|
Showing reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 292)
|
|
 |
This move was a lot different from other movies. If you happen to like historical drama with an actress here who was considered to be the whole attraction of this film. Was okay but there I think need some improvements as I think the plot has to give in more. Otherwise this film would be quite enjoyable to go and see.
6/10
27.10.2009 -
andreaquebec0@ - age: 50+
It is worth seeing if you like historical drama. Camilla Bell was easy to watch on screen and I hope we will see more of her in other roles.
7/10
31.8.2009 -
patnace@ - age: 50+
Follows the typical Hollywood script and was quite predictable but enjoyable.
7/10
29.8.2009 -
mortaric@ - age: 26-35
I enjoyed the movie, but the acting could have used some work. I recommend to just watch the movie for what it is, without ridicule, and then you'll really enjoy it.
7/10
4.7.2009 -
jqhn,quest1@ - age: 18-25
I love this movie it had really good actors in it the plot was amzing. It made me almost cry.
10/10
2.6.2009 -
munch1996@ - age: 18-25
This movie if it were ever seen by you would make you wish to puke. They lacked any time sense and had a complete absence of knowledge. The movie was predictable and the plot mind numbing. They have a childs view of wildlife and ancient living conditions. Horrible, I say they should do some research beforehand.
1/10
21.5.2009 -
smartz47@ - age: 13-17
The magnificent trailer rose my expectations two high. So much more the director could have done with it! I'll give this one a miss; 5/10.
5/10
30.3.2009 -
mrbugsy65@ - age: 1-12
People told me it sucked but when I saw it, I thought it was pretty good.
7/10
2.3.2009 -
sbaron_35@ - age: 26-35
I am so disapointed! I expected so much more from this movie. Boring, not as much action as it may seem in the preview. Story kind of seemed like it was ripped from Apocalyptica? I don't know... What a shame though.
3/10
28.1.2009 -
jono524@ - age: 18-25
This movie is really good the first time u see it then it kinda gets boring.
8/10
14.1.2009 -
jmdgallant@ - age: 13-17
There was no story. Don't see this movie. The acting was awful, it was unrealistic. Just not a good movie.
2/10
2.12.2008 -
rlacy@ - age: 13-17
| | | | |
I hateed this movie it had no action + the story suckkked (N)
1/10
9.11.2008 -
jfd1223@ - age: 13-17
I adored this movie I can see it over and over again directors should make more movies like that.
9/10
7.8.2008 -
tiffy_cutie@ - age: 13-17
It was pretty good its worth seeing but I dont think I'd watch it again.
7/10
6.8.2008 -
toxic,frizhead@ - age: 13-17
Always hesitating to go see it! But was glad when I did... Beautiful picture. You can tell alot of hard work was put into this one!
8/10
5.8.2008 -
m_tino80@ - age: 26-35
Was appealing visually and the story line was very captivating. It really felt like I was there.
9/10
25.7.2008 -
roxychyld@ - age: 18-25
I was expecting one thrilling prehistorical adventure. Unfortunately, 10,000 B. C. didn't end up to be that special to my eyes. Don't make the mistake of buying it on DVD or Blu-Ray.
6/10
24.7.2008 -
lp@ - age: 13-17
I really enjoyed this movies. Glad there was no subtitling!
9/10
13.7.2008 -
madmom4@ - age: 26-35
This movie is visually appealing with enough action to hold your attention. Not a realistic story line.
7/10
11.7.2008 -
sherrileemac@ - age: 36-49
Even though I haven't made it through half of the DVD yet I had to write a review warning viewers to stay away from this horrible film. Should never have been made.
2/10
10.7.2008 -
mazey6@ - age: 26-35
Skip this dumb movie and watch Quest for Fire. This movie puts anthropology back a million years. The writers should have researched, coz dumbness begins immediately and never seems to stop. Authenticity is lost in the first piece of dialogue. There is more 10, 000 B. C. in Lothar than in this disasterous directing. I was waiting for a character to begin a soliloquy- that stylistic choice would have added to the dumbness. This movie was difficult to watch. Even the special effects could not distract from the dumbness. All parties involved should be embarrassed to have created this dud.
2/10
8.7.2008 -
raclout@ - age: 50+
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
-WOOLY mammoths in the African desert... heat exhaustion? -evil slave traders resemble Arab traders who probably didn't come into existence until waaay later? -the priests of the "god" resemble... Aztecs? -Arab slave traders came all the way from the Equator to capture nomads in the frozen north... and it only took them 3 days to get back? -I am pretty sure the Pyramids were built under Pharohs of the old kingdoms... and some of them were built by Israeli slaves (um... story of MOses? )
3/10
7.7.2008 -
uchan77@ - age: 26-35
I couldn't help but think throughout this movie that a different director and different make-up artists could have made this a really great movie. Of course 10,000 years before Christ, these people seemed a little too well refined so that was unbelievable. It's a renter.
5/10
30.6.2008 -
casserly5@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
It wasn't bad but it wasn't GREAT. A little bit boring and confusing. Evolet, one of the main characters, is absolutely beautiful.
7/10
26.6.2008 -
detwiije@ - age: 13-17
Good movie. I enjoyed it mostly because Steven Strait is extremely good-looking. The story is alright too. You can't call this movie a masterpiece but you can't say you wasted your money on it either. It was enjoyable. It was very beautiful to watch (Camilla Belle isn't hard on the eyes either) and there were some nice scenes. I'd recommend it!
7/10
24.6.2008 -
freestyle3000@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
It got blasted for being historically inaccurate, but there are signs that there was civilization as early as 10000 to 14000 years before Christ in the form of the Bon or Bonpo civilization of ancient Tibet, assurped by Buddhism in the 6th century BC. The Bon are one of the big mysteries of our planet. As such, the movie is perhaps an unintentional masterpiece. Conans Hyperborea was really set in the Bon period of the Silk road area, where I feel this film is meant to take place.
8/10
23.6.2008 -
knownspace@ - age: 26-35
Visually stunning... other than that it was a complete flop. The plot was sooo unbelievable that I had to laugh, seriously!
3/10
6.6.2008 -
etowngal@ - age: 26-35
Screenplay, settings, costumes and story were very good. Really entertaining.
9/10
31.5.2008 -
jepenny@ - age: 50+
Great eye candy, don't expect much more. The acting was bearable, the fantasy aspect appealed to me.
6/10
11.5.2008 -
tumuerte@ - age: 26-35
Not amazing but watchable... would wait for the dvd... but it's an ok movie... just give it a chance.
7/10
10.5.2008 -
alaingauthier72@ - age: 26-35
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Should I start with the fact that I was offended by the movie as a black african, because it suggests that 10 000 BC blacks where already slaves and were waiting for a white man to free them? Or that the Egyptians did not build the pyramids and they found them where they are? Or should I talk about the fact that the chronology is totally wrong since in less than a lifetime a hunter became a nomad and a farmer? Not to mention, giants birds, mammoth in the desert, people sleeping outside in a snowstorm barely covered, a whole army crossing the desert without water or food supply, hunter that wait for their preys instead of following the herd. The list goes on and on. Many people get their education from movies, Hollywood should pay more attention to what it produced.
2/10
2.5.2008 -
saintdodo@ - age: 26-35
I am baffled how these clashing cultures fit on a timeline. The 3 tribes and the animals are all from different eras. And some sort of Atlantis explanation. But, once you turn your brain off, not a bad adventure.
7/10
22.4.2008 -
clifforda@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
K, so this movie was def. A rip off of a couple movies... it was really poorly acted and just dumb.
4/10
21.4.2008 -
emckenzie47@ - age: 13-17
Ummm... mammoths were an ice age animal. Wouldn't they have died of heat stroke in the desert? Stupid movie.
1/10
20.4.2008 -
hook2275@ - age: 26-35
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Movie was laughable, bad acting and a totally ridicoulous plot. You can literally see the snowy hills and they get to a tropical rainforest in the middle of nowhere. Are you serious killer monster osterichs?! I mean come on...
2/10
20.4.2008 -
divad_666@ - age: 18-25
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I really did not know what to expect with this movie but I really enjoyed it. The scenes were great, the story was great and it was nice to see where the "dinosaur life" was at the time and how these people survived that and the weather. One thing though is I would not recommend it for younger kids and there were two behind us laughing at one of the most poignant scenes in the movie as they just did not understand it.
8/10
20.4.2008 -
deinesgp@ - age: 36-49
Probally one of the worst movie's I have ever seen. The plot is terrible the acting was brutal. It seems like there is going to be a huge fight scene in the end of the movie and it might last for about 4 min. I would never pay to see this money or ever want to own it. This story could've been made so so much better.
2/10
19.4.2008 -
mitch_macmillan@ - age: 13-17
Bad movie. Bad acting. Wooly mammoths in the desert and giant birds. Ya pretty accurate of the holocene.
3/10
18.4.2008 -
fal_c@ - age: 18-25
It is nice to see sure fabulous special effects. The woolly mammoths must be seen in a theatre to appreciate their size. Excellent plot. Nice to watch a movie without swearing in it.
9/10
18.4.2008 -
moodymb@ - age: 36-49
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I walked out after 25 minutes. So cliche it's painful. Whats up with stealing the 300 style narration?. I think it's the same voice.
2/10
17.4.2008 -
nbj622@ - age: 26-35
This is a rainy Sunday rental from your local DVD shop... for a day when you feel like watching a movie but don't care if you fall asleep during it.
5/10
17.4.2008 -
sothaitthai@ - age: 36-49
Interesting and much better than the previous movie...
7/10
16.4.2008 -
natsuki_tokisho@ - age: 26-35
My friends and I really enjoyed it! It was sooo totally awesome, we want to see it again an again. I would suggest to make sure you don't have a sib, because they'd be jealous!
7/10
16.4.2008 -
sarahandbluebell@ - age: 13-17
Well filmed, edited and at least the story line is coherent, although painfully simplistic for all the complex BIG production effort. Also, some character actions too improbable or stupid, or both. A lite cheesy action film. Good acting and casting.
6/10
16.4.2008 -
paulspaniel@ - age: 36-49
Not as good as 300 first of all, but an okay movie overall. Good plot, but still a little disappointing. Wait for the DVD to come out, not worth $10.00.
7/10
16.4.2008 -
d-jung2005@ - age: 13-17
It is nice to watch movies without any big actors in it sometimes as we discover new people and their talents. There are a few interesting characters in this particular movie. The special effects were great and we truly enjoyed seeing the movie on the big screen.
8/10
15.4.2008 -
blanchard,nancy@ - age: 36-49
It's the best movie of the world 10.00 that movie its your life go to the cinema now!!!
10/10
13.4.2008 -
serghei-681@ - age: 13-17
Really good. We were supposed to see Prom Night, but they wouldn't let us in, so we saw this. It wasn't bad. The only things I didn't like was there was too much stabbing and I didn't get the whole "Tale of the Blue Eyed Child" thing.
8/10
13.4.2008 -
proud,bluenoser@ - age: 1-12
Well filmed, but nothing more. Wait for the DVD... No, wait for the TV screening (probably in only a few months, by the looks of it)!
3/10
13.4.2008 -
endimios@ - age: 26-35
Is movie is awesome , i liked watching it, i like the part where that guy, was trying to find is girl or something, but yeah I liked it, p. S. I hope they will make another part of it.
7/10
13.4.2008 -
girl_got_game_01@ - age: 13-17
| 
