Digital wooly mammoths + impossibly perfect teeth for a pre-dentistry society + a whole lot of Apocalypto = 10,000 BC.
See, it’s not that it looks bad, it just looks kind of pointless, especially in a post-Apocalypto world. (If you’ll remember, that surprisingly good Mel Gibson film also had a pre-cultural dude who has to save what’s left of his tribe from people who hang out in giant temples and think they’re akin to gods.) And, while I’m usually okay with the cinematic use of the British accent as a stand-in for every other nationality—including aliens—this is a bit of a stretch, considering that these people barely had language, let alone the upper-crust refinery of our sires across the pond. This oughta sound like Quest for Fire, not RSC tryouts.
The ultimate question, though, is Will I Go See It. The jury’s out. Depends if something good is on the Hitler—I mean, History Channel.
Comments (1-13) of 13 Add your comment
They also look far too clean to me. People in today’s society get pretty grubby when they don’t groom themselves, and we have the capabilities! Ah, Hollywood, so many liberties taken. I think I’ll pass.
the action looks like fun but ultimately the movie appears lacking in so many ways, not the least of which is the language thing. i’d have to say no, won’t be seeing it.
Looks like all kinds of stupid to me, storywise AND historically speaking. No thank you !
A barely clothed, super hot Steven Strait is my only reason for watching this movie. That man is gorgeous! Please excuse my drool…
“From the director of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow.” That’s the hallmark of quality entertainment right there. Kind of like when they say a movie is written by three of the eighteen writers of Scary Movie 4.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think woolly mammoths and Egyptian pyramids were around at the same time.
This movie looks sooo bad. Historical inaccuracy can be forgivable in some cases, but this is just dumb. it frustrates how bad this movie looks. i can see a bunch of guys in a room saying “ooh ooh pyramids are old, let’s but some of them in.” “dinosaurs too!!!” “don’t forget loincloths!!”
The actors are hot, but it is more than a “stretch” to cast them – it is disgusting. The people in the movie would look like the Hopi, Navajo, or Tsimshian Indians of today, not caucasians at all. The Gwich’in of Alaska still know how to trap mammoths in their oral history. At least Apocalypto hired all-native and Central American cast. Yes, Mel Gibson gets major points for racial sensitivity!
Blue-eyed Caucasians with gelatin-infused nappy hair do not indigenous people make.
I dunno. Were there still massive herds of mammoth around at 10,000 BC? The city of Jericho was founded in 9000 BC, for comparison. The pyramids were built much later. Unless they’re going for some sort of pre-Egyptian Ur-civilization (maybe that is Ur?) … I just dunno. And dreadlocks on white men are so dated now. The European mammoth-hunter scenes look very Paleolithic — seriously Clan-of-the-Cave-Bear stone age — but 10,000 BC is late Neolithic. I dunno. Looks like just another excuse for Emmerich to do his thing.
I have been arguing with my husband for a week over whether this movie is historically accurate or not. His best defense? Why would Hollywood make a movie with such a ridiculous premise? They couldn’t possibly think we’re that stupid. Or do they?
Seriously people, you need to look up the Neolithic period. Sure, there weren’t many mammoths, and they didn’t build the pyramids. But there was civilization.
10,000 B.C. is an eloquent film about the evils of so called civilized cultures. As seen in previous films, the ancient cultures were pagan like and arrogant because of their dominance. The premise that ancient tribes were primitive and earth conscious is a fair one. With civilization comes conquest.
Bearing in mind that the filmmakers are taking alot of liberties with history, to make it easier to film and by paying less attention to detail.