Print Page | Close Window

DINO DOO-DOO??

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: FORUMS on NON-NOMINATED 2008 RELEASES w/LYNX!
Forum Name: 10,000 B. C.
Forum Discription: So What Does the "B.C." Stand For -- Basically Crummy? Bad Cat?? Brainless Cro-Magnons???
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2546
Printed Date: October 24 2014 at 10:20am


Topic: DINO DOO-DOO??
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: DINO DOO-DOO??
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 2:57am

"I DON'T LIKE MAMMOTHS and SNAKES, and THAT AIN'T WHAT IT TAKES..."

POSSIBLY 2008's SILLIEST WORST REMAKE or RIP-OFF CONTENDER, http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=261&PN=1 - 10,000 B.C. RIPS OFF ITS BASIC RIFF from the  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032871/ - 1940 CAROLE LANDIS and 1966 http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000079/ - RAQUEL WELCH VERSIONS of  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060782/ - ONE MILLION B.C. -- DRESS YOUR MAIN CHARACTERS in TOO-SMALL ANIMAL SKINS, HAVE 'EM CHASED by BEHEMOTH BEASTIES...and THROW in a LITTLE NEANDERTHAL NOOKIE for GOOD MEASURE. IT DOES, HOWEVER, GO THOSE PREVIOUS VERSIONS ONE BETTER (or "WORSER"??) by ALSO RIPPING OFF BATTLE SCENES from http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Ah-Nuld&btnG=Search+Razzies.com&domains=razzies.com&sitesearch=razzies.com - AH-NULD's RAZZIE® NOMINATED http://www.imdb.com/find?s=tt&q=Conan&x=12&y=9 - CONAN MOVIES.  THROW ALL THESE ELEMENTS in YOUR PRE-HISTORIC POT, and YOU'VE GOT the MAKINGS of a POTENTIAL STONE-AGE LAUGH RIOT.

NOW, USE THOSE PRE-HENSILE TOOLS YOU'VE CARVED for YOURSELF and GET BIZZY BASHING BIG BAD CAVEMAN and HIS SUPER-SIZED CGI PALS... 

RUNNING DUDE: "Get this precinct captain off my ass -- There's NO WAY I'll vote Republican in 2008 A.D. !!!!"

 



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 5:59am

My understanding is that this was supposed to be a holiday release in 2007, but was pushed back to March 2008 for one of the usual lame reasons provided when one of the major studios decides to bury a projected blockbuster that turns into a stinker. I'll probably see it just because the mammoths look cool in the previews, but the guess is that this one will be as extinct as saber-tooted tigers before the Easter Bunny makes his rounds.

ADDENDUM: Three quick points--first, this one wasn't previewed for critcs. As we all know, that is a major red flag.

Second, Omar Shariff is actually making an appearance in this film. Evidently, he can't make it on social security checks these days.

Finally, this film is brought to you by the same people who turned Art Bell and Whit Strieber's book The Day After Tomorrow into a movie. For those not familiar with those two gentlemen, Art Bell used to be the host of the popular overnight Coast to Coast radio show that allowed the credulous a forum to discuss Martians and Bigfoot and other urban legend nonsense. Whitley Strieber was making a modest living selling fictional tales about werewolves until he found he could make a barrel of money selling books about his alleged personal experiences as an alien abductee. On the whole, his werewolf books were more credible.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 7:39am
I think it might be good.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 7:59am

Mea Culpa: I am reminded that Bell and Strieber's book was entitled The Coming Global Superstorm. The movie The Day After Tomorrow was inspired by the book. Personally, I don't draw much distinction between the fictional movie and the supposedly non-fiction book. Neither of the authors has any particular scientific training, let alone specific expertise in climatology, atmospheric sciences or planetary sciences.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 11:38am
Overall, I think this is going to be a big budget disaster for Roland. As previously mentioned since almost all of Roland's movies have been aimed at Summer/Holiday blockbuster status and to have it moved to March means that something stinks in New Zealand (as opposed to Denmark, this movie was made in New Zealand), Plus to date (with the exception of Ice Age) all the beginning before time movies have done poorly in the box office. I really do not see this being any different.

-------------
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 2:37pm
Yeah, I'm not looking forward to this because of it's pre-historic style. I'm usually biased towards these films.

-------------


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: March 03 2008 at 2:43pm
Well, here's one person hoping for a B.C. that had NOTHING to do with
Johnny Hart!


Posted By: ramsde
Date Posted: March 05 2008 at 7:28am
I hope this will do good, but then again the leading man (Steven Strait) was in "The Covenant" (one of the most terrible movies ever) and the leading girl (Camille Bell, I believe her name is) was in the remake of "When A Stranger Calls" (dreadful remake). I hope that this movie won't be like "Pathfinder" just with good special effects, but I can't shake the feeling. Well I will find out soon enough on this weekend just how good or bad this movie is and then I will give my verdict.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: March 05 2008 at 12:14pm

I actually liked When a Stranger Calls and The Covenant. People are being too harsh on The Covenant when it tries to be fun and cheesy, in a good way.



Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: March 06 2008 at 7:18am

...we know Moviewizguy -- just like John Wilson was being too harsh on Mommie Dearest for it's "Dramatic Unappeal" and "Unintentionally funny dialogue and over the top acting" by our favorite wire-hanger-wielding star, Faye Dunaway!!

 



-------------
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 07 2008 at 3:15pm

*thrashes ITbeast with a coat hanger*

If I've told you once, I've told you a million times. NO WIRE HANGERS ON THIS SITE -- EVER!!!!!!!!!  

 



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: March 07 2008 at 4:45pm

....I'm sorry Mommie, It will never happen again

...at least for now!



-------------
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: March 08 2008 at 6:11am
Well, I think we have found our Razzie front runner for 2008...This movie is getting totally raked over the coals over at http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10000_bc/ - RT  , with an approval rating right now of...a whooping 08%!!!.

-------------
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger


Posted By: phe_de
Date Posted: March 09 2008 at 2:08am
Well, this looks bad.

I usually enjoy Emmerich movies, but 10.000 B.C. was not great. I'm not sure if it was as bad as "Battlefield Earth", but it's not far off.

This is Razzie material, I guess. 8% at Rottentomatoes, and a disappointing Box Office so far... However, the year is still young, and I'd guess there will be more movies to come out that will make 10.000 B.C. look like "The Matrix."




-------------
Everything is possible, and nothing is sure.


Posted By: bruin_522
Date Posted: March 16 2008 at 9:52am

Here's the following films Roland Emmerich has done: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089378/ - Joey (1985), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093201/" name=director1980>Hollywood-Monster (1987), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097910/ - Moon 44 (1990), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105698/ - Universal Soldier (1992), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111282/ - Stargate (1994), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116629/ - Independence Day (1996)-Oscar Winner for Best Visual Effects, also RAZZIE nominated for Worst Written Film Grossing Over $100 Million, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120685/" name=director1990>Godzilla (1998)-RAZZIE 'Winner' for Worst Supporting Actress and Worst Remake or Sequel*-Emmercih received Worst Director RAZZIE nod, and Worst Screenplay RAZZIE nod, not to mention that it was also a Worst Picture contender, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0187393/ - The Patriot (2000), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/ - The Day After Tomorrow (2004), and now this http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443649/" name=director2000>10,000 B.C. (2008). Plus, he has two more films in pre-production: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1190080/ - 2012 (2009) and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1087521/" name=directorinp>Fantastic Voyage (2010).

*Tied with http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118661/ - The Avengers (1998) and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0155975/ - Psycho (1998) for that award.



Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 17 2008 at 11:36am

A few random thoughts on the above list:

Stargate: The with possible exception of The Matrix, it could be the most overrated sci-fi movie ever made.

Independence Day: For a million years, mankind looked to the stars and wondered...then the aliens finally came; intent on raping the planet and wasting our resources. We don't have enough damned Republicans, so we had to import more.

Godzilla: Proof positive that the only good Godziller movies come from Japan

The Patriot: Mel Gibson and a couple ten year-old boys kick England's ass. Give him the Vienna Boys choir and he'll take over the planet. Bad movie.

Fantastic Voyage: Isaac Asimov hated the original. So did most of the rest of us. As a well established axiom I have previously noted, a remake of a bad film will probably be worse. Let's keep this one in our sites.

 



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 21 2008 at 2:23am

This movie may or may not win Razzie nominations, but Yahoo has included it on a new list of 10 most historically inaccurate movies. The other winners were:

Gladiators

300

The Last Samurai

Apocalypto

Memoirs of a Geisha

Braveheart

Elizabeth: The Golden Age

The Patriot

2001: A Space Odyssey

To read the article and see why each of these films won a place on the list, click this link:

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/10mosthistoricallyinaccurate.html;_ylt=AtLrZzLlV1UkmcJUOWE9p1RfVXcA - http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/10mosthistoricallyinaccurate .html;_ylt=AtLrZzLlV1UkmcJUOWE9p1RfVXcA



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: tomsmobr
Date Posted: March 21 2008 at 8:34am

Funny how they put "Braveheart" on the list, considering I thought it was one of Mel Gibson's better films!

 

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

This movie may or may not win Razzie nominations, but Yahoo has included it on a new list of 10 most historically inaccurate movies. The other winners were:

Gladiators

300

The Last Samurai

Apocalypto

Memoirs of a Geisha

Braveheart

Elizabeth: The Golden Age

The Patriot

2001: A Space Odyssey

To read the article and see why each of these films won a place on the list, click this link:

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/10mosthistoricallyinaccurate.html;_ylt=AtLrZzLlV1UkmcJUOWE9p1RfVXcA - http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/10mosthistoricallyinaccurate .html;_ylt=AtLrZzLlV1UkmcJUOWE9p1RfVXcA



-------------


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 21 2008 at 3:36pm

Braveheart was  a decent film, but it is fraught with historical inaccuracies, as the article specifies. I thought 2001 was a somewhat more curious addition (albeit probably a tongue-in cheek one) since it is not an historical film per se, but rather a speculative one.

At the time it was made, we were on our way to the moon (although we hadn't made it yet), and it seemed as if the conquest of Mars and the rest of the solar system would follow in short order. How sad that since the last human set foot on the moon 36 years ago, no human has ventured further from our planet than Boston is from New York. On the other hand, we have extensively explored our solar system with robotic spacecraft, which is both cheaper and safer, so we haven't done all that badly.

NOTE: the words "last" and the number "36" above have been set in bold letters to avoid further editing that might create the impression that I, too am guilty of an historical inaccuracy.  With all due apologies to the board, I suppose you will just have to accept this as an inside joke, but take note, Head Razz.

 

 



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: phe_de
Date Posted: March 22 2008 at 5:14am

"2001 - A Space Odyssey" is "historically inaccurate"?
It's science fiction, for goodness' sake!

We might as well say that any SciFi-movie (or book) that has a specific year in its title is "historically inaccurate". 1984, Strange Days and Back to the Future 2 come to mind.

And what about the "Time Machine"? Was there a nuclear war in 1966? Is technology so well developed that we might think about blowing up the Moon in 2037? And what will happen in 802701?


Everything is possible...and nothing is sure.



 



-------------
Everything is possible, and nothing is sure.


Posted By: moat
Date Posted: March 22 2008 at 8:45am

I can think of quite a few westerns that could be on that list...

Specifically, WILD WILD WEST. I can't put my finger on it, but there was something about that movie that made me find it unrealistic.


 



-------------


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 22 2008 at 12:00pm
 Well, Wild Wild West was not meant to portray a specific historical event. Most of the movies on the above list, with, again, the exception of 2001 (and obviously 10,000 B.C.) were so intended. While a lot of westerns don't accurately portray events in the old west, they are basically genre pieces as opposed to representations of events.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 25 2008 at 4:48pm
I hate to say it...it's not RAZZIE worthy...but glad to say it's not the other way either...  This one will just stick the the middle of the barrel...

-------------
Comparing Uwe Boll's movies to a sack of horse manure will only get you sued by every fertilizer company in existence...


Posted By: hastymanic
Date Posted: April 18 2008 at 5:21am
Ok, since all of this happened 12,000 years ago, I'm apt to conclude some of the 'facts' may be a bit 'unfactish.' Give 'em a break!  Blah! Who am I kidding? There's no excuse for a film that aspires to be epic and monumental and settles for late night cable fodder. Assuming it's inevitable appearance there,  I sincerely hope the Weather Channel is only a couple clicks away.

-------------
Hasty Manic
I am still looking for a movie worse than 'Manos: The Hands of Fate.' Alas, I remain ever hopeful!


Posted By: Criss808
Date Posted: June 15 2008 at 4:29am
This movie is the definition of a deserving RAZZIE "winner":

prehistoric epic + bad special effects + laughable acting + historical inaccuracy = pure cinematic garbage!

-------------


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 12:14pm
Just saw this. It was damn stupid. It was, also, damn entertaining.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 6:25am
People say this was so stupid yet they went along with it and it was entertaining. Well, I'm in the minority (or majority, whatever). It was very stupid and very boring. The Day After Tomorrow was just an exhilerating film and I loved that movie to death! This movie was like...oh, some animals...big animals....CGI animals....only in 3 scenes...the only 3 entertaining scenes throughout the film....zzzzzzzzzzzz


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 12:21pm
The really sad thing is that this movie still managed to make close to http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=10000bc.htm - $270 million worldwide with a 91 percent disapproval rate at http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10000_bc/ - RT . I guess people are either into mind inflicted torture or this is just showing us how bad that the average audience intelligence level is.

-------------
The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 2:44pm

10,000 B.C. shows what happens when you pile a lot of money into a movie consisting wholly of ideas borrowed from many other movies and characters as two dimensional as a slice of Dominoes pizza.  I'm especially disappointed in how bland Camille Belle's character Evolet was.  Evolet should have and could have had a lot of heart, and the character as written, directed and performed was nothing but recycled cardboard. 

Then there's that one particularly ridiculous moment.  Remember, when the mammoth looks at you, your dreams will come true. . . .

Even so, this movie doesn't come close to worst of the year, with such stellar movies as The Hottie & The Nottie, Strange Wilderness, 88 Minutes, Meet The Spartans and Witless Protection crowding the field, not to mention TWO Uwe Boll films, In the Name of the King and Postal, AND Sly Stallone's resurrection of Rambo.  Even among wastes of money pictures, 10,000 B.C. wasn't anywhere near as bad as Speed Racer.  In the end, blandness hamstrings this picture, and even in its best moments, it never transcends being a very expensive B movie.

 



Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: June 29 2008 at 6:50am
I actually had free tickets to see it courtesy of my favorite country station...  Of course they were tossed in with a birthday bag during their birthday breakfast...

Last year there were NASCAR tickets and passes for The Ultimate Gift...which I used...and I'm STILL trying to get rid of the Larry the Cable Guy: Health Inspector DVD they stuck me with...  I'll put the worst part of it in the following thread... http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=71&PN=1 &TPN=38


-------------
Comparing Uwe Boll's movies to a sack of horse manure will only get you sued by every fertilizer company in existence...


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 01 2008 at 12:53pm
An apparently, the director's next movie will be "2012", about the many possible ways the world will come to an end. A docudrama about Uwe Boll and the writers behind "Meet The Spartans" making "Video Game Movie" perhaps?


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 21 2008 at 8:34am

I finally got around to seeing this piece of crap on On Demand the other night. It was definitley a howler. The mammoths looked kind of cool until  the scene when they started stampeding. They ran with a sort of weird bunny-hop that must have produced gales of unintended laughter in the theaters. The sabre-toothed tiger looked like a reject from some Ray Harryhausen effort.

Combine that with a plot in which the audience probably couldn't help but get the feeling that they were rooting for the wrong tribe an you have the formula for a stinker definitely worthy of Razzie consideration.

This was Battlefield Earth set in the stone-age.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 13 2008 at 11:51am

Movie Preview Critic ripped this movie a new one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROn3NOn-orE - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROn3NOn-orE



Posted By: Stumanji
Date Posted: October 30 2008 at 10:59am
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

This was Battlefield Earth set in the stone-age.

Totally. This movie was a stinkfest. One I regret spending money on. It had entertaining moments, completely horrible writing, and possibly the stupidest casting of all time (we're supposed to believe these people all come from the same tribe?).

It's bad. A renter at best.



Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: November 05 2008 at 11:34am

About Movie Preview Critic's Review, I think he may have judged that film based solely on its trailer.  That is lazy and rude, not to mention awful.  That guy is one corrupt son of a bitch.

Based on what we've seen this year, this film may be drowned out in the Worst Picture category by much worse films that came out since then.  It might get a nod for Worst Director or Worst Screenplay (despite the fact that it might lose to Disaster Movie and Postal), but I doubt it will get nominated for Worst Picture based on everything I've seen.



Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 06 2008 at 3:56pm
Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

About Movie Preview Critic's Review, I think he may have judged that film based solely on its trailer.  That is lazy and rude, not to mention awful.  That guy is one corrupt son of a bitch.

That is a pretty provocative claim and I'm going to have to ask that you provide pretty substantial support for it. Further, don't even dare attempting to cop out by saying, "Well, it's just my opinion." because in the very next statement, you clearly move on to a supporting  assertion that clearly underscores your previous claim as fact. It therefore behooves you to present the requested support.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: November 24 2008 at 4:35pm
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

About Movie Preview Critic's Review, I think he may have judged that film based solely on its trailer.  That is lazy and rude, not to mention awful.  That guy is one corrupt son of a bitch.

That is a pretty provocative claim and I'm going to have to ask that you provide pretty substantial support for it. Further, don't even dare attempting to cop out by saying, "Well, it's just my opinion." because in the very next statement, you clearly move on to a supporting  assertion that clearly underscores your previous claim as fact. It therefore behooves you to present the requested support.

And for that matter, why is it that if a person gives a movie a negative review, that means they are "corrupt"? I'm not sure if you even understand what the word "corrupt" means. As I have said time and time again, people are entitled to their opinion, so please quit it with the "who do you/he/she/they think they are" and "how dare you/he/she/they" remakes. This forum is all about the fact that not all movies are created equal, so if you think no one has the right to judge a movie, than you're in the wrong place.



Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: November 25 2008 at 12:39pm

After careful reconsideration, I've decided that this was less than stellar. While, I still consider it "damn stupid," the "damn entertaining" didn't hold up. I was willing to overlook the Egypt part the first time, but the second, it was unforgivable.

That being said, I don't think it's worthy of WORST PICTURE or the title of "'Battlefield Earth' in the Stone Age".

Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Just saw this. It was damn stupid. It was, also, damn entertaining.



-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 27 2008 at 12:50am
Was there a more (unintentionally) hilarous moment in the movies this year than those stampeding, bunny hopping mammoths or that dreadful CGI sabre-toothed tiger? Actually, this movie was pretty entertaining for all the wrong reasons, which is why I'm leaning toward giving it a Worst Picture nod.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: November 27 2008 at 11:51am

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Was there a more (unintentionally) hilarous moment in the movies this year than those stampeding, bunny hopping mammoths or that dreadful CGI sabre-toothed tiger? Actually, this movie was pretty entertaining for all the wrong reasons, which is why I'm leaning toward giving it a Worst Picture nod.

Ah, like how "Plan 9" is entertaining for all the wrong reasons? I don't know how this director is able to keep making movies, he has no concept of writing good characters, dialog, or plots. He's like the American Uwe Boll, except movie goers are sucked into his movies by their outragous CGI effects. And yes, "StarGate" the movie sucked big time. And yes, "The Matrix" is highly overrated (it's just a live action adapatation of "Ghost In The Shell").



Posted By: movieman
Date Posted: December 13 2008 at 2:32pm
Pardon me but the Matrix is the most thought provoking and
imaginative movie that I have ever seen in my life. To start off, the way it
is shot and filmed just took me in, everything around me disappeared and
the screen became my eyes, the set designs and and feel was so well
executed. Second, the story is hands-down amazing, the moment where
Morpheus tells Neo what the Matrix is just blew me away, That's when I
knew I was watching a sci-fi classic, no matter what generation you live
in, you will be astounded by the premise. Even if you were to take out all
the action the story would still be enough to salvage the movie. Third,
the action is groundbreaking, never until I saw that movie had I seen
such immensely skillful action sequences, my favorite of course being the
helicopter sequence and the scene where Trinity tells Neo that he is "The
One", at which point he is able to stop the bullets in midair is a classic
CGI sequence. To say the Matrix is "overrated" is fallacious on a
grand level.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: December 13 2008 at 3:37pm

I also find the first Matrix quite over-rated. I actually found the sequel a lot better, more mature and emotional... 

Originally posted by movieman

Pardon me but the Matrix is the most thought provoking and
imaginative movie that I have ever seen in my life. To start off, the way it
is shot and filmed just took me in, everything around me disappeared and
the screen became my eyes, the set designs and and feel was so well
executed. Second, the story is hands-down amazing, the moment where
Morpheus tells Neo what the Matrix is just blew me away, That's when I
knew I was watching a sci-fi classic, no matter what generation you live
in, you will be astounded by the premise. Even if you were to take out all
the action the story would still be enough to salvage the movie. Third,
the action is groundbreaking, never until I saw that movie had I seen
such immensely skillful action sequences, my favorite of course being the
helicopter sequence and the scene where Trinity tells Neo that he is "The
One", at which point he is able to stop the bullets in midair is a classic
CGI sequence. To say the Matrix is "overrated" is fallacious on a
grand level.

.



-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: December 14 2008 at 2:08am

The Matrix? Imaginative, yes. Original, no. Seriously, rent "Ghost In The Shell" (a Japanese Anime movie from 1994/95), watch it, then watch "Matrix". Like me, you will see "Matrix" as it really is: a live action adaptation to "GITS". The plotline (false memories), the look (sunglasses and raincoats), the gun fight with pillars, giant robots, the chase through a market, the plugs in the back of the head, Trinity even looks like "GITS"'s main character. Heck, the Japanese company that made "GITS" unsuccuessful sued the "Matrix" filmmakers because the two movies had too much in common. I know many fans consider "Matrix" to be groundbacking here in American filmmaking, but to us anime watchers, it's nothing that Japan hasn't done already. And now America is stuck in a trend that Japan is already famous for, turning their animated TV series into live action movies. It always seems America is trying to catch up to the trend of international film making. Saturnwatcher, your thoughts?



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: movieman
Date Posted: December 16 2008 at 12:40pm
I actually found Ghost in a Shell to be more vexatious than
fascinating, as the story fails to draw viewers into its
convoluted and futuristic world as well as its predecessors, and also
because few ideas
fully established themselves with the viewer. Yes, there were
some parts of the movie that clearly inspired the Matrix, but at least
the Matrix explained its origins
consistently enough to make a coherent story. I felt the look and feel of
The Matrix was more stylishly conceived
than GITS (the comment you made about Trinity's resemblance to
Kusanagi, I guess it Trinity was Japanese....). And as
far as story lines go, I think the idea of machines harnessing humans for
energy while humans live in the simulation
was more interesting than that of the convoluted pursuit of The
Puppeteer, or whatever he's called. I see where Michaels
is coming from, and I respect his opinion in the sense that GITS was part
of the inspiration of the Matrix.


Posted By: movieman
Date Posted: December 16 2008 at 1:07pm
As for moviewizguy(who is often easy to start an argument with), though
many people disagree(the Razzie board giving the Wachouskis Worst
Director noms, way too harsh, considering them competition against
Gigli), the first sequel was good, but not anywhere near as
groundbreaking or thought-provoking as the first one. It was the third one
that was the least of the three, as the story is often easy to keep up with,
new ideas seem to be nonexistent, and not to mention some parts were
downright cheesy, that I wonder if it was a blooper that accidentally got
added in. Compared to Speed Racer though, Revolutions looks like
Reloaded, and Reloaded looks like the original Matrix. Seriously, if it weren't
for the bright look of the movie, it would be in the same league as In the
Name of the King
.


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: December 16 2008 at 1:41pm

Are you saying Speed Racer is bad?  If so, is it bad enough to nominate for one of your awards?



Posted By: movieman
Date Posted: December 16 2008 at 1:53pm
Oh yes, anyone who survived hearing Susan Sarandon say the words, "I go to
your races to watch you make art" should know what I am talking about. And
yes, it's going on my top ten list for worst movies of the year(that I've seen; I
haven't watched all the major candidates). The Wachouskis seemed to
energetically direct the race sequences and the bright colored sets, but the
dialogue and interplay between the characters is so hollow, you could watch
the movie with the sound off and enjoy it more than hearing what the bland
script forces these talented actors to say.



Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: December 16 2008 at 2:52pm

Disaster Movie, Meet the Spartans, Postal, In the Name of the King, The Love Guru, Meet Dave, The Hottie and the Nottie (and a few others) are keeping me from wanting to give Speed Racer any nods.



-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: December 17 2008 at 12:44am

I'll admit that, to this day, there are still parts of "GITS" that make no sense to me. And the movie had an animated TV series spin-off that could be just as confusing (if not more so). I let fans of "The Matrix" go about how they like the storyline, and yes, the style is interesting. But that style is often seen as being anime style as well. What I won't defend is when people call "Matrix" "original," for the reasons I stated in my earlier post.

Originally posted by movieman

I actually found Ghost in a Shell to be more vexatious than
fascinating, as the story fails to draw viewers into its
convoluted and futuristic world as well as its predecessors, and also
because few ideas
fully established themselves with the viewer. Yes, there were
some parts of the movie that clearly inspired the Matrix, but at least
the Matrix explained its origins
consistently enough to make a coherent story. I felt the look and feel of
The Matrix was more stylishly conceived
than GITS (the comment you made about Trinity's resemblance to
Kusanagi, I guess it Trinity was Japanese....). And as
far as story lines go, I think the idea of machines harnessing humans for
energy while humans live in the simulation
was more interesting than that of the convoluted pursuit of The
Puppeteer, or whatever he's called. I see where Michaels
is coming from, and I respect his opinion in the sense that GITS was part
of the inspiration of the Matrix.

 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: December 18 2008 at 1:56pm

Originally posted by movieman

Oh yes, anyone who survived hearing Susan Sarandon say the words, "I go to
your races to watch you make art" should know what I am talking about. And
yes, it's going on my top ten list for worst movies of the year(that I've seen; I
haven't watched all the major candidates). The Wachouskis seemed to
energetically direct the race sequences and the bright colored sets, but the
dialogue and interplay between the characters is so hollow, you could watch
the movie with the sound off and enjoy it more than hearing what the bland
script forces these talented actors to say.

Speed Racer is one of the most fun movies I've had this year. It's pretty good, actually. It surely did not deserve the box office bomb it has gotten.



Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: December 29 2008 at 1:14am

Too bad, because it is whether you like it or not, H-Wood needs to take a cue for the up-coming "AstroBoy": If your movie is based on an animated series, then your movie adaptation of it should be animated as well.

Originally posted by moviewizguy

 Speed Racer is one of the most fun movies I've had this year. It's pretty good, actually. It surely did not deserve the box office bomb it has gotten.

 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: January 05 2009 at 3:55pm
I will say it was worth what I paid to see it (got free tickets from a radio station)... 

It wasn't all that bad...  It wasn't all that good either...just not RAZZIE-worthy...considering the heavy competition this year...

-------------
Comparing Uwe Boll's movies to a sack of horse manure will only get you sued by every fertilizer company in existence...


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 06 2009 at 10:40am

Originally posted by Razzilla

I will say it was worth what I paid to see it (got free tickets from a radio station)... 

It wasn't all that bad...  It wasn't all that good either...just not RAZZIE-worthy...considering the heavy competition this year...

No. It's a fun movie and I enjoyed it a lot, especially on IMAX. That was like crazy. All of the colors and the whole racing sequences were like WOW!!!



Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 06 2009 at 2:58pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy

No. It's a fun movie and I enjoyed it a lot, especially on IMAX. That was like crazy. All of the colors and the whole racing sequences were like WOW!!!

Yeah, that's what the directing style of this "filmmaker" is all about,  pretty colors to keep you from noticing the crappy storytelling and 1-D characters. 



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 07 2009 at 10:11am
Originally posted by Michaels

Yeah, that's what the directing style of this "filmmaker" is all about,  pretty colors to keep you from noticing the crappy storytelling and 1-D characters. 

The characters remained true to the source and the plot was actually pretty good.



Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 08 2009 at 12:41am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

The characters remained true to the source and the plot was actually pretty good.

I'm sure saturnwatcher will totally disagree with you on both accounts, seeing as how english WAS NOT invented in the stone age and the plot was taken straight out of Mel Gibson's Mayan movie.




Print Page | Close Window