Featured Audience Ratings

• John M

  
  I went in expecting less and a had a fun action packed ride. Was looking for a good fast action movie with nice effects and thats what I got.

• Directors C

  
  [img]http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/icons/icon13.gif[/img] This continues Roland Emmerich's mission to go through every type of action movie and completely destroy the sub genre's reputation with arguably his worst film to date. One of the first being sci-fi… More
  [img]http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/icons/icon13.gif[/img] This continues Roland Emmerich's mission to go through every type of action movie and completely destroy the sub genre's reputation with arguably his worst film to date. One of the first being sci-fi thriller with Independence Day, followed by the disaster movie genre with The Day after Tommorow and then even worse with 2012, the monster movie with Eight Legged Freaks. His only remotely good film i've seen is his under rated Godzilla remake. Anyway, Roland Emmerich's next commercially sucessful but genuinely bad film in terms of anything else is here. 10000 BC has one of the most uninspired scripts ever written. Like Independence Day it is CGI overload with too much aggresiveness. In other words it's trying to make itself look better then it actually is. A terrible plot and no characterisation whatsoever 10000 BC is another big-scale marketing scheme for audience's that dont know any better.

• Phil H

  
  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 hammy… More
  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 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 Gibson's '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, obviously a homage but not as good funnily enough. Its not that much different from his earlier film 'Stargate'. But at the end of the day its silly and very cheesy but its fun, I just wish they were alittle more accurate with that timeline hehe kinda spoils it cos its so wrong.

• Alexander D

  
  Roland Emmerich takes a break from apocalyptic disaster films (well, for one film; we see the release of 2012 a year after this) to direct a ho-hum disaster of an Ice Age-set film. There's so much wrong with 10,000 B.C. There's the narration, to start with. It sounds like… More
  Roland Emmerich takes a break from apocalyptic disaster films (well, for one film; we see the release of 2012 a year after this) to direct a ho-hum disaster of an Ice Age-set film. There's so much wrong with 10,000 B.C. There's the narration, to start with. It sounds like a Native American reading out of a textbook he found in a time capsule. And with all the historical inaccuracies that are practically shouting, "Hey, Historian! Look at me!" (Not that you even have to be a historian to be able to notice them--another big issue.) Oh, and then there's the whole idea of it. If you want to combine a chick flick with a movie about survival and hunting, that's clearly an automatic "N-O". But clearly poor Roland Emmerich did not know that when he created this film, a love story set over twelve-thousand years ago. Sorry, but it just doesn't work. There is one good thing about this film, though, that saves it from becoming a total bomb: the visual effects. They're <i>stunning</i>, as usual for the man behind THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW and INDEPENDENCE DAY, and the costumes and make-up, too, are something to applaud for. But what's to applaud for if you don't even <i>see</i> it? Please take my word and do not see it, as it is underwhelming, redundant, and (forgetting the dazzling visual work) dull, without a good enough story line for an entire feature length.

• Marc L

  
  If you're a 11 year old boy, you will probably love this movie. It has violence, special effects and a love intrest. That's all it takes to entertain 11 year old boys. However, if you are 13+ years old and have a brain, you'll probably end up hating it. The acting is… More
  If you're a 11 year old boy, you will probably love this movie. It has violence, special effects and a love intrest. That's all it takes to entertain 11 year old boys. However, if you are 13+ years old and have a brain, you'll probably end up hating it. The acting is really bad, the plot doesn't make sense, and it steals scenes from better movies like ALL THE TIME. Let me start of by saying, if you've seen Apocalypto, you've seen 10,000 B.C. Ancient man tries to save loved one from civilization who captured loved one. Take away the bloody violence, the Mayans and "Apocalypto"s shear emotion and meaningfulness and throw in Mammoths, violence and cave men and you've got 10,000 B.C. The whole film seems to be incredibly unoriginal. Guy is a loser. Guy becomes hero. Guy falls in love with girl. Girl gets captured. I bet you if I chose a random movie on Netflix, it would have the exact same plot. What's worse is, the plot isn't even fully explained, particularly in the kidnapping scene. Who are these kidnappers? Where do they come from? Also, why does it take like 2 days for the protagonists to make it from the snowy mountains to the jungle to the desert? Were they traveling in hyper speed? Oh wait, I forgot. This movie is not made for thinking. The character development in this movie is some of the worst I've seen in a VERY long time. The characters have no personality at the beginning of the film, and they have none at the end. The relationship between D'Leh and Evolet is very underdeveloped. Not only do they barely know each other yet they fall in love in like two seconds. On top of that, we get no back story on any character in the movie, making me not care about any of them. The acting in the film was awful as well. Steven Strait overacts and underacts, performing a down right awful performance comparable to Barry Pepper's performance in "Battlefield: Earth". Ben Badra was pretty bad too, downright awful, though I don't blame him considering most of his dialogue consists of grunts and random yells. The dialogue in this movie is awful. It sounds like it was written by an 8 year old with quotes like "Do not eat me when I set you free". It's comparable to any of the quotes in "Battlefield: Earth" or "Troll 2" (2 Battlefield Earth refrences. I thought we'd have more.) Imagine an entire script like the line you just read, and you've got this films dialogue. 10,000 B.C is watching a kid playing LEGOs with a large and expensive budget. It's an ugly, witless, bland film filled with cliches that blantantly rips off scenes from other films. (The spear throw= "The Scorpion King", e.t.c)If you still really want to see this movie, go watch "Apocalypto" while watching "Battlefield: Earth" while shaking your head.

• Sophie B

  
  I really love this era and expected this to be a kind of realistic look at the era however it seems they've got a lot of their history wrong. I wasn't invested in any of the characters and to be honest I didn't really care if they got to be together or not. The scene… More
  I really love this era and expected this to be a kind of realistic look at the era however it seems they've got a lot of their history wrong. I wasn't invested in any of the characters and to be honest I didn't really care if they got to be together or not. The scene where the mother dies to save Evolet was stupid and cheesy and ruined the film. The only good thing about it was the CG was pretty damn good.

• Matt G

  
  That was terrible! Holy shit! Never have I seen something so.. STUPID. The dialogue makes no sense, the effects are fine, but everything else is complete and utter shit. Don't see this. Doesn't even deserve half a star. Grade: F

• Albert K

  
  what the hell was this? straight up garbage. i'm surprise roland emmerich didn't try to destroy the world in this one.

• Richard C

  
  D

• Dead A

  
  Well I could sensed that they tried to make it an "awesome" movie. How come they spoke English so fluently? Savage people were suppose to speak something like "lao mao bao"? I don't know. I used to think something like that. At least their dress up indicated… More
  Well I could sensed that they tried to make it an "awesome" movie. How come they spoke English so fluently? Savage people were suppose to speak something like "lao mao bao"? I don't know. I used to think something like that. At least their dress up indicated something like that. And every time when I felt like "yes there's going to be an exciting moment, here it comes!" my bubbles are just bursted in a cruel way. Sometimes I don't trust other reviewers as I found good movies which was poorly rated. But this time I felt stupid for not listening to them. I'm thankful that I watched this for free

• jay n

  
  Pure drivel, the first two films on which this is based were hardly works of art but at least they were entertaining. This just plods on and on with big set pieces which add little to the film. The sixties version may have been inane but at least it had Raquel Welch, not a great… More
  Pure drivel, the first two films on which this is based were hardly works of art but at least they were entertaining. This just plods on and on with big set pieces which add little to the film. The sixties version may have been inane but at least it had Raquel Welch, not a great actress but one with a lot of charisma which is not displayed by any actor here.

• KJ P

  
  One of the worst films I've ever seen, and not to mention how bad the effects are! This film is complete garbage!

• Red L

  
  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.

• Jason O

  
  Another one of those movies that seemed right up my alley that I thought I'd love from the previews, but turned out to be a HUGE disappointment. Not as much about animals and the old days as I'd thought, more of a lame fantasy film.

• Coxxie M

  
  Right, a guy who looks like jason Castro from American Idol who also looks as if a ham sandwich could kick his ass is gonna hunt a wooly mammoth? Noooo i think ill pass, thanks... EDIT: ok i saw it. and yes, if i were a ham sandwich i would not be scared of this caveman.

• Lorenzo v

  
  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… More
  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. 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.

• Derek A

  
  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… More
  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:<p>*ahem*<p>This film 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.

• Brian D

  
  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.......

• danny d

  
  the obvious historical innaccuracies are a huge black mark for this film, and it had its rediculous moments, but i couldnt help but enjoy this film a lot. im usually more into the intelligence of a film and this was more action and eye candy than intelligent, but i had a lot of fun… More
  the obvious historical innaccuracies are a huge black mark for this film, and it had its rediculous moments, but i couldnt help but enjoy this film a lot. im usually more into the intelligence of a film and this was more action and eye candy than intelligent, but i had a lot of fun watching this movie. i couldnt wait to see what would happen next. the end felt silly, but i still cared more about the characters than i should have. this may be a bit of a guilty pleasure because its not "good", but i loved it anyway.

• Bobby H

  
  It's not as great as the hype was for it, but it's also not as bad as the critics made it out to be. 10,000 BC is at fault for being far out when it's accuracy pertaining history is concerned. (Yet - I think that was the entire point, it is considered… More
  It's not as great as the hype was for it, but it's also not as bad as the critics made it out to be. 10,000 BC is at fault for being far out when it's accuracy pertaining history is concerned. (Yet - I think that was the entire point, it is considered "fantasy"). As well as a bit of the prehistoric creatures look a little fake. However, I have to give them credit for the "Mammoths" as they come off really convincing. I think this movie could of also benfited from having at least one big name actor, but the leading actress is super-cute so that counts for something. The movie itself has a great plot. It's a typical love story in which after a tribes people is kidnapped, the lead hunter, sets out to find his girl as well as his fellow tribe members who has been kidnapped. Along the journey he discovers not only his people, but other tribes, other kidnapped victims, an entire world he never knew existed, as well as a lot about himself and about his family history. There's some great twist and soul searching behind this movies plot, and I give it great props. The actors are not anyone major, but there fairly convincing for the roles they must play. There's points in which some of the actors from the main tribe seem a little bit to modern for the movie, but overall, it's a fun action packed adventure that takes you back in time too a time in which we rarley get a glimpse into - 10,000 BC!

Read all 20 featured audience ratings