Jul 01, 2008 19:51
You all know that I'm not a movie snob, right? So when I say that 10,000 BC really, really sucked, I mean it really, really sucked.
On a scale of one to ten, where ten is terrible but hilarious like, say, Flash Gordon or Krull, and a one is something nauseatingly unwatchable like Blood Waters of Dr. Z, this movie was about a three and a half. One point for Steven Strait, one for scenery, one for prehistoric mammals, and a half-point for the MST3k-style wisecracking it provokes.
Folks, this puts it behind Undiscovered for bad Steven Strait movies. He is shirtless in both, but he spends an awful lot of time in 10,000 BC looking like he rolled in mud the day before, so it fails (comparatively) at showcasing his prettiness.
I'm not sorry I watched it, it was enjoyable enough to hold my attention, but it was really bad. The dialogue was horrible, the fake accents were horrible, the plot was horrible, the characterization was horrible, and it was completely predictable. At one point, Sargon said "Hey! This is right about when guys on horses should come riding in to kill everyone. With torches and a battle standard!" Which is what happened.
"Oh, look!" I said. "It's the annoying comic relief sidekick! You can tell by the hair!"
And, later: "So, he's going to rescue this saber-toothed cat, and later it's going to save his life. Right?"
"Yeah! Then they'll call him 'the Boy Who Speaks To Pixels!'"
It was the kind of movie where you go: "That guy has a big ol' cloud of doom, that guy's going to sacrifice himself nobly, that guy's going to die by impalement. . . ."
It's quite beautiful to look at, so it's not an hour and a half of my life I want back, but I recommend watching it with both the sound and your brain turned off.
movie reviews,
media,
bad reviews