Movies You Can Skip: 10,000 B.C.

Posted on 10th March 2008 by Ryan Somma in Mediaphilism - Tags: , ,

10,000 B.C. tells the story of a tribe of people living in what is, to my mother’s best guess, the Himalayas. All year long, the tribe looks forward to when the mammoths come migrating through their land, so they can hold their great hunt. This is actually right about the time Mammoths went extinct due to climate change and over-hunting by primitive tribes just like the one in this movie. These are hunter-gatherers, but we don’t see them do much gathering, which would have been their primary source of sustenance. I guess they focused on gathering after they finished eating all the mammoths.

Somehow this is a multi-cultural tribe, some members look Caucasian, others Asian, others North American Indian, but they all speak English with an inconsistent Arab accent in dialogue that is meant to be primitive, but is actually just really really bad. I cringed every time a character referred to a long time as, “Many Moons.”

One day a blue-eyed girl shows up, the local shaman looks into her mind and predicts “four-legged demons” would come one day, meaning men on horseback, 6,000 years before the domestication of horses. And they do come, taking much of the tribe as slaves, including the blue-eyed girl, who our well-waxed hero must go on a quest to save.

This quest takes him through the bamboo jungles of Asia and India, where he is attacked by Phororhacos, a giant predatory bird that not only lived in South America, not the Old World, but was long extinct by this time. He then somehow travels through Africa (before reaching the Middle-East), where he gathers up many African Tribes into an army, including one tribe with bones sticking out of their chins, which made absolutely no sense whatsoever (seriously, somebody please get a photo of it and explain how that works).

Eventually, they arrive at the Pyramids at Giza, which are nearly complete 7,500 years before they were actually finished, and located alone in a vast desert that was actually lush farmland, a fantastic metropolis, and one of the most advanced civilizations of the time. There are also Mammoths being used to build the Pyramids… but whatever.

The Pyramids in 10,000 B.C.

The Pyramids in 10,000 B.C.

Instead of being run by the Pharaohs, the pyramids are being built by people claiming to be gods whose city has sunk into the ocean. Thanks to my Mom the New Ager, I now know they were referring to Atlantis, a myth probably based on the Minoan civilization, which was wiped out by a volcanic eruption about 3,500 years ago, 8,500 years after this movie takes place.

The slaves revolt, the oppressors are toppled with much slow motion dramatics (Yes, I know this is sort of a plot spoiler (If you’re one of those people who doesn’t know the good guys are gonna win.), but if you still plan on seeing this film after everything I’ve told you, then you deserve to have it spoiled.). The movie accurately depicts the pyramidion, the top of the Pyramid, was covered in gold leaf, but doesn’t bother to explain how the Pyramids were finished after the slaves push the pyramidion off to avalanche down one of the Pyramid’s slopes. I guess the Pharaohs could have come along thousands of years later and said, “Hey look at those half-built Pyramids! I know, let’s get some slaves and finish building them!”

The one thing the film does get right is that blue eyes was a genetic mutation that appeared between six and 10K years ago; however, this film was made before the fact was known. The director got lucky, which does give 10,000 BC one redeeming quality: proving the hypothesis that even a blind squirrel can find an occasional acorn.

4 Comments

  1. Ryan, I knew you would hate this movie. Just because it is of the past, and has has obviously incorrect information :p

    But here is how I will watch the movie, taking a cue from Marvel. I will picture it as earth in an alternate dimension. Aka, I will take it is an action adventure movie, meaning to woo me with visual effects and possibly cool fight/action sequences. Now please Ryan, get off your mighty high horse and stop hating everything that is new and isn’t correct, it is so cliche :o

    Not meant to be an insult or anything, but just a message. Ryan, calm down, heh.

    Comment by Nick Hamden — March 10, 2008 @ 12:13 pm

  2. I totally knew I would hate it too. In fact, that was the whole reason I went to see it, to sniff derisively at the film and look down upon it with an air of smug superiority.

    Now if the film had been done in that Marvel-style you described, I might have totally loved it… like Stargate or something. But this movie just sucked. It sucked and sucked and then it sucked some more. It sucked so bad the suckiness dribbled down from the screen to wiggle away into the darkness to die in shame.

    Okay, maybe it didn’t suck that bad, but it certainly wasn’t good.

    Don’t just take my word for it Rotten Tomatoes hated it too. If it had been a good film with all these historical inaccuracies, I would have pointed out the inaccuracies, but plugged the movie anyway. When a movie’s good, I can overlook the implausibilities. Gangs of New York was a great example of such a film.

    And feel free to insult me anytime, I know I’m a dumbass. : )

    Comment by ideonexus — March 10, 2008 @ 9:41 pm

  3. Damn, that was gonna be my next argument, that you went into the movie, thinking you would hate it, and thus hating it. But you already knew that about yourself :(

    Comment by Nick Hamden — March 10, 2008 @ 11:54 pm

  4. […] so violates the audience’s suspension of disbelief. Then they should be properly flamed, like 10,000 BC or Transformers: Revenge of the […]

    Pingback by Mooney and Kirshenbaum’s “Unscientific America” | ideonexus.com — July 1, 2009 @ 7:00 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.