Sounds like a girl we knew once, who thought for sure there hadn't been a WWI or WWII-but WWIII definitely involved Hitler and Walmart, and was responsible for the South separating from the Union. Luckily Lincoln and a small group of commandos were able to stop this heinous atrocity before Kennedy was assassinated!

We enjoyed sticking knives in her butt.

I blame Oliver Stone.

Quote from: darDead, garlicy seagull??? I was wondering who that was. No wonder the seating around here is first come first served.

My kids saw cave men, spears, shamans, a big freaking cat, and the fact that it isn't actually history as icing on the cake. I just might be doomed to owning the freaking thing.

My son wants to see it sooooo bad...even though I've warned him it's not really historical.  He saw those mammoths and that two-handed-sword-toothed tiger and that was it.

However, it will be a home viewing event as he's not quite old enough yet (IMHO) and I wasn't going to spend the money when I heard the reviews...

Quote from: Serious PaulSounds like a girl we knew once, who thought for sure there hadn't been a WWI or WWII-but WWIII definitely involved Hitler and Walmart, and was responsible for the South separating from the Union. Luckily Lincoln and a small group of commandos were able to stop this heinous atrocity before Kennedy was assassinated!

That sounds like it could make for a good alternate history game but...

Quote from: Serious PaulWe enjoyed sticking knives in her butt.

What the heck is that supposed to mean?  Even as a joke, that comment is fairly disturbing.  Maybe I'm being overly sensitive from reading about this case in the news, but what's the meaning behind that quip?

Quote from: James J SkachMy son wants to see it sooooo bad...even though I've warned him it's not really historical.  He saw those mammoths and that two-handed-sword-toothed tiger and that was it.

However, it will be a home viewing event as he's not quite old enough yet (IMHO) and I wasn't going to spend the money when I heard the reviews...

I'm not sure about the 'not quite old enough' comment, James. How so? Is he two?

I mean, for a movie featuring a kidnapped cavegirl and slaveholding godkings, this sucker is about as lusty as My Little Pony. There is some violence, but compared to Tom and Jerry cartoons....  well, I guess the 'people actually dying' puts it on par with 'constant brutality with no actual death'... so its about equal to the cartoons.

Just curious mostly.

Mine are 5 and 7 and it'll be a while before they see it.

Quote from: SpikeI'm not sure about the 'not quite old enough' comment, James. How so? Is he two?

I mean, for a movie featuring a kidnapped cavegirl and slaveholding godkings, this sucker is about as lusty as My Little Pony. There is some violence, but compared to Tom and Jerry cartoons....  well, I guess the 'people actually dying' puts it on par with 'constant brutality with no actual death'... so its about equal to the cartoons.

Just curious mostly.

Mine are 6 and 7. It's why I said "quite" - I think he's on the edge. He's already violent enough - it's more about nightmares and such. He still has "Drastic Park" dreams where the dinosaurs are chasing him (and I, apparently, am hiding!).

Which is why I think perhaps next year I'll give him a shot at it.

As a side note/derail - Tom and Jerry are a bit different in that that are a) animated, and b) anthropomorphic. So it doesn't quite translate, particularly with respect to having nightmares.

None of which is to say that we're making the one and only right decision. We're just doing the best we can given these specific children in our care

I was snatching for cartoons, it was the first that sprang to mind.  The movie is pretty tame in just about all respects, even the violence is fairly tame, it really is a live action cartoon in many ways.

I mean the relationship between pretty cave boy and pretty cave girl?  About the same as you'd see in an Abigail Breslin 'young love' film. I'm not even entirely certain they ever kiss on screen, its that tame.

Violence?  Well: that big cat? never kills anyone.  Aside from the slave revolt at the end (which is broad enough that to a young fellow it probably doesn't even register as 'people dying'...). I think maybe a dozen people die 'on screen' all told, and there is almost no blood.  Thats not a lot given the entire 'bad guys raid villages and take slaves... villagers form army of angry cavepeople to destroy kingdom of badguys'.  

Eh: Three scenes total where violence is a real issue: initial slave taking raid early on (trying to remember how brutal it was... middling), the scene with the giant birds in the grass ( lots of tension but in the end only bad guys die, and all of them off screen essentially) and the one pretty cave boy that is 'sacrificed' to convince the other slaves to work harder (they threw him off the pyramid I think...)... that's really it.

Then again, what do I know... I was watching Star Wars (complete with Genocide... TWICE!) when I was 3.

Quote from: SpikeThen again, what do I know... I was watching Star Wars (complete with Genocide... TWICE!) when I was 3.

And, I presume, Han Solo shooting first.

Quote from: John MorrowAnd, I presume, Han Solo shooting first.

Obviously.  There is no truth to the rumor that Greedo started it.

That's why I never mention it. There is no discussion.  Hell, the way I remember it, it wasn't even a matter of Greedo shooting. Han just realized that the conversation would end with someone dying so he made sure it was Greedo.

The entire debate, and these rumors of some 'alternate universe' where there is actually a quick draw contest and Greedo somehow gets a shot off?  Those belong in the same place theories about 27 dimenional universes shaped like straws do...

Spike - I can only go by trailers because who the fuck has time to go preview a movie just to see if later he can take his kids to the same movie? :haw:

Joking aside, this has two impacts. First, I can't argue specifics I trust you enough to doubt that you'd be somehow lying to me to get me to take my kids to an inappropriate movie. I know you've got pika issues, but...

Second, the scenes I have seen in the trailers - some you mention but in particular the scene where the saber-tooth is right up against that guy - are, in many cases, enough to know that they would be likely to give my kids nightmares. This might not apply to other kids - perhaps most. I'm just familiar enough with these two to be pretty confident in the result.

But, see, waiting for it on HBO or something and recording it on TiVo gives me the opportunity to preview it without the time constraints and cost issues. Then I'll make the full assessment. Might be that I agree with your analysis and let him watch it right away.

The preview shows about 90% of both scenes with the tiger... where he rescues it from the water filled pit (up in his grill) and where it 'saves him' by convincing the african pretty cave people that he's blessed by the gods becuase, well, he talks to cats.


that said: the scene in the tall grass and the 'toss the slave off the pyramid' are both reasonably intense I suppose.

But if you aren't teaching your spawn how to kill and feed, you really aren't doing right by them.  Really, I assume he's and only child because he already killed and ate the weaker ones, yes?

Quote from: SpikeBut if you aren't teaching your spawn how to kill and feed, you really aren't doing right by them.  Really, I assume he's and only child because he already killed and ate the weaker ones, yes?

That's what made Klaxon big and strong! That and the ones he absorbed in the womb...

-clash

James, content and maturity issues aside, the main reason you shouldn't take your children to see 10,000 BC is because it sucks!  Do you want the kid growing up thinking that action movies are supposed to have hours and hours of exposition and stupid goofy characters running around learning stuff about themselves?  That is not the kind of legacy you want to leave with your children, I suspect.