10,000 Bc

[The Shape]

It's easy the vote 1/10 for a movie when you're not entertained whatsover. This movie was lacking with the action, effects, story, and acting. Why give it a higher rating if a person didn't like it at all?

 

[Jerry!]

This was MST3K style bad. And those were the worst of the worst movies so in that sense, this was a pretty big achievement.

 

[X-Maniac]

The bad acting really irritated the **** out of me. I can almost tolerate it if the plot wasn't all crazy; poorly put together costumes and sets. I usually have a lot of respect for child actors, but I swear I wanted to throw something at the screen which was so pulled from 300, but made me cringe. It was rushed and poorly choreographed

What was wrong with the costumes and sets? And what does 'the plot was all crazy' mean?

Can you come back and make sense this time!?

 

[X-Maniac]

I know, I was talking about people who vote 1/10 But I do agree with the acting being stiff. And it seemed every village had a dirty shayman I hated 'old mother' and the narrator made me want to leave. But other than that, this movie could have been great. Loved the mammoths, loved the new take on Egypt, loved the cracked out ostriches, but the sabretooth was a bit lame.

I never gave it a 1 or a 10. But it did entertain me and the visuals were stunning. Shots like the valley full of mist near the beginning, the mammoths, the sailing ships going down the Nile, the shots of the pyramids - all were stunning. The effects were excellent.

By the way, they weren't 'cracked out ostriches', they were giant predatory birds called Titanis which, at one point, were believed to exist around 10000BC, though it's now believed they died out before that. Not that dates matter, this was a prehistoric fable.

I wanted more creatures, to energise the pacing later in the film.

I'm totally aware of accurate prehistory yet I was able to enjoy this movie. The mammoths looked totally real, as though right there on screen. The sabretooth slightly less convincing, but excellent nonetheless. Everyone flinched when it leapt forward in the pit, as though going to attack D'Leh, and that signifies that the FX worked or it wouldn't have had that reaction.

People have to enter into the spirit of the movie. Maybe I'm more skilled and experienced at this, having been introduced to prehistoric/mythical creatures through the stop-motion animation of Harryhausen in films from long ago. I suspect it's the younger generation who lack the means to suspend disbelief - if they aren't whacked out on E or God-knows-what to find pleasure, then they're cynical of everything.

 

[tzarinna]

What was wrong with the costumes and sets? And what does 'the plot was all crazy' mean?

Can you come back and make sense this time!?

Let's not get nasty, someone asked my opinion so I gave it.
You liked it and I didn't, I'll not convince you other wise and vise versa.

 

[hammerhedd11]

I never gave it a 1 or a 10. But it did entertain me and the visuals were stunning. Shots like the valley full of mist near the beginning, the mammoths, the sailing ships going down the Nile, the shots of the pyramids - all were stunning. The effects were excellent.

By the way, they weren't 'cracked out ostriches', they were giant predatory birds called Titanis which, at one point, were believed to exist around 10000BC, though it's now believed they died out before that. Not that dates matter, this was a prehistoric fable.

I wanted more creatures, to energise the pacing later in the film.

I'm totally aware of accurate prehistory yet I was able to enjoy this movie. The mammoths looked totally real, as though right there on screen. The sabretooth slightly less convincing, but excellent nonetheless. Everyone flinched when it leapt forward in the pit, as though going to attack D'Leh, and that signifies that the FX worked or it wouldn't have had that reaction.

People have to enter into the spirit of the movie. Maybe I'm more skilled and experienced at this, having been introduced to prehistoric/mythical creatures through the stop-motion animation of Harryhausen in films from long ago. I suspect it's the younger generation who lack the means to suspend disbelief - if they aren't whacked out on E or God-knows-what to find pleasure, then they're cynical of everything.

It has nothing to do with suspending belief. It has to do with the terrible dialogue, the horrid pacing and the laughable acting. Y'know people can be entertained by good movies.

 

[블라스]

hammerhedd: Oy! That's exactly what's been on my mind!
The idea itself is very cool...what with the tribes and early civilizations and all that
I think people with half a brain know that this is not meant to be a historical documentary or something like that. In fact, I'd go as far as to call it a "fantasy" movie
It's just that the actual movie sucked so bad
A movie with a setting like this can be good, I mean...hello....

Spoiler

Cheesy? Sure.
Fun? Hell yeah.
Boring, stupid and annoying? Nope.

Poster above hammerhedd: It's got nothing to do with "suspending disbelief", guy...
And playing the "age" card is lame. I'm 28, so of course I've seen the great Harryhausen films, but I have friends in their late teens or early 20's that love classic films, are not "wacked out" on anything and still hated this POS movie.

 

[Hobgoblin]

How about we just say it was a bad movie?

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

So voting 10/10, this is one of the best movies you've ever seen? There is a difference between saying a movie is enjoyable and voting it as one of the best movies of all time, which is basically what you have done here.

Did i SAY it was one of the best movies i've ever seen?

No.

I said i enjoyed the hell out of it, hence the 10/10.

You want to make a thread about people's top films, then no, this movie wouldnt be on that list. But i still had a good time watching it.

 

[X-Maniac]

It has nothing to do with suspending belief. It has to do with the terrible dialogue, the horrid pacing and the laughable acting. Y'know people can be entertained by good movies.

They were in a no-win with the dialogue. Either you have primeval grunting with subtitles, or you have a sort of fantasy version of primitive language. I don't think you could expect brilliant or smart dialogue when it was about primitive peoples. The acting was fine too. Steven Strait was very watchable and believable.

The pacing dipped a bit during the walk through the desert and just after that. Until then it was fine, and it did pick back up again. It needed a creature attack in the desert, something to step it up a bit.

I loved the attack by the Titanis 'terror birds', which several people of low intelligence have called killer chickens or whatever.

 

[X-Maniac]

hammerhedd: Oy! That's exactly what's been on my mind!
The idea itself is very cool...what with the tribes and early civilizations and all that
I think people with half a brain know that this is not meant to be a historical documentary or something like that. In fact, I'd go as far as to call it a "fantasy" movie

It was a fantasy movie. You don't have to 'go as far' as calling it fantasy, it actually was fantasy. It's no great revelation that this was fantasy. Any numbskull could figure that one out. It took liberties with ancient history but that wasn't the point.

Poster above hammerhedd: It's got nothing to do with "suspending disbelief", guy... And playing the "age" card is lame. I'm 28, so of course I've seen the great Harryhausen films, but I have friends in their late teens or early 20's that love classic films, are not "wacked out" on anything and still hated this POS movie.

Don't try to pull the wool over my eyes. At 28 you wouldn't be part of the generation that grew up on much simpler technology such as the Harryhausen stop-motion. You were born in 1980. Harryhausen's last movie was Clash of the Titans in 1981, so you'd be aged one when that was released and wouldn't even remember it. You'd have caught up with his work much later.

If you didn't like the movie, fair enough, but don't try to come up with feeble validations.

Suspension of disbelief is a phrase meaning you have to buy into the basic concept of the movie, especially if it has fantastical elements. No one can deny that those mammoths looked totally real, that the pyramids and sailing ships looked wonderful, that the landscape and visuals were amazing. The story was just a typical myth/fable which I found no worse than any other myth or legend from ancient times.

 

[X-Maniac]

How about we just say it was a bad movie?

We? Do you have collective thoughts?

Well, I have my own mind and I don't think it was a bad movie. Sort of Apocalypto meets Stargate.

 

[블라스]

It was a fantasy movie. You don't have to 'go as far' as calling it fantasy, it actually was fantasy. It's no great revelation that this was fantasy. Any numbskull could figure that one out. It took liberties with ancient history but that wasn't the point.

It is the point when people say such things as "Duh, it's not meant to be realistic, you didn't get it, this movie rules!".

Don't try to pull the wool over my eyes. At 28 you wouldn't be part of the generation that grew up on much simpler technology such as the Harryhausen stop-motion. You were born in 1980. Harryhausen's last movie was Clash of the Titans in 1981, so you'd be aged one when that was released and wouldn't even remember it. You'd have caught up with his work much later.

Yeah, because it's impossible to see movies that were made before you were born...if only there was some kind of device that would let you play these ancient movies in the comfort of your own home!
Hahaha are you serious? Of course I "caught up with his work much later", just like I enjoyed several movies that were made in the 30's, 40's, 50's, etc....you get the point. I'm not part of your holy generation of the Golden Era of Cinema, but I can still appreciate a classic movie, or an entertaining one. IMO, 10,000 B.C. was neither....it was just bad filmmaking.

If you didn't like the movie, fair enough, but don't try to come up with feeble validations.

I can just say: If you liked the movie, fair enough, but don't try to come up with feeble validations.

Suspension of disbelief is a phrase meaning you have to buy into the basic concept of the movie, especially if it has fantastical elements. No one can deny that those mammoths looked totally real, that the pyramids and sailing ships looked wonderful, that the landscape and visuals were amazing. The story was just a typical myth/fable which I found no worse than any other myth or legend from ancient times.

The effects were great for the most part, yup.

 

[X-Maniac]

It is the point when people say such things as "Duh, it's not meant to be realistic, you didn't get it, this movie rules!".

Then forget those people. As long as you're not using the 'inaccurate history' or 'dude, they spoke English!' arguments.

I can still appreciate a classic movie, or an entertaining one. IMO, 10,000 B.C. was neither....it was just bad filmmaking.

How was it 'bad film-making'? What are your criteria?

I can just say: If you liked the movie, fair enough, but don't try to come up with feeble validations.

Well, when people talk about carnivorous chickens and mutant dodos, then I have to step in with a correction. There's no excuse for ignorance.

The effects were great for the most part, yup.

Okay, and since the dialogue was never going to be smart slick dialogue from a modern courtroom drama movie if it was some kind of pseudo-primeval language, then we can dismiss the complaint that they spoke in English. Storywise, it was obviously a myth or fable with the typical elements of a prophecy, quest, etc, so we can dismiss complaints about that. That doesn't leave that much that's so wrong with the movie. I think it pretty much does what's expected. The high point is the visuals - the scenery and the FX. I wasn't expecting a Discovery Channel documentary or The Godfather or Atonement.

 

[Hobgoblin]

We? Do you have collective thoughts?

Well, I have my own mind and I don't think it was a bad movie. Sort of Apocalypto meets Stargate.

Sorry, that was directed at the people that were saying it was bad, but were arguing over HOW bad it was.

 

[블라스]

Then forget those people. As long as you're not using the 'inaccurate history' or 'dude, they spoke English!' arguments.

Yeah, I wasn't planning on using those arguments

How was it 'bad film-making'? What are your criteria?

Well...when a movie has bad acting, poorly shot action scenes (well, Tic Tic's fight was pretty cool), horrible lines, lame attempts at comedy and when it annoys the piss out of me, I'd consider it bad filmmaking, yeah.
It just has that horrible "We made it PG-13 so that we could reach a bigger demographic" MTV-style vibe.

Well, when people talk about carnivorous chickens and mutant dodos, then I have to step in with a correction. There's no excuse for ignorance.

Yeah, I don't know what you're talking about here.

Okay, and since the dialogue was never going to be smart slick dialogue from a modern courtroom drama movie if it was some kind of pseudo-primeval language, then we can dismiss the complaint that they spoke in English. Storywise, it was obviously a myth or fable with the typical elements of a prophecy, quest, etc, so we can dismiss complaints about that. That doesn't leave that much that's so wrong with the movie. I think it pretty much does what's expected. The high point is the visuals - the scenery and the FX. I wasn't expecting a Discovery Channel documentary or The Godfather or Atonement.

Hahaha whoever complainted that the movie was in English is missing the point. Pretty much every action adventure film set in ancient times (fantasy oriented or realistic) has been in English (LOTR, Gladiator, Conan, Troy, Krull, etc, etc, etc). Sure, there's been exceptions (Apocalypto and Quest for Fire), but that's not what we're talking about here.

Also, countless movies have done the prophecy schtick, with much better results.

And finally....I'm pretty sure no one was expecting a "Discovery Channel documentary or The Godfather or Atonement". I sure as hell wasn't.
What I was expecting was a kickass movie about cavemen, mammoths, saber-toothed cats, etc.
I didn't get it.

 

[chaseter]

It's easy the vote 1/10 for a movie when you're not entertained whatsover. This movie was lacking with the action, effects, story, and acting. Why give it a higher rating if a person didn't like it at all?

Voting 1/10 is childish and a jab for attention IMO. It is not a true representation for anything. You got pissed, didn't like it, and said it completely sucked. There are hardly few movies that hit the silver screen that should be deemed 1/10 like 'From Justin to Kelly,' and 'Santa Claus Conquers the Martians'. Those are truly bad movies. No this movie is not perfect, far from it, but it had some good CGI, some good cinematography, some good set pieces, and some good suspense is some scenes. I have ranted about 1/10's before but I guess people still love to try and make a sad statement than sit down and actually analyze the movie on the whole.

 

[The Shape]

Voting 1/10 is childish and a jab for attention IMO. It is not a true representation for anything. You got pissed, didn't like it, and said it completely sucked. There are hardly few movies that hit the silver screen that should be deemed 1/10 like 'From Justin to Kelly,' and 'Santa Claus Conquers the Martians'. Those are truly bad movies. No this movie is not perfect, far from it, but it had some good CGI, some good cinematography, some good set pieces, and some good suspense is some scenes. I have ranted about 1/10's before but I guess people still love to try and make a sad statement than sit down and actually analyze the movie on the whole.

I have sat down and analyzed the movie if you read back pages. There's no such thing as a "truly bad movie". It's all opinion. All the things you said you liked about 10,000 BC are your opinion, not fact, and they are also some of the things I didn't like, which is why you can't get on someone's case for voting a movie you liked a 1/10.

IMO, you're the one who's being childish here...

 

[The Shape]

Well, when people talk about carnivorous chickens and mutant dodos, then I have to step in with a correction. There's no excuse for ignorance.

Whether it was carniverous chickens, mutant dodos, ostriches, turkeys, people dressed up as birds, or dinosaurs, the fact remains: that scene was still lame.

 

[X-Maniac]

Whether it was carniverous chickens, mutant dodos, ostriches, turkeys, people dressed up as birds, or dinosaurs, the fact remains: that scene was still lame.

Wrong. The 'fact' doesn't remain. It's your opinion that remains. I liked that sequence with the predatory birds, it had great suspense and brought energy to that part of the movie. What was so 'lame' about it? What didn't you like?

 

[Poeman]

How about we just say it was a bad movie?

this movie is like taking a long piss and not enjoying it

 

[Figs]

LOL, I'm going to have to see this now just because all of this back and forth arguing.

 

[The Shape]

Wrong. The 'fact' doesn't remain. It's your opinion that remains. I liked that sequence with the predatory birds, it had great suspense and brought energy to that part of the movie. What was so 'lame' about it? What didn't you like?

Just as it's your opinion that people low intelligence they haven't studied the birds featured in this movie, or taken the time to look them up.

And what was so lame? Let's just say there was basically no suspense -- it was the same scene that we've been exposed to in COUNTLESS other films, which all did it better. "Oh, gee! A group of random animals are attacking our dread-locked heroes! Are they gonna make it? I'd assume so because the movie just started...". Also, the birds did not look real whatsoever, just as half the other animals in the movie didn't.

 

[chaseter]

I have sat down and analyzed the movie if you read back pages. There's no such thing as a "truly bad movie". It's all opinion. All the things you said you liked about 10,000 BC are your opinion, not fact, and they are also some of the things I didn't like, which is why you can't get on someone's case for voting a movie you liked a 1/10.

IMO, you're the one who's being childish here...

If it is opinion then, why don't you accept that some people liked it instead of hanging around here bashing on it?

This movie was more than just bad acting and if you can't see that then IMO you have no taste in movies. This movie was not good no, but it wasn't one of the world's worst movie which is what a 1/10 is.

 

[X-Maniac]

And what was so lame? Let's just say there was basically no suspense -- it was the same scene that we've been exposed to in COUNTLESS other films, which all did it better. "Oh, gee! A group of random animals are attacking our dread-locked heroes! Are they gonna make it? I'd assume so because the movie just started...". Also, the birds did not look real whatsoever, just as half the other animals in the movie didn't.

I thought it did have great suspense. And just as with any action sequence in any movie with an established set of characters, you know deep down they will make it through the sequence. Very few movies have genuine shock deaths and lasting consequences and those that do (X-Men The Last Stand, Bridge to Terabithia) get bashed for it. But your criticism isn't valid - did we really expect Superman to die in SR when he fell to earth and lay in that hospital bed? No, we knew he'd make it. But, here we are listening to your lame, asinine 'Dudez, dere's noo suspenze. dis flik suxor.' Zzzzzzz. Get some sex and lighten up!

I thought the birds did look real, and so did the mammoths. I thought the sabretooth was a few per cent off being totally convincing, but it was still excellent.

Your problem, or at least one of them, is that you're knowing it's CGI and saying 'Oh no, it's CGI, it can't be real therefore it isn't real therefore I'm not convinced.' The same is said with most movies where there is CGI or even prosthetics. It's like those absurd criticisms of Hulk - 'It's CGI, boohoo, wahhhh, it's not real.' As if the director was supposed to put out a casting call for a 15ft green goliath.

Seriously, get a grip. Watch some older movies like the Harryhausen classics, see what passed for magnificent effects decades ago, then look at what can be achieved today and just learn some gratitude rather than being some pissy little bedroom Gameboy who finds it soooooo easy to criticise.