I knew about this thing before probably 99% of the population. No, I am not some sort of dinosaur fan boy. My knowledge of this blockbuster goes back to my senior year of college and one of my many fruitless attempts to hit on a girl before a lecture started. The girl in this situation was a daughter of an apparently well-renowned hollywood producer. I don't go seeking these girls out, but the film studies department at UCSB was pretty well packed with kids who were either doing it because they were raised in the movie industry.

I can't recall the conversation, only that she said her father was in Africa shooting the next Roland Emerich pic. I said, "oh, cool." And wondered if that was a name I was supposed to know. I would have forgotten the whole thing, but I got her number and thought there was interest, so I should actually find out who this guy was and support my 'lie.' Turns out that Mr. Emerich is responsible for such feats of explodery as ID:4, The Day After Tomorrow, and Godzilla (US)! And Stargate too, which I actually think is pretty damn cool. From what I saw and read of the film, it looked really promising and the idea was intriguing.

Years later, I finally see the film and just like with the girl, I'm disappointed. It's not that it's outright bad, it's simply that it's just what I should have expected. Emerich has a good eye and knows how to construct a story like no other reasonably new blockbuster director. He also knows how to create a hero and give the widest demographic the most satisfying experience possible.

But here's what I expected: A rag-tag band of war hardened cavemen, driven from their homelands due to the harsh and unanticipated changes in the seasons (Roland gets to keep his fight the environment themes) encounter unspeakable creatures and torturous bands of men. They find themselves in an unlikely alliance against the advancing hordes of the southern lands in a final battle for the very survival of their way of life. And of course cavemen will be riding saber-toothed tigers in the battle.

Roland's story is much more geared towards the traditional idea that one resilient bastard can do whatever the hell he wants. I tend to have a habit of printing spoilers, but I'll refrain. I'll just leave it at that. He does some stuff that just didn't and couldn't have happened. And, it breaks my heart to say this, but no one rides a saber-toothed tiger into battle. Saber-toothed tigers are used as a symbol... not as bad-assery. 10,000 B.C. was a time when the traits of modern man first showed themselves and the prehistoric tribes spread out amongst Europe. However, I do not think they talked as much as they did in this film. Nor do I think that the ideal of romantic love had really blossomed to the level that we blockbuster watching filmgoers crave.

The battle scenes had their moments, but the hero story (which I think he tried to make a half-baked epic out of) was center stage through every frame. The hero story was essentially the love story as his only real motivation was to save his childhood love. This distorts the facts I learned in school of the relationship of a hunter to his gatherer. I swear it was more along the lines of the hunter pointing his finger at his favored gatherer and saying, 'that one is mine.' If she isn't strong enough to survive then there are always more gatherers. Things remain pretty ridiculous until they get really ridiculous and you see what look a lot like the pyramids of Giza, which weren't built until somewhere around 2,500 b.c... Actually the first pyramid, which was actually just a series of really big steps, wasn't built until 2,650. God knows how many people are now basing their idea of history on this film.