2 NO!feldoln | 09/06/2008 | See all feldoln's reviews (56)I waited quite some time before I had the chance to see this movie. I saw it in trailers, but unfortunately it didn't appeal to me enough to see it in the cinema. However, I watched this earlier today, and I can't believe it... What a joke this film led to be.The plot is quite interesting when you hear it summarised. But it's to a great unfortunate instance that this film turned out to be so bad. It had such a great chance to be an excellent movie. However, the many historic inconsistencies, ridiculous landscape structure, absurd fairy-tale like magic, and loads more turned it into something that it shouldn't have been.Here's the thing - the film is set in the obvious 10,000 B.C. Questions rather hastily arise from just thinking about it. Why do they speak English for a start! It would have been 10,000 times better if no words were spoken. At least then it would have some form of realism. When they spoke, it was never anything of actual value - One of the first things our hero says is how the moon (which according to them stays in the same place) shines in the sky, and how that represents his love for our leading lady. I forbid as well, that this at one point is a shining dot in the sky and at another about 20 times bigger than our moon actually is. I'm pretty fed up with the moon being enlarged in movies - there is no need for it, and it simply cheapens the scene every time.Another problem; the sheer amount of historical inconsistencies are truly a burden to the film, and since it's trying to be set 10,000 BC, you'd think they would do they're research, and get the facts right; Right? Well, apparently not because let's list a few, shall we?Eighteen foot long sabre tooth tigers did not exist in that era. Nor did mastodons (at least not where they were anyway). Elephants today, and then, were lead by the matriarchal female - Bulls were never leaders as depicted in this film.(a) Metalworking - first copper, then bronze, then iron - was not mastered before 5500 BC; (b) Exploitation of horses for human transportation started approximately 4000 BC; (c) The earliest pyramid was erected in Egypt circa 2630 BC; and (d) Mammoths had never been domesticated as pack animals.Okay, there are lot of errors there already, but there are still loads more! I haven't even mentioned the massive problems with the films geography. To start, the group set out starting on mountain tops, then suddenly into a tropical forest, then a desert, with seemingly no transitions at all. The tropical forest is too close to the snowed mountains, without any transition between them. The terror birds that attacked in the forest lived in South America not Europe, Asia, or Africa. The tribes are seen sleeping barely clothed in the desert during night-time. The temperature differences between day and night are known to be enormous in the desert, because the heat cannot be held in.So with this many problems, what else is there to possibly be wrong with it? I'll tell you - it copies scenes from other (decent) movies, it has a fair amount of cheesy lines, it's completely predictable, it has a bad cast, who can't act well, bad costumes and the CG was poor at best.(Just for the sake of anyone wondering what movies it copied scenes from: 300, Aliens, Jurassic Park are a small list.)In my honest opinion, if you want to see a decent version of this, watch 'Apocalypto' instead. In truth, I wanted this film to be good, but the constant amount of inconsistencies and other problems just made it impossible for it to be any better than a 1 or 2 star rating. On a last note, the ending was THE WORST thing I've ever seen in a supposed SERIOUS film. I'd advise to skip this movie entirely.