10,000 B.C.

[Yxklyx]

Pyramids in 10,000 BC? Ugh.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0443649/

[Velocipedist]

Roland Emmerich = dreadful.

[MadMan]

I will probably go see this. It looks awesome, even if I expect cheesy dialogue and a rather cliche story. "HE....IS NOT A GOD!" sounds a lot like "THIS....IS....SPARTA!!!" :lol: The visuals appear to make this a solid rental and how long has it been since we had a really cool prehistoric film? The only thing its lacking is Racquel Welch but she's a bit old for this pictures. But man back in the day.....ah crap she still looks good even now.

[Spinal]

I would like to see more good B.C. films that aren't action/adventure based. I'd like to see something that would bore a teenager.

[Watashi]

Emmerich is my favorite guilty pleasure director. I don't think I've ever seen a bad film from him.

I'm seeing this opening night.

[DavidSeven]

I don't think I've ever seen a bad film from him.

Wait, what?

[Watashi]

Wait, what?

Love it.

[Watashi]

Granted, all his films would probably get **1/2 stars from me. I know they should go lower, but dammnit, his films are so illogically fun.

I can't wait to see how Emmerich destroys prehistoric New York in this one.

[lovejuice]

Wait, what?

i'll say, that's his only unforgivable sin.

[MadMan]

I would like to see more good B.C. films that aren't action/adventure based. I'd like to see something that would bore a teenager.

Why the hell would I want to go see something that would bore me? Movies are for entertainment. If you want a good history/science lesson go watch the Discovery or History Channels.

Love it.

:|

Although looking through his filmography I have to say with the exception of Godzilla I've enjoyed all of his films. So Wats does a have a point there that he's a good "guilty pleasure" director. Having seen four of his movies I'd have to say that he's a pretty mediocre director who's made some decent escapist cinema.

[Ezee E]

I'll agree with Wats. Other than Day After Tomorrow which is bad every way you look at it, the rest of his movies have exciting scenes to it that make it watchable in the end. As badly scripted as ID4 or Stargate is, they still work as an action movie.

Oh yeah, The Patriot... Well, I guess that makes two really bad ones.

[Ezee E]

Why the hell would I want to go see something that would bore me? Movies are for entertainment. If you want a good history/science lesson go watch the Discovery or History Channels.

I think he's referring to a more There Will Be Blood-ish approach instead of a balls-out action movie where people speak English.

I'm in support of that idea. It was a task to read it, but it'd be awesome to see Alan Moore's short story about a caveman put on film.

[Spinal]

Why the hell would I want to go see something that would bore me? Movies are for entertainment. If you want a good history/science lesson go watch the Discovery or History Channels.

Where did I say that I didn't want entertainment? Why are 'splosions considered a synonym for entertainment? I don't want a lesson. I want thoughtful, historically sound entertainment.

[MadMan]

I think he's referring to a more There Will Be Blood-ish approach instead of a balls-out action movie where people speak English.

I'm in support of that idea. It was a task to read it, but it'd be awesome to see Alan Moore's short story about a caveman put on film.

Ah, I see. That makes sense to me. And I actually think its been done maybe once before concerning prehistoric movies.

Where did I say that I didn't want entertainment? Why are 'splosions considered a synonym for entertainment? I don't want a lesson. I want thoughtful, historically sound entertainment.

Fare enough.

You no likey 'splosions? :P Why can't we combine the violence with the thoughtfullness and the historically soundness? Is that what your also saying? If so then yes I agree. Maybe the success of this film will lead to something like that. You can always dream.

I'm also hoping to see some of the prehistoric gigantic creatures like the big ass beavers, the woolly mammoths and the insanely large sloths. Why the hell everything was so big back then is behind me, but I find it to be pretty awesome and fascinating.

[lovejuice]

after much thought, i'll say, if anything, emmerich is much more talented than michael bay. their movies are similar; it's not hard to imagine emmerich tackles the subject of pearl harbour or bay doing global warming gone berserk. yet emmerich is not as sexist, racist, or lack sense of humor as bay is. he knows what he's doing, escapist fun, and never pretends or makes it otherwise.

[MadMan]

Despite it being really cheesy at times I actually defend Independence Day as a rock solid film. Its really a great mix of entertainment, great (if now dated) FX, sports a really sizable cast, and has Randy Quaid acting all crazy. Plus I'm one of the few who doesn't find Bill Pullman's speech annoying. I think its sort of stirring emotion wise.

PS: And I agree that Emmerich is a much, much better director than Bay. I think lovejuice hit the nail on the head as to why he is.

[lovejuice]

Despite it being really cheesy at times I actually defend Independence Day as a rock solid film. Its really a great mix of entertainment, great (if now dated) FX, sports a really sizable cast, and has Randy Quaid acting all crazy. Plus I'm one of the few who doesn't find Bill Pullman's speech annoying. I think its sort of stirring emotion wise.

ID4 is a lot of fun. at that time, i was very surprise by how vast the scope of this film was. it's about our first contact with aliens, how it almost conquers us, and how -- unrealistically -- we beat the crap out of it. imagine if the movie were made nowadays, greedy studio would want to break it into trilogy. epicize the shit out of something endearing in its simplicity/stupidity.

that's it. emmerich's anything but pretentious. (and when he is, say in the patriot, the outcome sucks.)

[DavidSeven]

Why can't we combine the violence with the thoughtfullness and the historically soundness?

Why does violence have to be involved at all?

[MadMan]

Why does violence have to be involved at all?

Well considering the prehistoric times were full of cavemen hunting and struggling to survive, wars between the early humans and the more evolved humans, different animals eating each other and such, yes violence is going to be involved. No those were happy times, full of hippies and flowers! :P

Honestly. If you want one constant thing throughout the years of human kind, its violence. One way or another.

[Morris Schæffer]

I think he's referring to a more There Will Be Blood-ish approach instead of a balls-out action movie where people speak English.

With Daniel-Day Lewis as a triceratops or velociraptor. And you just know he's going to be frighteningly convincing.

[Yxklyx]

With Daniel-Day Lewis as a triceratops or velociraptor. And you just know he's going to be frighteningly convincing.

He's better suited to a Mammoth - then we can see just how he intends to drink another man's milkshake from such a vast distance.

[EvilShoe]

The only Emmerich movie I've enjoyed so far is Universal Soldier.

The man needs to team up with Van Damme again.

[lovejuice]

With Daniel-Day Lewis as a triceratops or velociraptor. And you just know he's going to be frighteningly convincing.

with kate blanchett as a saber teeth.

[Barty]

This movie was insanely stupid.

[Qrazy]

Love it.

Yeah, I don't really understand the hate for that one. Granted it's bad but I just don't find anything in it worth loathing.