long brown hair and a beard? Geez, man, you are a college grad, open your mind.

Keep in mind 10,000 may not be a literal number

[musicman1999]

I was willing to accept the English, after all its a movie but when he told the Sabertooth " If I free you, you must promise not to eat me" they lost me, went downhill after that.

bill

[nightflier]

When I said that 300 was just about as far from reality, I was blasted up and down for suggesting that this awesome, violent, and crude film could be anything but the epitome of movie making. Ahem, let's review: those pesky Spartans spoke perfect English too, fought monsters with mechanical arms, undying enemies, and animals twice their normal sizes. They also had perfectly shaved beards, perfect teeth, 24-hour Fitness physiques, stood 6-feet tall, and looked about as Greek as your average Englishman. Yeah, that's real. I remember the debate about how people going to see the film would know that this was a fantasy and not real history - OK, tell that to an impressionable teen-ager who doesn't even know how to read anymore....

_____

Well 10,000 BC was entertaining, but also far from realistic. Yes, you have to turn off part of your brain to be entertained by it, but then c'mon don't tell me any of you were expecting anything more from seeing the trailers or the movie posters? Not to repeat the inconsistencies already mentioned, but these animals were twice the size they were supposed to be, the "Egyptians" hadn't built any pyramids in 10,000 BC, even horse-riding and ship-building came much later, and I don't think I'm the only one who is a little doubtful that shamans can breathe life back into already dead people hundreds of miles away? If anyone thought this was going to be more than Disney-for-teens, then I suppose it's possible to be a tad disappointed. And let's remember that these teens, given the state of our public schools, believe that dinosaurs walked right along humans writing this "history" down on paper while they discussed it in perfect English, laughing about it with perfect teeth and hair, LOL.

All that being said, I thought the perspective that all the people were African was an interesting departure (even the blue-eyed girl could have been North-African). When's the last time an American/Hollywood movie came along and the whole cast was black/brown? I also thought that there were some powerful themes that were introduced: father-son relationships, superiority of one society over another, famine, diplomacy, monotheism, the purpose of life, agriculture, and man's relationship to the animals and plants around him. Yes, they are all very 21st century concepts, but maybe that's just a sign of the times. If you really want something to talk about, here's one that will bake your noodle: in the midst of all these very universal themes, maybe the fact that everyone had a deep dark natural tan, is presented as a harbinger of the world-community we are becoming?

This summer's blockbusters were mostly duds, so this movie was hardly much worse. To most college-educated people who saw fit to pay for it, it should have been at least entertaining. And to those who think this is "history"? Well they can stand in line to be the next contestant on The Tonight Show's JayWalk.

[Mr Peabody]

Maybe that's the difference, I never took the movie serious. I thought of it as like a Cohnan movie or something.

Look if you believe life can be breathed into some one, what's the difference if it's 5 inches or 5 miles? I personally have no problems letting that type of thing be part of the story, it's no different than Superman being able to stop a train.

Was the guy talking to the tiger, or was he just talking out loud to himself as he hoped not to be eaten? It's like that fable of the mouse who removes the thorn from the lion's paw. Hey! speaking of stealing......

[markw]

I wanna see it just to see Raquel Welch in a fur bikini. ;)

[kexodusc]

Oh, Batman is real.... but, oh my, we can't have the prehistoric guy speak english.
Ar.com comment of the year nominee!

I'm with you on this one Mr. P. I have to many (civil) arguments with my friends over movies where they criticize the historical accuracy or "believability" of certain elements of films. The style of guns used in war, the size of naval vessels, speaking english, explosions in space, etc. Or everything about Titanic. Gripe for the sake of gripe.

As far as I'm concerned there's an implicit requirement of suspension of disbelief when a movie is made to entertain, rather than educate, particularly when it comes with no guarantees or claims of accuracy. The concept has to be pretty flawed for disbelief to be too great to overcome, not just a bad plot or movie, but a flawed concept - where no director could save the film - I could count movies I've seen like that on one hand.

Speaking english I would consider a convenient necessity to deliver the film to the audience - you should pretend you speak caveman in this example. If you can't put yourself into "fiction mode", you probably shouldn't watch movies or you will undoubtedly find so many minor flaws that you'll ruin the experience for youself.

Haven't seen this one yet, but I found Apocamalyptimico to be vastly overrated and pre-judged 10,000 BC....maybe I'll give this a shot some afternoon...

[Groundbeef]

Ar.com comment of the year nominee!


Haven't seen this one yet, but I found Apocamalyptimico to be vastly overrated and pre-judged 10,000 BC....maybe I'll give this a shot some afternoon...

I hated the film.

The use of english was not an issue.

The poor acting, and TERRIBLE use of blue screen/CGI was the killer. The blue screen work was circa 1950's. Picture Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang quality. Without the help of a well written script, and good acting.

The "historical" problems were less of an issue. It was just a bad film trying to be like many others of the same genre. Except all the others were better. Way better.

[GMichael]

I wanna see it just to see Raquel Welch in a fur bikini. ;)

Isn't she about 100 by now?

[emaidel]

This summer's blockbusters were mostly duds,

You can't be serious. "Indiana Jones...," "Iron Man," "Wall-E," "Hancock" were all terrific films. Still to come is, at least from initial reviews in "Time" and "Newsweek," the"best" Batman film ever, along with numerous positive nods to "Hellboy-2."

[Feanor]

When I said that 300 was just about as far from reality, I was blasted up and down for suggesting that this awesome, violent, and crude film could be anything but the epitome of movie making. Ahem, let's review: those pesky Spartans spoke perfect English too, fought monsters with mechanical arms, undying enemies, and animals twice their normal sizes. They also had perfectly shaved beards, perfect teeth, 24-hour Fitness physiques, stood 6-feet tall, and looked about as Greek as your average Englishman. Yeah, that's real. I remember the debate about how people going to see the film would know that this was a fantasy and not real history - OK, tell that to an impressionable teen-ager who doesn't even know how to read anymore....

....

I was poo-hooed too because I said a lot ot the same stuff about 300. Really bad history and I didn't blame the Iranians for being offended by it. But I was told it was "only a comic book". Hey, comic book reality is all many people know or believe in.

[nightflier]

You can't be serious. "Indiana Jones...," "Iron Man," "Wall-E," "Hancock" were all terrific films. Still to come is, at least from initial reviews in "Time" and "Newsweek," the"best" Batman film ever, along with numerous positive nods to "Hellboy-2."

Indiana Jones? How formula does it have to be before people go, hmmmm, maybe I won't waste $18 +$10 for a pail of stale popcorn on that one. Can you honestly say that this was original in any way at all? Wall-E, been there, done that too. Doesn't it strike anyone as odd how similar Wall-E looks & sounds to ET? Yeah, real innovation, there. Hancock was another Will will save the world movie - if it wasn't for the occasional humor, it would be about as formula as all the other superhero movies. Special effects were more of the same too, although of the lot, it was probably the only one I'd pay matinee prices for.

Iron Man is the exception. But I was a huge fan of the comic book, so I'm a wee bit biased. I also have to give credit to RDJ for kicking the habit and getting his life back in order. But another perspective is that this film's originality was that the Iron Man comic strip was far less well known than your Supermans and Batmans, so any origin story for the main character would fly. And let's not forget that it too is still just as formulaic as every other superhero movie.

Batman? Well how many times do we have to see that story repeated? Batman Begins had an original premise, but now it's back to the original storyline with the villains. Don't be surprized if Mr. Freeze returns in Batman 8, or whatever number is next. And yes, Christian Bale makes a great batman (a better film for him is Equilibrium, BTW), Michael Caine never dissapoints (see The Quiet American, if you want to see good acting), Eckhart has his moments (see Thank you for Smoking), and this being Ledger's last film is unfortunate, but it's still the same formula movie with a big show-down at the end were our hero saves the world and vanquishes his nemesis. Doesn't this type of storyline get old? Granted, 10,000 BC had the same progression, but I still think it had some interesting themes.

Great actors are one thing, but you have to give them an interesting story - there's plenty of examples where academy award winning actors couldn't save a crappy story line. Of course, that's my opinion, and people will probably disagree, but that's why I'm not going to spend my money on it, and that's my choice. And if Time or Newsweek say otherwise, then I can only guess that they are lemmings too, or paid very well for their pseudo-critical endorsements.

[topspeed]

I hated the film.

The use of english was not an issue.

The poor acting, and TERRIBLE use of blue screen/CGI was the killer. The blue screen work was circa 1950's. Picture Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang quality. Without the help of a well written script, and good acting.

The "historical" problems were less of an issue. It was just a bad film trying to be like many others of the same genre. Except all the others were better. Way better.

Exactly.

I wasn't that bothered by the use of English, it was the script and the insufferable acting by the characters. I don't even care about the dinosaurs and/or lack thereof. What I have a problem with is a bad movie that absorbs two hours of my life that I'll never get back. If not for the comfort of my couch, I would have walked out on this thing in the theater. It was that bad!

I have no problem suspending disbelief at a movie, in fact one of my favorite quotes was from Mr. Apocalypto himself. When cornered by a reporter after voicing John Smith in Pocahontas, the historical accuracy of the movie was questioned. His response:
"Historical accuracy?!? There's a f**cking talking racoon in it!" :lol:

Nightflier can dive into the social significance of this all he wants, indeed I applaud his ability to pull that much resonance out of what is, by any measure, a turd. I don't need social commentary, I just want to be entertained. Perhaps I'm different, but once a movie crosses over to inanity, it's just pink noise.

[Kam]

i think these guys have taken their idea from Stargate (which i really enjoyed) and pounded into oblivion here. I had no problem with all the weirdness going on, i'm on board with the suspension of belief issues (which they did totally destroy in their other movie, Godzilla). but this team likes to make the big disaster flicks and summer blockbuster movies.

i think they're hit and miss to be honest, imo:
Stargate - fun!
Independence Day - fun!
Godzilla - one of the worst movies ever made.
The Patriot - gimme that 7 hours of my life back.
The Day After Tomorrow - HILARIOUS! fun!
10,000BC - eh. just a bad movie.

it just wasn't all that entertaining to me. it kinda dragged along, had some interesting points (that they already made in stargate) about aliens and all that jazz, but overall it just fell flat on the story for me.

[Mr Peabody]

AH SH*T!!!! I do have bad taste. I liked Godzilla too, in fact it's in my DVD rack. French Secret Service, love interest, action, what more could you want..... the acting wasn't that bad, it was a Godzilla movie. At least they weren't Asian actors with english over dubbed voices :)

[Mr Peabody]

Next I guess some one is going to trash 8 Legged Freaks!! Go ahead tell me there's not a Santa Claus too.

[Kam]

Next I guess some one is going to trash 8 Legged Freaks!! Go ahead tell me there's not a Santa Claus too.

hey i liked 8 legged freaks too! and arachnaphobia. and the best godzilla movies are the ones with the dubbed over english!

the best all time is the godzilla vs. king kong one, with ORSON WELLES! now THAT'S a classic :D

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You can't be serious. "Indiana Jones...," "Iron Man," "Wall-E," "Hancock" were all terrific films. Still to come is, at least from initial reviews in "Time" and "Newsweek," the"best" Batman film ever, along with numerous positive nods to "Hellboy-2."

Once again, there is no accounting for taste......or lack of it.

[bobsticks]

the best all time is the godzilla vs. king kong one, with ORSON WELLES! now THAT'S a classic :D

Oh Kam, Kam, Kam...tsk. The lizard and the monkey?

...I got one word for ya..."Mothra".





sticks

[Rich-n-Texas]

"I'm Batman" opens tomorrow!!! Gonna take the day off and see if I can't get into a theater early afternoon to catch it.

[L.J.]

I watched this last night and was pretty disappointed. I was really hoping for more prehistoric animal scenes. The tiger appeared for a whole 30 seconds. Same with the mammoths & the birds. Glad I didn't go to the theater to see this.

[Kam]

Oh Kam, Kam, Kam...tsk. The lizard and the monkey?

...I got one word for ya..."Mothra".





sticks

ohhh c'mon! Citizan Kane with Godzilla??? with that super thin wire that's stronger than anything??? that was such a great fun horrible movie!

:D

[Groundbeef]

I watched this last night and was pretty disappointed. I was really hoping for more prehistoric animal scenes. The tiger appeared for a whole 30 seconds. Same with the mammoths & the birds. Glad I didn't go to the theater to see this.

How did you like the blue/green screen work? Fantastic no? Really gave the impression that the actors were really in the mountains no?

[L.J.]

How did you like the blue/green screen work? Fantastic no? Really gave the impression that the actors were really in the mountains no?

After reading the reviews and thoughts here, I went in not expecting much. Background looked kinda washed in some scenes. I thought the CGI was just OK. The mammoths looked decent. I had mixed thoughts about the tiger. It looked OK sometimes but looked really bad at others. I thought the birds looked pretty good though. Too bad we didn't get much. No cave girl eye candy either :p

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00018D3ZA.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

[Groundbeef]

After reading the reviews and thoughts here, I went in not expecting much. Background looked kinda washed in some scenes. I thought the CGI was just OK. The mammoths looked decent. I had mixed thoughts about the tiger. It looked OK sometimes but looked really bad at others. I thought the birds looked pretty good though.

I was being sarcastic. The CGI was poor at best.

[bobsticks]

. No cave girl eye candy either...


This movie I shall not see.

[Worf101]

How'd Godzilla, Batman and King Kong get drawn into this fracas? LOL, great thread. I'm just sittin' here, munchin popcorn and watching this posts roll by.

Da Worfster

"This movie, I shall see it not."

[nightflier]

"This movie, I shall see it not."

Sticks & Worf = Vincent & Jules? There seems to be a connection there, methinks. But can Sticks dance?

By the way, it looks like Batman really shot to the top of the ratings this weekend, not to mention a ton or repeat viewers. Or is it just that people are so desperate for one decent movie this summer? To those who have seen it, is it as good or better than Iron Man?

[Woochifer]

Sticks & Worf = Vincent & Jules? There seems to be a connection there, methinks. But can Sticks dance?

By the way, it looks like Batman really shot to the top of the ratings this weekend, not to mention a ton or repeat viewers. Or is it just that people are so desperate for one decent movie this summer? To those who have seen it, is it as good or better than Iron Man?

Geez, if you hate summer movies so much, why not just quit forking more money over to the studios? :cool:

I don't know why you might think that people are going looking forward to The Dark Knight because they're "so desperate." The simplest reason why The Dark Knight is shaping up as the summer's biggest hit is because of the groundwork laid down by Batman Begins. I was looking forward to Batman Begins because I loved Christopher Nolan's directing and writing on Memento and Insomnia. But, on the whole, that movie was definitely not hugely anticipated when it opened three years ago, given that it had to overcome the decidedly negative stench left by Joel Schumacher's disastrous Batman & Robin.

In fact, industry pundits were calling Batman Begins a disappointment when its opening weekend box office numbers came in well behind some of that summer's other entries. But, Batman Begins had the highest Cinemascore audience rating of any movie that summer, which generated very positive word of mouth. Along with the critical acclaim, this word-of-mouth gave Batman Begins box office "legs" with relatively low week-to-week declines in ticket sales, and a relatively long theatrical run in which its box office take eventually passed most of the other movies from that summer with higher opening weekend numbers.

In addition, Batman Begins was a huge hit on DVD (and the biggest selling title on HD-DVD) and on cable TV. Regardless of the quality (or lack thereof) of the other summer blockbusters, The Dark Knight is a heavily anticipated release because the audience took a liking to its predecessor and wants more. Add the Oscar buzz (and macabre curiosity) surrounding the late Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker, nearly universal acclaim by film reviewers (94% composite rating on Rotten Tomatoes, second only to Wall-E among all movies released this summer), and some creatively done viral marketing, and you got the makings of a monster hit.

This movie has been on my watch list for the past two years, ever since principal photography began and the announcement that Heath Ledger would play the Joker. Wouldn't have mattered to me what month it came out, I was definitely going to catch it on the big screen. I don't think I'm alone in that either if you look at how the midnight and weekend showings for The Dark Knight began selling out a month ago.

[Mr Peabody]

So Wooch, can we assume you've seen it?

[Woochifer]

So Wooch, can we assume you've seen it?

Not yet. Don't need to see it on opening weekend ... waiting for the IMAX showings to simmer down a bit, since the weekend IMAX screenings in my area have been sold out for about two weeks.

[bobsticks]

Sticks & Worf = Vincent & Jules? There seems to be a connection there, methinks. But can Sticks dance?

Kewl. I'll play second fiddle to Worfster any day, though it should be noted that I am somewhat rhythmically challenged until a certain amount of gimlets are involved.

Hey Worf, you wanna Royale with cheese?

[nightflier]

Geez, if you hate summer movies so much, why not just quit forking more money over to the studios?

Maybe I'm being a little harsh on Batman's new lease on life. I've liked Christian Bale's screen presence well before he started wearing rubber suits, and yes, the rest of the big-name cast is impressive. What I'm getting at, though, and this isn't directed specifically at Batman, but more to all superhero movies of late, is the formula plot. Regardless of the plot lines in the first half of the movie, at some point things don't work out for the hero, then there is usually a lull with a rebuilding/introspection period in the early second half (kind of like the duct-tape sessions on the A-Team) and then things pretty much converge on a big all-out fight at the end where the hero wins all the goodies. Maybe this Batman movie does it better, but it still does it. It's almost as if there is no original progression anymore in action films. Why does everything have to follow that same sequence every time? Even with the best actors and directors, this has got to get routine after a while, no?

It kind of reminds me about my father's reaction to the European Cup that just concluded. I was pretty into it and starting telling my father about it with quite a bit of excitement. He let me go on for a good ten minutes about it and when I was done he patiently said: "all that fuss because some people were chasing a ball?" Considering how many hours I spent watching the tournament, he had a point.