3.20.2008

Dozing at the Movies: A Review of 10,000 B.C.

by Brett Parker

I yawned a lot during 10, 000 B.C. This is curious, considering the movie contains an interesting premise, fun special effects, competent leads, a really cool villain, and an action-packed third act. You can always depend on caveman flicks to serve up cheesy fun, but director Roland Emmerich takes the production way too seriously and it becomes surprisingly hard to engage. If the film does one thing very strongly, it makes you pine for Raquel Welch when she donned cavewoman garbs in One Million Years B.C.

The film follows the adventures of a caveman tribe circa (yo
u guessed it) 10,000 B.C. Their days consist of tribal rituals, hunting woolly mammoths, and speaking perfect English. The film focuses on D’Leh (Steven Strait), a tribal warrior whose heart belongs to the gorgeous Evolet (Camilla Belle). One day, tragedy strikes when a sinister tribe led by an evil Warlord (Affif Ben Badra) ravages D’Leh’s village and takes Evolet hostage. The Warlord is snatching up tribes to build a community of slaves that will build the pyramids. Desperate to rescue Evolet, D’Leh assembles an army of several tribes to take down the evil Warlord and his forces. This all leads to a climactic showdown of slaves versus masters on the grand Pyramids set piece.

The effects here mainly consist of CGI creatures (mammoths, saber-toothed tigers) that look no more real than Shrek, yet have a fun quality about them that makes it all tolerable. I especially liked a set of giant birds that gobble cavemen in a giant green jungle. As for the dreamy cavewoman formula, Camilla Belle doesn’t exactly fit the bill. Don’t get me wrong, Belle is a drop-dead gorgeous actress, yet her character is grossly underwritten and lacks the carnal quality we’d expect from a role like this. More material (and better costumes) should’ve been nurtured for her character.

Steven Strait’s D’Leh also suffers from the same faults. Strait seems like a durable leading man and will probably do well for himself as a future matinee idol, yet his character has no real dimensions or personality. We care very little about him and care even less about his quest for Evolet. Both Strait and Belle are attractive and likeable and will hopefully get better material in better movies. The one performance I did really enjoy was that of the evil Warlord. Badra looks like Ben Kingsley on steroids and his foreign caveman tongue makes him sound like the Persian Warlord from 300 with a really bad cold. He’s a uniquely evil presence that’s like an exotic color against a drab background.

Roland Emmerich is a director who tackles popcorn movie ventures with slick and elaborate production values. I think his problem is that he takes concepts at a serious face value and never adds any significant depth or humor to them. This straight-on approach brought a compelling urgency to Stargate and Independence Day yet brought a frustrating dullness to Godzilla and The Day After Tomorrow. Adventure movies work best when there’s a colorful spirit driving them along. Wolfgang Peterson’s Poseidon may have been an expensive special effects show, but it’s the fact that the characters were more colorful than Crayola that made the movie watchable.

10, 000 B.C. has drawn numerous comparisons to Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto and the two films indeed have a lot in common. Both films follow an ancient and primitive tribe as they try to fight off the evil forces of an advanced civilization. Apocalypto demonstrates everything that’s wrong with 10, 000 B.C. and proves that Emmerich lacks the passion and risk apparent in Gibson’s direction. Gibson brought a stronger sense of adventure, danger, and humor to his film and even expressed deeper themes hidden within the material. Apocalypto is an intelligent allegory on primal violence and cultural conflicts while 10, 000 B.C. never rises above being a routine genre exercise. Emmerich’s film also reminded me of 300 in its depiction of a small band of warriors who take on an imperial army. I used to have my reservations about the cartoonish and macho world 300 created, but after 10, 000 B.C., I’ll never complain about the former again. For those that hate on the Spartan epic, I ask you to endure 10, 000 B.C. and tell me 300 doesn’t feel like Lawrence of Arabia afterwards.

I’m sure there will be plenty of moviegoers who are curious to see this film based on its premise and its blockbuster potential, but I warn you: it will bore you and have you thinking about better films the entire time. This made me realize that it’s better to have an adventure epic be too silly than too serious. It will also make you more appreciative of cinematic adventures that do work and are exciting. I guess we really did need another Indiana Jones after all!

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've got a thing for Mastadonts. Oddly, the word "Mastadont" is derived from the Greek for "nipple tooth". Interesting, since the other term for such an animal is "Wooly Mammoth". You can take the innuendo from there.
When I was younger, I would take boys to the NYS Museum to view the Mastadont exhibit ...as a test; if they found it to have the same stark and lonely majestic beauty as I found it to have they were keepers.
When this movie came out I immediately felt, despite its unromantic subject matter, that it would be a good date movie. But only if there were tons of mastadonts and to the correct scale.

Anonymous said...

I've got a thing for Mastadonts. Oddly, the word "Mastadont" is derived from the Greek for "nipple tooth". Interesting, since the other term for such an animal is "Wooly Mammoth". You can take the innuendo from there.
When I was younger, I would take boys to the NYS Museum to view the Mastadont exhibit ...as a test; if they found it to have the same stark and lonely majestic beauty as I found it to have they were keepers.
When this movie came out I immediately felt, despite its unromantic subject matter, that it would be a good date movie. But only if there were tons of mastadonts and to the correct scale.