Quest for Fire (1981) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
121 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Unique prehistoric survival adventure.
jckruize22 April 2002
Ignore the idiotic negative comments of the naysayers. This is a great film. It boldly creates a world unlike any we've seen before, with dedicated actors going well beyond the call of duty in portraying a life and death struggle for survival under the most harrowing conditions imaginable.

Featuring Claude Agostini's splendid wide-screen cinematography of remote, rainswept landscapes and a rich score by Phillipe Sarde, this movie will take you on a compelling journey that, if nothing else, will clarify the routine creature comforts of our civilized world in a manner more direct than anything you might have previously experienced in a theater.

Jean-Jacques Annaud and collaborators tell their tale with dramatic simplicity and virtually no dialogue, but the points made are powerful. Humanity survives, and will prevail despite our weaknesses and faults. Overall, a remarkable, life-affirming work.
136 out of 148 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A one of a kind
preppy-315 August 2007
I caught this in Boston back in 1981. They played it in the biggest cinema they had in 70mm and in stereo sound. I had only the slightest idea of what it was about but it sounded interesting. When I realized it was a caveman movie I almost left, but the beautiful wide screen cinematography kept me in my seat. Slowly it worked on me and by the end I was mesmerized.

There's not really much of a plot--the caveman discover fire and different sexual positions--and there's no dialogue that we could understand but it didn't matter. The whole cast was excellent--especially Ron Perelman and Rae Dawn Chong (who had guts to do this). Their whole performances had to be done using some foreign language and body movement but they pulled it off. I heard Anthony Burgess was called in to develop the language used and coach the cast in how to use it. The cinematography is just breath-taking and the prehistoric animals look realistic all the way. I can't exactly say why I loved this movie but I did.

20th Century Fox deserves credit for actually acquiring the film and releasing it. Naturally it bombed badly here in the US but it seems I'm not the only one who likes it--when I mention it to friends I just get a blank look back. I haven't seen it since 1981 but it's never left me. Try to see it on a big screen TV. I give it an 8.
16 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Powerful caveman epic
Leofwine_draca22 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Jean-Jacques Annaud's French caveman epic has gained an almost mythic status in certain circles, mainly due to its one-of-a-kind nature and its relative obscurity here in Britain. Expecting another man-vs-monsters adventure yarn in the style of ONE MILLION YEARS B.C., I instead found myself watching a powerful and deeply moving film concentrating on the triumph of the human spirit, the struggle for life, and the calamity of death. Despite there being no recognisable language spoken in the film, the story is very easy to follow and basically consists of the quest undertaken by three cavemen to capture and bring back fire for their tribe, who will be wiped out without it. Along the way they face many dangers, from wildlife to aggressive rival tribes, to treacherous bogs and even cannibals. QUEST FOR FIRE is a film that pulls no punches in its depiction of the brutality and violence of stone-age life, and the explicit violence and gore is kept realistic which makes it all the more shocking.

Most, if not all, of the elements in this film are spot-on. Annaud's direction helps keep things interesting throughout, and his style helps the viewer to identify with the central characters despite us being separated from them by thousands of years. The music is stirring and the camera-work often spectacular, often when taking in the breathtaking unspoilt locations that the film uses - from the wilds of Canada to the plains of Kenya and the mountains of Scotland and the Cairngorns, the landscape is used in such an evocative way that it almost becomes a character in the film itself. The special effects that transform lions into sabre-tooths and elephants into mammoths are simplistic but highly effective, as is the subtle makeup used on the actors to give them that prehistoric look.

Speaking of acting, it is generally of a very high level in what are difficult performances to give - acting must be done here through actions rather than words, but the actors successfully manage to pull it off. Each of the central trio (comprised of Everett McGill, Ron Perlman, and Nameer El-Kadi) have strong, distinctive appearances which are accentuated to good use in the movie. Rae Dawn Chong also puts in her breakthrough performance as the cannibal prisoner who is freed by our heroes and joins them on their journey. The various action is handled adeptly with fine camera-work and the film is very moving at times, especially towards the end, without being sentimental in any way. QUEST FOR FIRE is definitely the most realistic caveman film of all time and also perhaps the best. Incidentally, the film's success was proved by the arrival of two Italian rip-offs which followed the year after: Alberto Cavallone's gruesomely graphic MASTER OF THE WORLD, and Umberto Lenzi's silly but endearing IRON MASTER.
14 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Remarkable
August199123 February 2004
I recall when this film was released. If memory serves, the hype concerned the efforts to turn an elephant into a mastodon using make-up and an actress running around nude. In other words, the film in my mind fell into the 'One Million Year BC' category and I ignored it.

Later, I learned who Annaud was and admired 'The Name of the Rose' for its direction, its translation of a difficult book and its effort at realism. Finally, I rented 'Quest for Fire' on DVD and saw it on the big home screen. (In fact, I watched it several months ago and I'm commenting now because it remains in my mind.)

Experts can quibble about the realism. But for me, this film makes an intelligent and credible effort to present a world of 80,000 years ago. In this, it raises good questions about who we are as a species. Human genetic code has not changed in that time and any one of the beings portrayed would be perfectly capable of using a computer as I'm doing now. Nonetheless, they lived in a world without numbers, without prices, without trade, without written language and without means to create fire. Everyone alive today had an ancestor who survived those conditions. 'Quest for Fire' is a must-see for anyone curious about the human condition.
100 out of 108 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
"...and Prometheus said, 'Let me give you fire,' and humanity saw that it was good..."
ragana26 April 2005
A peaceful tribe of prehistoric humans, unable to create fire, loose their only source of flame due to another tribe's attack. Three of the tribe leave their home to search for a new source of fire to bring back to their people before the cold climate can take its toll. Their journey brings them not only into contact with other tribes of prehistoric humans at different stages of evolution but also advances their own humanity, as well as teaching them to be "prometheuses" in their own right.

An absolutely fascinating film. Those who are partial to history and anthropology will especially enjoy this. An honest, un-PC look at the origins of the species and the development of humanity through loss, tragedy, hardship, hostile elements and the beginnings of laughter, morality, community service, leadership, friendship and of course, love. A wondrous feat of body language performances as there is no truly discernible language/dialogue spoken. This is a well done, well made film all around.

For those into scenery gazing the beauty of the locations (Canada, Iceland, Kenya, Scotland) alone are worth a rental fee.

Ron Perlman is one of the three male leads/would be prometheuses. Watch the body language! Someone did research! A difficult and impressive (first movie) performance.

Definitely worth a buy (the DVD has two commentaries, one with the director Jean-Jacques Annaud, one with producer Michael Gruskoff, Rae Dawn Chong and Ron Perlman).
111 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
In Search Of The Past
Lechuguilla30 January 2007
Raw and at times brutal, this story follows three primitive warriors who make a cross-country journey in search of that most precious of natural elements ... fire. In prehistoric times, having fire meant survival from the cold and protection from predators.

In this film, facial gestures, hand movements, general body language and mannerisms of the characters are all consistent with conclusions about early man, as a result of thorough anthropological research. In lieu of modern language the film's dialogue consists of some 350 invented words and sounds, also based on research. In addition, an important part of the film is attention to detail in costumes and makeup, for which the film won several awards. All of these technical cinematic elements combine to create a reasonably accurate visual and audio impression of mankind as it existed some 80,000 years ago.

As you would expect, the film is shot entirely in rugged, remote locations, resulting in landscapes that are stunningly beautiful. Background music is generally low-key and ethereal, like what you might hear in a sci-fi film. There's lots of flute sounds, which reinforce the simplicity of the time period.

For all its technical achievements, this film's main weakness may be the screenplay. When you take away the artifacts of modern life, you're very limited in the kind of story you can tell. And that clearly is the case here, with a plot that drones on with a monotony and repetition that can be tedious, and at times difficult for some viewers.

Although the story's entertainment value may be marginal, "Quest For Fire", with its low tech cinematic style, is interesting not only for its technical elements but also for its over arching theme of modern human's continuity with prehistoric man, based on the element of fire.
35 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
However accurate or not it is: the best prehistoric men movie
Quebec_Dragon8 June 2009
It's probably the best and most accurate prehistoric men movie ever made as I write this (barring any PBS or Discovery channel documentaries). As accurate as anything prehistoric can be since anthropologists are probably even worse than historians about agreeing on theories. Whatever is the truth, it felt believable for that period. I thought at first it might devolve into cheap cavemen antics and the "costumes" for the second tribe seen seemed really lame but the movie grew a lot on me. It's actually a movie about the transition from ape to man condensed into a relatively short time for one tribe. It's actually more philosophical and emotional than one might initially think. What makes us humans instead of animals? Everything was filmed on outside locations with real animals (sometimes modified to look prehistoric) and it shows in the scope and authenticity. It felt strangely grim, uncomfortable and disorienting to me, which when I think about it, is probably how those tribesmen going on the quest must have felt.

They even had a famous linguist/author, Anthony Burgess, invent a language for the ape men to communicate. There aren't even any subtitles. It was made so anyone in the world can see this and understand which is a feat in itself. The beautiful musical score certainly helped counteract the lack of intelligible words by conveying the drama of the times. The performances were very good and convincing especially the one by Rae Dawn Chong (strange female covered in gray "makeup") who had the guts to be mostly naked throughout the film. Look also for Ron Perlman in his first role. From the commentaries, the actors really suffered a lot during shooting for the sake of authenticity (such as walking barefoot all the time). The story was simple but well told and meaningful. It felt a bit long at times for me so be sure you're up for it before starting your journey.

Rating: 7.5 out of 10
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A journey through the essence of the human spirit.
Gustav-1115 June 1999
Jean Jacques Annaud's "Quest for Fire" caught me by surprise. I have always been enthralled by movies that take place in prehistoric times, but I never expected this movie to be filmed with such consistency. This film captures an innocent adventure, in which three men (Naoh, Amoukar,& Gaw) are selected by the tribe to recapture their snuffed out fire. The journey brings them into many trials of existence, which we modern beings very seldom come in contact with. At points, there scenes that capture a sense of humor that is so basic to our modern way of thinking, but for these characters they are just discovering such things like the concept of laugher. At other points of the film, these brave men encounter situations that show the true brutal world of the survival of the fittest. The manner in which these characters search for fire gives the viewer a true love for the characters courage and heroic nature. For if they do not succeed, it is surely the end of their tribe and for them. The fire holds the key to survival with its warmth, cooking function, and most of all its ability to ward off stalking predators. Fire is power for beings at this point in time. Just as knowledge is for modern human beings.

This film succeeds in it's proportions,direction, settings, music, great special effects,and acting. The acting especially is something to take notice of, since there is no recognizable language spoken. The preparation for such a role as this these is amazing in its own right. "Quest for Fire" will lead you into the reality of what once was and capture the essence of the human spirit.
90 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fascinating And Entertaining
sddavis6320 June 2009
This movie presents an interesting piece of speculation about the life of prehistoric humans and sub-humans, and the possible interactions between them. I suppose credit has to go first to the makeup department, who made a pretty convincing set of these creatures. The story is interesting and well-acted, especially considering that the cast was working with the significant limitation of not speaking a word of English (or any other known human language) in the whole movie. As might be expected, given the context, the story is violent (and, at times, even brutal.) Somewhat surprisingly, there is also a more gentle touch included, especially contributed by the character played by Rae Dawn Chong - belonging to a tribe more advanced than the primary tribe of the movie, who introduces the lead tribe to more advanced human traits such as laughter and affection, if not love.

The presence of the various tribes was one of the weaknesses here as well, though. As best as I could make out, there seem to be three different humanoid species represented. What I know about human evolution is essentially what I remember from high school biology, but from the makeup the tribes appeared to be australopithecine (the ape men at the beginning of the movie), neanderthal (the primary tribe of the movie) and cro-magnon, essentially modern humans. The problem is that, from what I remember of those high school biology classes, I'm not sure those three species ever co-existed. I'm not sure that any three humanoid species ever co-existed in the same time and place. So that represented a bit of a muddle to me. The mammoths portrayed also lacked authenticity to me. I thought they looked exactly like what they were - elephants with makeup on.

Still, this is a good movie, if a bit fanciful and even with the possibility of inaccuracies. Although probably not made with this intention, I appreciated that the movie offered a good glimpse at the cause of conflict even in today's world. The tribes fought each other because they all wanted fire. Today's world generally assumes that conflict is about ideological or religious differences, which is nonsense. People fight because one side has what the other wants. The story also flows pretty well, and at 1:40 it's pretty easy watching. 7/10
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Very underrated.. one of my top 20 Favorites.
jake-8731 January 1999
Many of my friends laugh at me when I mention this movie. I don't know what makes so many of them hate it so.. Perhaps the lack of understandable dialogue? Too much like thinking to understand what is going on? Whatever it is, I am one of the few I know who feel this is a very underrated movie.. I know it is not accurate from a scientific perspective... The time line is all messed up.. but so what? I sat there in the theater just thinking.. "suppose live in our distant past WAS something like this movie. Fire=Life=Fire. Along comes a superior tribe and I realize that I could summon the flames at MY WILL. How powerful I would feel.. Almost G-d like! The photography is lush and there is a tinge of humor when the backward tribe learns to laugh. I enjoyed the story and the acting... everything. Rent it! See it twice if you must. Just maybe... we ARE looking back at ourselves.
128 out of 148 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Innovative for its time
smatysia23 June 2012
OK, well, even attempting to make this into a movie was innovative, especially at that time. I read the novel that this was based on, many years ago, and liked it a lot. To the best of my recollection, Ika and her tribe never appeared in it, so the filmmakers added that bit. The cinematography was beautiful, and the Scottish locations helped get across the cold of Ice Age Europe. The struggle to survive really came across as well. The special animal effects, were much remarked on at the time, but look rather cheesy now. However, I kind of like that. You really had to work at it back in the day, unlike now, when the computer will put anything at all onto your film. Ron Perlman looked seriously simian, and you have to give him credit, since he doesn't look that way normally. And this was the breakout role for Rae Dawn Chong, who also nailed her very odd role. Worth checking out.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The best cavemen movie ever!
elcopy7 June 1999
This is an extremely overlooked film many people should learn about. First, it tells you a very complex story without a single line of dialog successfully.

Second, the story is universal: Every civilization on earth can pick up this film and understand it, because it goes to the most basic, primitive issues of a species (mainly, survival). Third, it makes the beginning of man interesting. Fourth, it reminds us we were once as savage as any other animal on earth.

Fifth, it's like no other movie you've seen before. That one I can guarantee you.
88 out of 102 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Quite a period piece (ha ha)
Samiam35 August 2009
It's a good thing I saw this before I saw the BBC series Walking with Caveman, otherwise I might have thought less of this movie. But then I remember that this was made twenty years earlier. In fact the age of the film doesn't mean much, Both are entertaining. This one is fiction rather than fact, and it incorporates some decent scientific accuracy, as well as some VERY primitive, but clever humor, and some cute creature effects for the amazing beasts which shared Ice Age Europe with us a hundred thousand years ago.

The great thing about movies like Quest for Fire is the way they can be universally appreciated. There is no classifiable language, it can be enjoyed equally in all countries. People are saying the same thing about WALL-E, but this is actually a better example. After all regardless of Nation, creed, and color, we all evolved from the same creatures.

We follow the semi-epic journey of Neanderthal trio which has been sent by their clan to bring back the gift of fire, after the clan has been kicked out of their massive cave home by the clan of another species. The three of them have to hurry before their brothers and sister freeze to death. Along the way they find a skinny little Homo Sapien girl (that's our species), she is a long way from home and she urges them to help her get back to her people. Reluctantly they do. However, things to do turn out to be so bad when, they discover that these people know how to make fire.

In truth we will never fully know how our ancestors lived, but the fossil remains we have discovered are numerous and can give us a descent understanding. Today, twenty years later, we know twice as much. It is now believed that Neaderthals did not have dark hair, but red hair. I doubt that the majority of people who watch quest for fire will care about science and anthropology, but I think the film is more interesting if you do care. Otherwise you are liable to see quest for fire as old hat, long been replaced by modern movie magic.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Interesting but Inaccurate
atm_gal_056 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
If you are someone who is interested in the origin of man, you will watch this movie and be intrigued. If you are someone with an anthropological background, you will watch this movie and either laugh hysterically or groan tremendously. Apart from being riddled with inaccuracies as far as science is concerned (such as the tiny fact that these four types of early hominids did *not* exist at the same time, nor in the same areas of the world), the Australopithecus afarensis look like extras from "Plant of the Apes", the Homo erectus are big, oafish cannibals, and, naturally, the archaic Homo sapiens are sophisticates with a well-developed fertility culture.

The protagonists of "Quest for Fire" are three Neandertals who go searching for fire after being attacked by the troll-like A. afarensis and losing the ember with which they always begin their blazes. Whilst the film does a good job of telling the story without a single word of any recognizable language, the storyline is disturbing (and disturbingly inaccurate) at times, particularly when our heroes stumble upon H. erectus gnawing on the arm of a (still-living) H. sapiens, or when the Neandertals had the urge for a little coital action. Still, when one considers what was known by paleoanthropologists in the 80's (when this movie was made), some allowance can be made—a tiny, miniscule fraction of allowance. Altogether not a *bad* movie, just don't watch it and expect to ace your Physical Anthropology final.
17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
This film stands up strongly after 25 years
sraymond710 December 2006
What I love about this film is the very plausible portrayal of the development of human traits in prehistoric man. The story centers around a tribe that has not yet learned to start a fire. They have to steal fire from other tribes, or find it in nature. So much of their efforts are centered on keeping a fire constantly nurtured, and if their fire goes out, the entire tribe suffers the elements. However, this is not a simple caveman flick. The filmmakers portray the development of human attributes such as humor and laughing, connection between males and females beyond the pure sexual, language development, story telling, cross-pollination of ideas between tribes of different levels of advancement, and at the end, the awakening of a sense of the transcendent. I find the film to be a compelling drama even after 25 years, and it does not seem at all dated. If you have even the slightest interest in early man, this film is a must-see.
21 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
They say there's no accounting for taste...
nescient12 July 2004
I saw this film (on VHS rental) so long ago I might have been in it. My (ex) wife & friends thought it was stupid - "What's going on? Nobody's saying anything". I found it mesmerising and have been looking for it ever since (car boot sales, Ebay etc).

OK, if you've two adjacent brain cells, you'll spot the anachronisms and the cheap effects, but credit where it's due for originality and balls - to the director and the backers.

If you're sick of hype and tripe, find it. If you're hooked intravenously to Hollywood pap (as 99.999% of the world's population seem to be) then give it a miss.

Just my 2p.
108 out of 134 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The two best scenes in the movie
jmichalec13 February 2004
Much has been said about the movie and all I want to add is what I think are the two best scenes in the movie. The first is when the clay covered tribe member took Naoh into the cave and showed him how to make fire by friction. The look on Naoh's face could not express more wonder if he had pulled a buffalo out of his ear. The second scene was after they returned to their own tribe and tried to narrate to the rest of their tribe the things that they had seen along the way, seemingly inventing language as they went.
16 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The Dawn of Man
evanston_dad29 January 2008
A strange and compelling film about prehistoric man, filmed nearly entirely without dialogue.

It's so lacking in any of the traditional elements that would normally make a film a commercial success that you have to admire its chutzpah if you admire nothing else about it.

Fortunately, it's also excellently made, and feels incredibly authentic, thanks to expert camera-work and production design, and quite amazing makeup effects.

The only recognizable actor in the film is Rae-Dawn Chong, but under all that makeup, even she's hard to spot (just look for the woman).

Grade: A-
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
The best cave man movie ever!
jeelbeartoe18 February 2005
Okay, there haven't been many cave man flicks and they were all bad except for Quest For Fire. Yes, the mammoths looked a bit like Mr. Snuffolopogus and some of the makeup jobs could've been done better but it's still a great movie.

The story line was captivating and the characters were well-developed. Even though there were no subtitles, I could still understand everything that was being said because of the way the movie was put together.

This flick has it all: Action, adventure, comedy, and romance. I loved it.
50 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A noble attempt to capture the distant past
runamokprods11 January 2011
Different primitive tribes interact 80,000 years ago trying to keep their fire alive so they don't freeze and starve.

Visually stunning, and ultimately somewhat moving. But somehow, although it's very well done, it's hard to forget you're watching a movie. I found myself falling out of the story and thinking about what a great job they did making these actors look and sound like cave people, instead of being wrapped up in their situation. The score can also be over the top at times.

Still, ambitious, original and interesting (if scientifically dubious at moments).
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Anthropoids galore!
Don Muvo12 January 1999
One of the elements of this film I liked the most was the realistic depiction of the diversity of anthropoid types that existed in those times. This was executed beautifully and skillfully in the depiction of several diverse tribal groups, explaining the well deserved Oscar for makeup.

When Naoh finds the love of his life in one of these other tribes, it is because there is an element of compatibility both between the cultures and the two individuals supporting the attraction they share. Some of the other groups depicted don't do as well in the tribal intercourse and cultural sharing department, as they tend to eat the individuals from other tribes that they encounter.

Another elements of realism that scores big with me was that there are attacks by wild animals as well as by anthropoids. I also liked the language used by the main tribe, there was a suggestion that the language was evolving right before us as the travelers, having been sent on a quest for fire, returned with quite a bit more to talk about.

This is one of my favorite movies, possibly the most favorite.
53 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Pre-historic epic film
jackasstrange27 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Quest for Fire (French: La Guerre du feu) is a 1981 film adaptation of the 1911 Belgian novel by J.-H. Rosny,and is probably the greatest pre-historic epic ever filmed, but the funny part is that i've never heard about this film

before today. I kinda did a blind-buy when a picked this film so it was like 'whatever' for me. But for my surprise, this film is a bit interesting. The cavemen are surprisingly intelligent in areas such as hunt and attack, and they also have a sub-par instinct and will to live and survive.

Sure it is a little nonsense at times, and the fact that it has no dialogs in any real language known in the world don't helps that much, but it needs to be in that way in order to keep the 'disbelief' suspended for it. Obviously, it would be weird to watch Cavemans from 80.000 years ago talking in English.

But yeah, as every film which touches in subjects related with the creationist theory, this film drew his fair amount of controversies at the time of it's release. Nothing too strong, though, since that this film is not the most popular out there.

I don't have any complaints about the acting, i thought it was very normal, with a few low moments. It's not the kind of film which relies that much in acting, anyways. It's the kind of film that requires the actor to be as bizarre and grotesque possible, which actually is not a hard job. The use of soundtrack is good, very good actually, but the film don't has plenty of quality tracks, so it is kinda off.

A recommended film, though not for everyone. 6.6/10
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
I forgot what a great film this is
ahall12219 May 2003
I saw this film on the big screen when I was a pre-teen. I recently saw it again and was reminded what a great movie this is.

You don't need to know the languages to understand what is going on. (The characters from different tribes don't know the other languages and they often act out what they need.) This is a movie about the primal fight to survive and how even though they are forced to travel to find a new fire, their experiences expand their horizons in ways they could never have anticipated. If their own fire hadn't gone out they would never have met the cannibals or the clay people, who ultimately hold the key to their survival.

At its core, this is a movie about how although we may look different and have different customs we are all human and what we can learn from each other is irreplaceable.
13 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Mostly Worth It
transtemp20 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers ahead.

I started watching this movie, and, after 40 minutes, packed it in. Too much "ooh ooh, ah ah," too many apparently gratuitous rape scenes, something that felt like a racist vibe, funny scenes that seemed to fail, serious scenes that came out campy, and characters who didn't come off the screen, in spite of Ron Perlman's being on it. I thought at the time a more accurate title might have been Clan of the Caveguys.

But the next day, La Guerre du Feu kept popping into my head, so I finished it. The film improves. The disturbing/campy violence ultimately yields a fairly interesting subtext. The film's aesthetic is pretty arresting. And seeing the shaman of Ika's tribe "make fire" is just plain neat.

Even the love story finally kind of works in spite of the fact it's a patriarchal/phallocentric fantasy (I mean, she asks for something new in the bedroom, and it's *missionary*?), mostly because Rae Dawn Chong acts the hell out of her (ridiculous) scenes. I would have liked the film better if we saw more of her tribe, who provided the most potential for interesting characters. But I get that that's not what the filmmakers were going for.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Nice try, no cigar
stupidus27 August 2012
If you can get past the fact that

a) different types of early hominids all exist at the same time, and that b) a pack of hobbling neanderthals/homo sapiens(?) manage to wander across nearly all types of terrain in an astonishing short time frame (and still find back to their tribe which is _still_ for some absurd reason standing in the same small patch of land in the swamp whence they had left...),

then I guess it's a passable, even engaging, movie.

The wildly varying outdoor shots are beautiful but of course totally out-of-place.

When they chose to film in multiple (and likely very expensive) outdoor locations probably meant that they could only afford to show exactly two saber-toothed tigers and a pack of mammoths...

Only the two most recognized animals that everyone will expect to see in a "Stone Age" film? Pathetic.

I thought the story itself is/was powerful. Primarily the constant changes in the scenery was distracting as were smaller or bigger absurdities throughout the movie.

I'd personally been very cautious about portraying sexual behavior in such a way. Tribes are bound to have a pecking order, particularly when it comes to mating. Such a casual way of raping at will would probably have been a big no-no: that "right" is reserved for a chief or chiefs and would in effect require their consent or facing their (=basically the whole tribe's) wrath. Punishment by death springs to my mind without much effort...

I dunno. Painting "cave men" as walking penises just runs against the common logic. When it comes to your own tribe - that is. When you are out and about, it's always a different story. Even still.

I can't help but feel that gratuitous sex scenes and most of the times bare female body of a leading lady were planted for the interest of an average guy (Annaud, including). Men who trashed the film apart from previous reasons, seem to indicate that the target was met.

But seriously, if you can sharpen your choice of weapon, you certainly can come up with a rudimentary defense system for your own (not to mention your tribe's) protection (other than just a lone watchman).

Frankly, the film is just too damn inaccurate for its own good.
8 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed