10,000 B.C.

< Previous Trailer  |   Add to My Scrapbook  |   Next Trailer >
10,000 B.C.

44% Liked It
liked it

10,000 B.C.

Camilla Belle, Steven Strait, Tim Barlow, Suri van Sornsen, Omar Sharif, Marco Khan, Joel Virgel, Cliff Curtis, Reece Ritchie

A prehistoric epic that follows a young mammoth hunter's journey through uncharted territory to secure the future of his tribe.

Id: 10888589

Do you want to see this movie?

My Friends Said...

10,000 B.C. Recent Reviews

Register or sign-in to see your friends' reviews !

Recent Reviews

10,000 B.C. Recent Reviews
  • Redlats
    September 29, 2009
    Redlats
    Alright, so 10,000 BC is not historically accurate, for instance woolly mammoths and horses did not roam earth at the same time, but as a bit of an escape, 10,000 BC is fine. The hero has to convince many tribes to join together to defeat the evil master.
  • mrpopcorn
    July 11, 2009
    mrpopcorn
    Roland Emmerich's latest blockbuster offering 10,000 BC tells the age old tale of a young tribesman D'Leh who crosses mountains to rescue his ladylove Evolet from the enemies.

    I thought it was terrible. Sure, some of the prehistoric animals looked fine, but that was about it...( read more). Talk about bloopers - the actors don't look prehistoric, the make-up was bad (who had perfect white teeth in 10,000 BC?) What's with the almost-dreadlocks? And the mammoths - weren't they supposed to belong to the Ice Age, and Ice Age only? What are they doing dragging huge blocks in the middle of a desert? Even the plot is so outdated and lame.

    The only reason I'm giving this a two is because the Sabertooth looked really awesome. Even though it just came out from nowhere, at least they made something out of this huge epic pile of garbage.

    Total waste of money. Compared to Apocalypto - one of the best epics I've seen so far - this movie is nothing.
  • DerekA101
    May 21, 2009
    DerekA101
    Once upon a time, I wrote a detailed review about this crappy film. Mysteriously, it has disappeared off Flixster. I kind of wish this movie would have disappeared during production. But anyways, here's my review in a nutshell since I can't remember details:

    *ahem*

    This fi

    ...( read more)lm sucks really really bad. It's awful. I say so, 91% of critics say so, and a majority of moviegoers also say so. So if you decide to watch this crapfest after knowing all this, then somebody should pee on you. Thank you, and have a nice day.
  • briandeguelle
    April 9, 2009
    briandeguelle
    Two stars are for the sfx only.story is way to dull and its just so boring.Took me 4 go's to watch this on dvd and i wish i never did!Words to mr emmerich is to go back and make those sci-fi,disaters flicks he's good at.......
  • phubbs1
    April 7, 2009
    phubbs1
    Like Emmerichs previous films, I knew not to expect anything serious, this was gonna be pure popcorn, and its not that bad popcorn either. Emmerich always produces good fun films and this is another good example. The plot is sooooooo very done before haha and the cast are rather ...( read more)hammy and cliched but it all works nicely with the silly story and over the top action. Mostly newcomers by the look of things, afew big names, but generally its a new line up which does work in the films favour, any big shot names in lead roles and it becomes too serious or trying to be serious.

    The effects are nice, not great but it does look good. You can tell its cgi but the vista's and mammoths do look good on the desert landscape. The tribes and costumes are the best, all look very realistic and quite accurate, certainly gives Mel Gibsons Apocalypto a good run for the money.

    There some obvious problems here and there though, what actual time period are we in? Jurassic? Prehistoric? Egyptian?

    The way he kills the almighty at the end is very very daft, and a bloody good shot haha
    The whole sabretooth tiger mini plot is really stupid, the girl coming back to life at the end, and what exactly is so special about her etc...

    There are many bad plot holes and really, its a really daft mix or rip of many other films which is poor really. Its not that much different from his earlier film Stargate. But...at the end of the day its silly and very cheesey but its fun, I just wish they were alittle more accurate with that timeline hehe kinda spoils it cos its so wrong.
  • sinD123
    December 9, 2009
    sinD123
    I don't think the movie was as bad as most people say it is. It's obviously not historically accurate but I think the people who made the movie assumed that people would be smart enough to realise the film is not supposed to be a documentary. Overall, the movie is still entertain...( read more)ing.
  • whackedman
    December 7, 2009
    whackedman
    One of my favourites
  • VEM12
    December 7, 2009
    VEM12
    10,000 B.C. fails to deliver the promise due to it's weak effects, poor action sequences, and inaccurate background timeline. D+: Really bad.
  • karensully92
    December 6, 2009
    karensully92
    i thougth dis was a good watch... i didnt no de storyline wen i start watchin it... but it turned out 2 b good.... kind of 300 ish..... i liked it...
  • morphine
    November 26, 2009
    morphine
    I loved it. I personally loved it on a bias that I love anthropological perspectives, true or imaginary. It was interesting tho, to see bits of historical conspiracies (like the ben-ben). Some cheesy moments here and there but none too unbearable on my books (we can't confirm how...( read more) much of the brain was developed anyway etc), and a couple of things I found hilarious albeit interesting was how the protagonist seems to start off as a completely lucky and impulsive poseur-warrior led about like a pawn to save people only because he loved a woman.. Lovelorn fools are born across timelines I suppose. Kudos on the sabretooth animation as well; looks like a lot of effort put in.

    Everyone has their opinion on the movie but to slam it on issues of sense and inaccuracies is just hitting a low blow that just pisses me off. YES I know the whole concept of civilization is -majorly- thwarted off the charts in the movie. But if I wanted to watch something more accurate, I'd build a freakin' time machine... this is ENTERTAINMENT folks. As for other "nonsensical" qualms.. Look- these were simple people with simple lives, so pardon them if they're terrified of animals they've never seen (like horses). People that walked across the world like they're drugged zombies? If we managed to evolve, wouldn't it make sense to assume that they were tough as hell before Nikes and 7-11s were invented? Other than that, I'm sure as hell I wouldn't want to spend 8 million hours watching them walk so stating that as unrealistic is the dumbest remark I'd ever heard. Why not follow the river instead of cutting across the desert? What a stupid idea that would be, to predictably "escort" enemy ships and walk into the compound of the enemy? Good god there's a crapload of stupid smart people. As for the historical inaccuracies, it's not an effing documentary, so why the bitchings? And why is everyone so sure of every bloody thing like they were born in that era? Nothing learnt from history is 100% (with the exception of the stupidity of Man, inspired by some of the complaints about the movie).
View All Reviews

Opening This Week

Top Box Office

Upcoming Movies

New on DVD