Let's be really clear here: we do NOT highly recommend 10,000 B.C. To be fair (though we don't have to), we haven't seen Roland Emmerich's latest effects-laden assault on logic.
However, we have been reading the reviews to learn exactly how bad it is.
Reviews from the New York Times and Ain't It Cool News used these surprisingly similarly descriptions:
"Sublimely dunderheaded"
"Blissfully retarded"
Smart money says other reviewers will have similar reactions. If you find one, leave a comment.
Related Stories:
4 comments:
The most damning one so far, IMHO (warning, spoilerish):
From the Las Vegas Weekly: "Worst of all, no one even gets eaten by the disappointingly tame saber-toothed tiger."
Seriously? Let's just go watch 300 on my buddy's plasma tv.
As a side note, could someone edit all of the talking out of 300? I enjoyed the movie from the standpoint of it being warporn with a good soundtrack, but I barely avoided throwing up on my shoes listening to all the speeches about freedom.
Kaiser, that's the number one thing that worries me about Watchmen. One can only hope that Snyder is doing Alan Moore's Watchmen, just as he did Frank Miller's 300.
That's a pretty good number one worry. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not really familiar with the original graphic novel version of 300, so I judged it solely based on the movie. I am, OTH, very familiar with Watchmen. My worry there is, fundamentally, time. I question whether or not any filmmaker, no matter how skillful or well intentioned, can put a graphic novel that is so dense plot-wise into anything like a reasonable cinematic time frame without seriously damaging the story.
Post a Comment