benjamindbridgeman I went into this fully expecting and looking for brain candy. This film is the black licorice of brain candy.

utgard14 Laughable hokum from Roland Emmerich about a prehistoric man on a quest to rescue his woman. Steven Strait plays our hero in love with Camilla Belle, who sports an unconvincing pair of blue contact lenses. They're distracting really. One day some foreign raiders show up and kidnap a bunch of people from Strait's tribe, including Belle. Strait heads off in pursuit, accompanied by Cliff Curtis and a few others. Curtis, by the way, is the only actor who comes out of all this smelling like a rose. The others just can't rise above the silliness they're stuck with. Anyway they follow the raiders and eventually catch up, briefly rescuing Belle only to lose her again. Where the movie goes from there I don't want to spoil because it has to be seen to be believed. Some of the special effects are good but they get spottier as the movie goes along. The saber-tooth tiger is cartoon-interacting-with-human stuff. The action scenes are not impressive, especially the chase scenes where things move so quickly and get jumbled together that you have trouble keeping track of which person you're watching being chased. Is it dark dreadlocks guy in fur #1, #2, or #3? Oh wait it's dark dreadlocks GIRL in fur this time. My mistake. They all look alike from behind. It's a silly movie by its very concept. If it didn't take itself so seriously it might have been more fun. But it does and it isn't. If you do watch it, look out for those giant ostriches. They're trouble.

brewster139 This film to my mind has a remarkably poor overall rating - suspend your logic whilst watching and just enjoy the quality effects and the excellent locations. This is not Citizen Kane but when compared to other caveman flicks this has to be the best out there. The narrative is pretty simplistic and the acting is basic at best but the overall prehistoric environment that the producers have created is certainly engaging which provides both good action sequences and science fiction/fantasy moments. I would recommend any one interested in the fantasy genre to give this a glance but not to expect too much in relation to character development or intelligent plot lines. The other aspect of this film which I enjoyed was it's nod to antediluvian theories and how ancient civilizations possessed technologies we can no longer harness. Overall this is a film I would watch again and would recommend fantasy fans to give it a go especially if you don't mind occasionally having to endure a scene that is both bemusing and over the top. But by definition that is fantasy isn't it?

Dominic LeRose I've been waiting for years for an absolute epic prehistoric time thriller that shows the difficult lifestyle and has exhilarating action sequences with ancient creatures. When "10,000 B.C." was announced I was dying to finally view what I thought would match my needs. Nope! "10,000 B.C." is a loud, goofy, boring, inaccurate portrayal of one of times most interesting periods. The plot is something you'd see out of a cheesy Disney action film from Jerry Bruckeheimer and gets to the point where it feels like a spoof on the time period. Basically, a young mammoth hunter named D'Leh journeys through uncharted territory after a band of mysterious horse-riding warlords raid his village and kidnaps his lover Evolet along with many others. D'Leh is forced to lead a small group of hunters south to pursue the warlords to the end of the world to save her. The most disappointing thing about this joke of a film is how cheesy the creatures are and how little we actually see them. We see many cheesalisous creatures and only see woolly mammoths and saber-tooth tigers briefly and when we do see them we get to take in the hilarious way they look. Seriously, there are films from the 60's with better visual effects. It's very hard to see how the film takes place in 10,000 B.C., because the setting and people look like a tribe in modern day rural countries around the world. The action scenes are too kinetic, not allowing us to be driven by the scenes or rushed with excitement. They go by too quickly and there are no visual description of where the characters are so there can be no intensity. Weak editing,stereotypical production and costume design and overdone music are all on the weakness of director Roland Emmerich for allowing these weaknesses to be enforced on this film and for using terrible camera work. There's too much running through trees, ridiculous names, fake acting, cheesy effects and sound for this film to be even a little bit entertaining. "10,000 B.C." is similar to something you'd find on the history channel as a reenactment. If you've been waiting for a prehistoric blockbuster film with great visual film elements, don't be fooled like I was with this joke.