10,000 B.C.

10,000 B.C.

(2008)
Shot in South Africa, Namibia and New Zealand is this dawn-of-man-epic from he who made 'Independence Day' and 'Godzilla': German-born director Roland Emmerich. The impressive trailer looks more 'Apocalypto' than the Raquel Welch classic 'One Million Years BC', and the story is said to centre on a young mammoth hunter who embarks on a journey through uncharted territory to secure the future of his dying tribe.

Flicks Review

Warning: May contain traces of historic license.

“From the director of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow”, the promos proclaim. Oh sure, they could namecheck The Patriot or Stargate or even Universal Soldier – but inasmuch as there’s a case to be made for Roland Emmerich as unsung (albeit somewhat hacky) auteur of the blockbuster age, it’s the apocalyptic trips to the brink of human extinction that he’ll be remembered for.

So there’s a pleasing symmetry in the director’s latest film taking it back to the pre-concrete streets. 10,000 BC packs an awful lot of pop-anthropological in-jokery into its two-hour runtime, much of it admirably spurious. It’s hard not to grin at a film that offers theories as to the spread of common language and tribal practise throughout the cradle of civilisation, but gives equal weight to the notion that these advances were only made possible because a human being made friends with a tiger the size of a freakin’ RV.

Eschewing the painfully vogue stylistic noodling of 300 (to which it’s nevertheless not dissimilar), but stopping short of anything as adventurously maverick as Apocalypto (as which it’s nevertheless pretty much the same damn movie), 10,000 BC maintains a pleasantly old-school restraint that you feel may serve it better in years to come. It’s also more pedestrian than those two movies, never really reaching the heights – or depths – of either.

Independence Day posited a society descending into complacency, as ripe for heavily-armed alien plunder as the Falklands. The Day After Tomorrow one-upped this thesis by making mankind the agent of its own potential demise. Does 10,000 BC, in depicting the moment The Average Guy learnt animal husbandry, astrological navigation, and agriculture, sow the seeds of those tragic flaws? Maybe so… but 12,000 years is a long period for the sequel to cover.


The Peoples' Reviews

Average ratings from 8 ratings, 9 reviews
Reviewed & Rated by
Your rating & review
Rate / Review this movie

BY rosiew superstar

Get off from your high horses everyone, this film has something special that other films have seemingly lost hold of. This film takes us back to a true and pure form of story-telling. I imagined this as an exciting camp fire story with awesome visuals to back it up. It was innocent yet adventurous. Maybe it wasn't the comedy you were looking for, or the deep Inception-like storyline you were looking for, but something about this movie awakens the inner child. Yours may have been in too deep of... More a sleep.Hide


BY munchkin superstar

Silly and utterly Cr**P


BY bigspendakev superstar

Really had the potential to be a good movie great special effects great scenery what lets this movie down is its bad storyline and bad acting if i knew then what i now now wouldnt have bought the movie would have waited to see on Tv .


The Flicks review says it well and so does Helena for those who think "10,000 BC" is meant to refer to a time.

See Apocalypto instead.


this movie does for prehistory infomation what no country for old men does for conflict resolution


Showing 5 of 9 reviews. See all reviews

The Press Reviews

  • Do not, do not, do not waste your time and money on this piece of extraordinary shit. Do <em>anything</em> else instead. Full Review

  • Emmerich says he deliberately steered away from casting big names, but shorn of starpower like Will Smith, Jake Gyllenhaal or Mel Gibson, the characters simply fade into the scenery as audiences find it hard to decipher who is who under the mud, hair and war paint. Fortunately, the impossibly clean Belle is kept in pristine condition, while New Zealand's own Cliff Curtis labours under a Nandor Tanczos wig. Prehistoric compared to 1966's One Million BC, this is a movie so bad our government should be demanding its tax-break back. At least Central Otago looks pretty. Full Review

  • As one might expect, there are campy moments and far too much reliance on God-like interventions in the affairs of early man. Less expected is that 10,000 BC works just fine as an action Western with handsome actors in striking costumes and a few CG predators, which are giddy fun. Full Review

  • The scenery is beautiful and expansive, from the snow-covered mountains and lush rainforest to the stunning desert, but unfortunately it's the human element that lets this film down. If half-naked men with dreads, dirty faces and immaculately white teeth is your thing, then you're in luck. Just don't expect them to say anything worthwhile. Full Review

  • Call it "Apocalypto" for pussies -- a PG-13 rating, puh-leese! -- or prehistory for peabrains. Just don’t call it friendo. 10,000 B.C. will take your money, rob your time and hit your brain like a shot of Novacaine. Full Review

  • Omar Sharif's narration lends a faint air of importance to the film, which is already burdened by bags of self importance, and the cast have to battle through impenetrable costumes and make up without looking silly. They almost succeed .... If some of the mumbo jumbo were cut out, not only would it tighten the film, it would also make the essential core of the story, the chase, more dynamic. But the film must be judged a partial success in appealing to its prime audience of teenagers eager for novelty. Full Review

  • Conventional where it should be bold and mild where it should be wild, 10,000 BC reps a missed opportunity to present an imaginative vision of a prehistoric moment. Full Review