ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

My Critique of 10,000 B.C.

Updated on March 24, 2008

Good Story Line with Flaws

The newest release of 10,000 B.C. is a story line with a strong human interest based on plausible archealogical speculation, but it contains many subtle inconsistencies and technical problems which don't support the possible or probable; forcing the viewer to suspend their disbelief to the breaking point.

The story begins showing the small tribe of mamoth hunters who live in the high mountains where it snows frequently. While it's apparent the viewer is supposed to assume they always live in this condition because of the permanent dwellings they sleep in as well as the fact that this period was a gradually receeding ice age, there is one major problem with their being able to support themselves in such an environment; no trees, shrubs or bushes are growing in this region.

Yet, through the movie scenes showing their small village, they show members bringing gathered wood miraculously from somewhere. The landscape for as far as the eye can see in these early scenes show nothing but rock and snow. From the looks of the surrounding scenery, they would have to go many miles to lower elevations to find such wood and this is highly unlikely. Odds are they'd be living at lower elevations for several conveniences like water, fuel, and availabiltiy of other game beside the giants they hunt.

Given that this tribe is supposedly surviving as mamoth hunters and the narration tells us that sometimes the herds are scarce, or don't come through the mountains some seasons at all, it pushes the credibility of their ability to survive in such difficult conditions. One has to assume that these people are nomadic; moving from the high mountains down to lower elevations to obtain food when winter months hit. However, no indication in the scenes leads the viewer to consider this possibility.

An elderly woman of the tribe is revered amongst the tribe as the remaining member of elders who still have abilities to communicate, or receive messages in the form of visions from the gods of the earth. Her role ties the story line together throughout and plays a key part in the very powerful resolution to the plot.

In one scene, where the men are chasing the herd they've infiltrated and spooked causing them to stampeed, shows these massive beast weighing several tons galloping such that they are lifting all four of their feet off the ground in mid-stride. Technically, this would not have been possible due to their incredible mass. If you stop and think about how elephants move when stampeeding, they bob their heads up and down as they run such that two of their four legs are always on the ground with one side together and the other apart; alternating in a trotting style. While this does not detract from the excellent CG images created for these scenes and the untrained viewer's eye, it is an impossibility that reveals a lack of research for accuracy and believeability to the movie.

One of the turning points nearer the end of this movie is when the main female character who is "betrothed" to the main male character is in captivity as a slave for the Egyptians. One of the priests discovers that she has some marks on the top on her right hand from the whipping she'd received while on their forced march. This priest immediately goes to the Pharoh to report he's found the woman of prophecy from the stars because these marks happen to be in perfect arrangement for matching the constellation for Orion "The Hunter".

While such an event might be plausible within the context of this story, I seriously dought this would be "the sign" the priests would consider credible to qualify a slave brought from a far away land as a goddess in their eyes. However, it is interesting that the author of the story, or screenplay, has incorporated the recent finding of Robert Bauval that the middle star of the belt in the Orion constellation was aligned to the shaft in the Great Pyramid at Giza in 10,000 B.C.

Lastly, that the Pharoh is either too slow, or doesn't see the spear coming at him, to get out of the way after the main male character hurls it up at him standing on the steps of the huge temple, again stretches the viewers ability to believe this could happen.

While there is a romantic thread throughout the movie, the acting by both male and female characters are good and believeable.

Recommended Reading:


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Jondolar profile image

      Jondolar 9 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Hi Victor,

      Yes, you've made some good points there. I just didn't choose to go into too much detail at the time I wrote the critque, so I thank you for point this out. However, my research has revealed that some theory suggests there are strong possibilities that Europeans had been to the North American continent about 100 year prior to the popluar "Columbus was first" taught in schools; namely, the Knights Templars via Scotland after having to flee France in 1307. The evidence which suggests this is the Rosslyn Temple in Scotland having ears of corn as part of the art relief in it which was built years before Columbus's voyage.

    • profile image

      victor 9 years ago

      You also forgot to mention that somehow the european or perhaps Central Asian people for some reason went through southeastern Asia (is there any giant bamboo anywhere further west?) then central africa (really dark africans have to be from very near to the equator) and then to saharan african without crossing any seas/oceans or giant mountain ranges. and that the Africans had corn, chiles, beans and squashes of all kinds, all new world plants (that means they only grew in the Americas until about the 1500's).

    • Jondolar profile image

      Jondolar 9 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Hi funride & lisaj66,

      You're welcome! Yes, it's definately worth going to see. The only reason I was critical about some things in it is because I've done a lot of study of this genre' regarding this period; Hancock, Bauval, Schock & Childress.

    • lisaj66 profile image

      lisaj66 9 years ago from Arizona

      I think I'll go see this movie, because the FX look spectacular. I can usually suspend belief for the sake of a good movie, as long as movie makers don’t go too far and enter the realm of stupidity. Thanks for the review. Sounds like the movie was worth the price of admission, at least the matinee.

    • funride profile image

      Ricardo Nunes 9 years ago from Portugal

      Great review! Now I really must watch the movie :)