View Poll Results: 300 VS 10,000 BC (Movies)

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • 300 is a special effects breakthrough and is by far better

    14 45.16%
  • 10,000 BC will be just as good if not better in terms of special effects, plot and storyline

    2 6.45%
  • both movies suck balls

    9 29.03%
  • iv seen 300 and will be going to 10,000 bc and dont care what's better, their both somewhat good

    6 19.35%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: 300 vs 10,000 bc

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    876

    Default 300 vs 10,000 bc

    which will be better?
    will 10,000 BC be as much a box office success as 300?
    more importantly will people like it and will you go see it?

  2. #2
    Coachella Junkie shakermaker113's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    san francisco
    Posts
    15,114

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    shouldn't we wait until we've seen 10,000 bc first?

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    876

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    didn't it premier last night? or 2night?

  4. #4
    Member Cpt. Funkaho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    2,071

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by unitedwestand View Post
    which will be better?
    will 10,000 BC be as much a box office success as 300?
    more importantly will people like it and will you go see it?
    Are you fucking joking? 10,000 BC looks like the most colossal waste of film ever.

    EDIT: As of right now, 10000 BC's rating at RottenTomatoes is 14%, which is almost as bad as Ultraviolet. Which was epically bad.
    Last edited by Cpt. Funkaho; 03-06-2008 at 06:43 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by youguysallsuckfatcock View Post
    now you guys are really pissing me off. especiall you walrus fucker

  5. #5
    Member GaragePoet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    535

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    i've been curious about "10,000 B.C." just because i like to see those types of movies in theaters... but really, where did you come up w/ the comparison to "300"? (which i also saw in theaters, but not since...)

    as for being a good movie to see on the big screen but completely forgettable otherwise (i.e. "beowulf" in 3D iMax), i'm expecting these 2 will rank the same.

  6. #6
    Member GaragePoet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    535

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    P.S. the whole poll sucks (and that's NOT what she said) because a) "300" was in no way a special-effects breakthrough, and 2) you should wait until a movie gets released before you ask people's opinion.

  7. #7

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Hahaha I am totally seeing 10000 BC tomorrow.

  8. #8
    Memorial_07
    Guest

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Funkaho View Post
    Are you fucking joking? 10,000 BC looks like the most colossal waste of film ever.

    EDIT: As of right now, 10000 BC's rating at RottenTomatoes is 14%, which is almost as bad as Ultraviolet. Which was epically bad.
    14%?

    Even Cloverfield got a better rating.
    And that movie blew by all means.

  9. #9
    Coachella Junkie shakermaker113's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    san francisco
    Posts
    15,114

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    how is it we manage to feed millions of dollars into a movie and still produce crap? seriously, what is wrong?

  10. #10
    old school superfiction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Woodinville, WA
    Posts
    5,698

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    10,000 bc was terrible
    http://blogs.1077theend.com/internbryce/

    Quote Originally Posted by OnlyNonStranger View Post
    I bet all those Canucks fans from last year would love it if Mumford & Sons headlined.
    Quote Originally Posted by bobert View Post
    It is good rioting music.

  11. #11
    Member PrettyRagdoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,030

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Let's see... A visually amazing movie based on a great graphic novel based on actual history or..... A movie set in a magical place 10,000 years ago where everyone spoke english and had perfect teeth.

    DECISIONS!

    Quote Originally Posted by clarky123 View Post
    Fuck your formal education up for music and stop being a coward.
    Quote Originally Posted by braundiggity View Post
    I dunno. Lots of the arguments seem hypocritical to me. Can't we leave it simply as: I loved the shit out of it, some hated the shit out of it, and that's just how some shows go?
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/musicislife/

    Karma Police are coming for you


  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles... all day erryday!
    Posts
    1,643

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    everyone spoke english except for the africans...

  13. #13
    Coachella Junkie Pixiessp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,265

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by PrettyRagdoll View Post
    Let's see... A visually amazing movie based on a great graphic novel based on actual history or..... A movie set in a magical place 10,000 years ago where everyone spoke english and had perfect teeth.

    DECISIONS!
    they speak english in this movie? I thought it was like that raquel welch movie where they just grunted.

  14. #14

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    10000 BC was one of the funniest movies I have ever seen.

  15. #15
    old school superfiction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Woodinville, WA
    Posts
    5,698

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by PrettyRagdoll View Post
    where everyone spoke english and had perfect teeth.
    this was the first thing i mentioned to my gf when it started
    http://blogs.1077theend.com/internbryce/

    Quote Originally Posted by OnlyNonStranger View Post
    I bet all those Canucks fans from last year would love it if Mumford & Sons headlined.
    Quote Originally Posted by bobert View Post
    It is good rioting music.

  16. #16
    Member Cpt. Funkaho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    2,071

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by shakermaker113 View Post
    how is it we manage to feed millions of dollars into a movie and still produce crap? seriously, what is wrong?
    That, amigo, is not the real question. The REAL question is this: Why do people watch terrible movies in such large numbers? By this I am saying that 10,000 BC is already a financial success. If a movie makes a significant profit, you can be guaranteed that there will be follow-up... sequels, imitations, et cetera. It's just good business to make movies that make money.

    The real question is why do people pay good money to see movies they know will suck? I mean, nobody had any illusions about 10,000 BC being good, and they went and paid $10 to see it anyway.

    I could be my usual self and ascribe it to a more charitable impulse- say, that people go to bad movies as escapism, or because they see some value in them that I'm blind to- but in this instance I'm going to pull a Randy and declare that it's because when it comes to movies, people are stupid, stupid fucks. They're suckers for marketing, and they'll watch anything with special effects and "O Fortuna" or the theme from Requiem For A Dream in the trailer.

    God, I fucking hate people when they're stupid. It's a pity there's nobody around for me to just lay savagely into right now.
    Quote Originally Posted by youguysallsuckfatcock View Post
    now you guys are really pissing me off. especiall you walrus fucker

  17. #17
    Member fasttrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, AZ
    Posts
    927

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    i'm not even going to bother with 10,000 BC.
    as far as i've seen, it doesn't even compare with 300.
    not even a little.
    I'm a loner Dottie, a rebel.

  18. #18
    Coachella Junkie humanoid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Orange County
    Posts
    6,900

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    ok, so luckily I saw 10,000bc for free, because otherwise there is no chance I would have seen it.......but now I feel guilty, and it's possible I did irreparable harm to my mind...not even all the weed we smoked prior helped make it worthwhile

    300 blows also...but it was significantly better (less terrible?) than 10,000 BC
    '99-'11...

  19. #19
    Coachella Junkie humanoid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Orange County
    Posts
    6,900

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Funkaho View Post
    That, amigo, is not the real question. The REAL question is this: Why do people watch terrible movies in such large numbers? By this I am saying that 10,000 BC is already a financial success. If a movie makes a significant profit, you can be guaranteed that there will be follow-up... sequels, imitations, et cetera. It's just good business to make movies that make money.

    The real question is why do people pay good money to see movies they know will suck? I mean, nobody had any illusions about 10,000 BC being good, and they went and paid $10 to see it anyway.

    I could be my usual self and ascribe it to a more charitable impulse- say, that people go to bad movies as escapism, or because they see some value in them that I'm blind to- but in this instance I'm going to pull a Randy and declare that it's because when it comes to movies, people are stupid, stupid fucks. They're suckers for marketing, and they'll watch anything with special effects and "O Fortuna" or the theme from Requiem For A Dream in the trailer.

    God, I fucking hate people when they're stupid. It's a pity there's nobody around for me to just lay savagely into right now.
    people generally have bad taste, or more accurately no specific tastes, and juste wait for mass marketing campaigns in the media to form their tastes for them
    '99-'11...

  20. #20
    DJ SallyBear sbessiso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    27,896

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    i saw 300 on acid, needless to say it blew me away, I think if i was sober, I wouldnt have enjoyed it nearly as much
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Coyne
    People treat Arcade Fire like they're the greatest thing ever and they get away with it.

  21. #21

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    10,000 B.C. was fucking lame... as much as i enjoyed the special effects, what was with the $0.10 wigs?? oh, and the weak acting and script...

    if you want to see a good version of this movie, go watch Apocalypto...

  22. #22
    Member signmeup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    918

    Default Re: 300 vs 10,000 bc

    Quote Originally Posted by superfiction View Post
    this was the first thing i mentioned to my gf when it started
    whoa you have a girlfreind??

    oh and this movie was doomed from the start.
    fuck

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •