82 reviews
The movie version of 'Clan of the cave bear' isn't really a bad adaption - but the very fact that this is a movie, running less than two hours, forces it to be a very compact version of the book. A lot of the details are left out, which of course is unfortunate.
Overall, the acting is quite good. How are we really supposed to act so it will be like neanderthals? Can you really put all their knowledge and way of life and act it out when modern man is so much different (or are we?). Daryl Hannah is probably a good choice for Ayla at the time, and thanks to the 80's still Allowing 'rougher stuff' to be shown, or as I prefer it: more natural, the abuse described in Auel's novel is to most extent included.
To sum it up: an OK adaption, but a 2-hour movie does not make this novel justice.
Overall, the acting is quite good. How are we really supposed to act so it will be like neanderthals? Can you really put all their knowledge and way of life and act it out when modern man is so much different (or are we?). Daryl Hannah is probably a good choice for Ayla at the time, and thanks to the 80's still Allowing 'rougher stuff' to be shown, or as I prefer it: more natural, the abuse described in Auel's novel is to most extent included.
To sum it up: an OK adaption, but a 2-hour movie does not make this novel justice.
This is one of the films that I grew up watching, and even now, I love it and admire its beauty as much as I ever did.
First of all, comparing movies to their books isn't something we should do, because they are two different forms of entertainment, and can take different liabilities. What is important is if the movie still tells the basic story, and in the case of the Clan of the Cave Bear, it stuck to the original story in a very suitable fashion. I must admit that when I first saw this movie, I did not know that this was from a book. It wasn't until 15 years later that I read the book, and it confirmed my statement that the movie kept the story intact.
As far as the acting was concerned, I have to admire a cast that had to convey throughout an entire script in a totally different language, and manage to keep it consistent. Watching the film, you can see that certain gestures always mean the same thing, as well as certain grunts and sounds. Folks, that is the result of a lot of hard work, and to put down that part of the film is like looking at the Empire State Building as just the result of an erector set.
The basic story of the movie is to show prejudice against what is new and not understood. Ayla's presence is meant to show the Clan what the future holds, which is the underlying reason why they fear and hate her, though they are unaware of the reasons. Ayla endures many trials throughout the movie in order to gain their trust and approval, which ultimately prepare her for a journey into the world without the Clan.
A movie worth watching again and again. The book is great also, by the way, so I recommend them both.
First of all, comparing movies to their books isn't something we should do, because they are two different forms of entertainment, and can take different liabilities. What is important is if the movie still tells the basic story, and in the case of the Clan of the Cave Bear, it stuck to the original story in a very suitable fashion. I must admit that when I first saw this movie, I did not know that this was from a book. It wasn't until 15 years later that I read the book, and it confirmed my statement that the movie kept the story intact.
As far as the acting was concerned, I have to admire a cast that had to convey throughout an entire script in a totally different language, and manage to keep it consistent. Watching the film, you can see that certain gestures always mean the same thing, as well as certain grunts and sounds. Folks, that is the result of a lot of hard work, and to put down that part of the film is like looking at the Empire State Building as just the result of an erector set.
The basic story of the movie is to show prejudice against what is new and not understood. Ayla's presence is meant to show the Clan what the future holds, which is the underlying reason why they fear and hate her, though they are unaware of the reasons. Ayla endures many trials throughout the movie in order to gain their trust and approval, which ultimately prepare her for a journey into the world without the Clan.
A movie worth watching again and again. The book is great also, by the way, so I recommend them both.
- Skeletors_Hood
- Aug 19, 2002
- Permalink
I am not going to say it sucked because it was nothing like the book. I am merely going to say that if you have read the book, don't bother because it will only tick you off. And What ticks me off is not that it didn't follow the book closely enough, it didn't follow the book AT ALL. There are scenes that should have happened well after they did, and scenes that happened that would have explained other scenes that were in the movie that aren't. To the above commenter who said that the subsequent books were all romance fodder, first Valley was not, it wasn't until the end that most of the pleasures were added, with small intermittent scenes throughout. Yes, there are a lot of Pleasures scenes in the books, Yes, they could have been done without, but that doesn't mean that the rest of the story is not worth reading. That is not what I am writing a review on, however. I was more upset that the movie didn't even maintain a SEMBLANCE to the book, other than the character's name, almost as if the director skimmed the book, and took pieces from sections without thinking about how they would go together.
- Thoughts_in_Chaos
- Feb 25, 2007
- Permalink
- Trinitty15
- Mar 1, 2006
- Permalink
I have seen this movie and I have read the novel that it is based on. Let me make this clear: this movie does not hold a candle to the book! Jean M. Auel's novel is a great piece of prehistorical fiction, and my personal favorite book (and it's in competition with books like "Huckleberry Finn," "Jane Eyre," and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest"). I know that movies based on books are rarely as good as said book, but this is intense. The movie cuts, adds, changes, and mish-mashes things together, all of which is at a detriment to the story line (I know some part of that is grammatically incorrect). The movie loses all the depth and subtlety of Ms. Auel's novel, and it miscasts Darryl Hannah. Don't get me wrong, she's a fine actress, but she was also way to old to play the leading character. If you are interested in the plot or premise of the movie, read the book instead. Your braincells will thank you.
I saw this little unknown gem two days ago, and I was just blown away by all the horrible reviews for it back in 1986. I just don't understand why people didn't want to see a healthy Darryl Hannah as the cave girl, Ayla. Maybe it's because, Darryl Hannah didn't appear nude, even though the costumes are scantily. All in all, It is a nice movie to watch. It tugs at your heartstings seeing all of the brutal honesty presented on screen. And that music! Oh, I was the Niagra Falls from the beautiful music. The most heart-breaking scene of this movie is when Ayla is separated from her mother at 2, from a vicious earthquake. The ghastly "R" rating is unecessary, altough the rape scene is horrible and graphic, they could have sacrificed for a PG or PG13.Watch this one if get the chance. You won't be disappointed!
1986 98 minutes Rated: R CC.
1986 98 minutes Rated: R CC.
- VivienLeighsnumber1fan
- May 8, 2002
- Permalink
From the standpoint of being able to take a Good book and turning it into a piece of rubbish? This then was a masterpiece. I had no problem with the casting of this film. Actually I thought the actors did a good job all things considered. However, Daryl Hannah as Ayla ...was for me a total wash out, this part required a stronger acting presence and in my opinion called for an actor of great ability. The visuals of the film were magnificent, and the Photography sometimes bordered on genius. But why is it that screen writers think that they have to "fix" a perfectly good story, by taking the same time it would take to tell the "actual" story and instead telling a silly disjointed and inaccurate one? One where none of the characters really develop nor become loved by the audience. Oh yes, I know that screen writers must compress events and so on. But this screenplay of Mr. John Sayles, was one of the worst examples I have ever seen. Not only was the "time line" of the story tragically out of whack, but when Ayla broke Brouds spear with her sling at the "shootout at the O.K. Coral" scene at the End of the film... Anyone who read the book would be able to tell you that had that actually happened, based on what we knew from the characters and the clan in this wonderful book, she would have been killed by the clan immediately. That would have been a travesty of enormous proportion for them. The real heart of the actual story, was the relationships between Ayla, Iza,Creb and Brun, and her interpersonal growth as a being, was almost completely missed in this film and the development of the characters whom you loved in the book was no where in sight. Basically the film characters. by virtue of really bad screen writing became a bunch of cardboard cut outs without connection one to the other. It was a mish mash of people running in and out of scenes. Jean M. Auel could not have been happy with this mess. I hope she was paid enough. If any of you fellow viewers have seen any of her comments on this film, I would appreciate you E-mailing them along to me. I would happily give her and her book at least a 9. but this movie was a mess and it's present IMDb rating of 4.9 is about 2.9 points to high. If you have read the book and wish to suffer....see this film. That is this viewers opinion.
- oxymoron-3
- Jun 9, 2000
- Permalink
Prehistoric tale set in Stone Age about cavemen plenty of drama , adventures , thrilling events and speaking a special language and particular primitive movements . At a time in prehistory when Neanderthals shared the Earth with early Homo Sapiens , a band of cave-dwellers travels through uncharted landscapes towards an unknown territory , searching for caves to shelter themselves . During their quest , they encounter and battle various animals as buffalo , lion , wolves and tribesmen in order to survive . Iza (Pamela Reed), Medicine woman of the "Clan of the Cave Bear" meets little Ayla from the "other"'s clan ; the little girl loses her parents , Ayla is taken in by after her own parents are disappeared , tradition would have the clan kill Ayla immediately , but the Medicine women insists on keeping her . Iza as a primitive gamine adopts blond and blue-eyed Ayla , the lost child of the "Others" . As it results out later , she's a bright girl , but has a hard time to keep her place in a clan with different habits . As the scrawny cavegirl named Ayla (a gorgeous primitive babe played by Daryl Hannah) matures into a young woman of spirit and courage , being helped by Creg (James Remar) , she must fight for survival against the jealous bigotry of Broud (Thomas G Waites) , who will one day be clan chief .
This interesting film about primitive humans contains drama , emotions , fights and is pretty entertaining . Ponderous and sometimes slow-moving , the picture failed at box office , however , nowadays being better considered . Based on Jean M. Auel's popular novel with screenplay by prestigious John Sayles , there is minimal narration ; subtitles translate the Neanderthal gestures and primitive spoken language . A planned back-to-back sequel never made it into production . Emotive musical score by Alan Silvestri , though composed by synthesizer . Colorful and brilliant cinematography by Jan De Bont , subsequently become filmmaker . The motion picture was well realized by Michael Chapman . Chapman is deemed one of the best cameraman of cinema , he photographed a lot of successes such as ¨Evolution¨ , ¨Primal fear¨, ¨The fugitive¨, ¨Rising sun¨, ¨Ghostbusters II¨, ¨Shoot to kill¨ and masterpieces for Martin Scorsese as ¨Raging Bull¨, ¨Last Walz¨, Taxi driver¨ . He occasionally directed some films as ¨The viking sagas¨, ¨All the right moves¨ and this ¨The clan of bear cave¨.
Other films dealing with cavemen are the following : ¨One million B.C. ¨(1940) by Hal Roach with Victor Mature and Carole Landis ; ¨One million years B.C.¨ by Don Chaffey with Rachel Welch and John Richardson ; ¨!0.000 B.C.¨ by Roland Emmerich with Steven Strait and Camilla Belle ; and the best is ¨Quest of fire¨ by Jean Jacques Annaud with Everett McGill and Ron Perlman .
This interesting film about primitive humans contains drama , emotions , fights and is pretty entertaining . Ponderous and sometimes slow-moving , the picture failed at box office , however , nowadays being better considered . Based on Jean M. Auel's popular novel with screenplay by prestigious John Sayles , there is minimal narration ; subtitles translate the Neanderthal gestures and primitive spoken language . A planned back-to-back sequel never made it into production . Emotive musical score by Alan Silvestri , though composed by synthesizer . Colorful and brilliant cinematography by Jan De Bont , subsequently become filmmaker . The motion picture was well realized by Michael Chapman . Chapman is deemed one of the best cameraman of cinema , he photographed a lot of successes such as ¨Evolution¨ , ¨Primal fear¨, ¨The fugitive¨, ¨Rising sun¨, ¨Ghostbusters II¨, ¨Shoot to kill¨ and masterpieces for Martin Scorsese as ¨Raging Bull¨, ¨Last Walz¨, Taxi driver¨ . He occasionally directed some films as ¨The viking sagas¨, ¨All the right moves¨ and this ¨The clan of bear cave¨.
Other films dealing with cavemen are the following : ¨One million B.C. ¨(1940) by Hal Roach with Victor Mature and Carole Landis ; ¨One million years B.C.¨ by Don Chaffey with Rachel Welch and John Richardson ; ¨!0.000 B.C.¨ by Roland Emmerich with Steven Strait and Camilla Belle ; and the best is ¨Quest of fire¨ by Jean Jacques Annaud with Everett McGill and Ron Perlman .
While the story of The Clan of the Cave Bears is a magnificent tale the movie did very little to capture that story. The film attempted to capture a deep and intricate epic story in the flash of a moment... and unfortunately failed grandly. I was hoping to see some of the wonderful scenes, written by the author Jean Auel, come to life but instead found an overview, a weak one at that, of the story in a very low quality format. Not even Daryl Hannah could save the film. If you want to know The Clan of the Cave Bear read the book... You will not be disappointed!
- cassielund
- Apr 24, 2001
- Permalink
If the movie lacks anything it is the beauty of the photography in films like "Quest for Fire" and "Windwalker". Otherwise I can't find any serious flaws. It is rare to find a decent movie about prehistoric peoples. "Quest for Fire" is the best movie of this kind in my opinion but "Clan of the Cave Bear" is a close second.
I am not trying to compare "Cave Bear" to the books by Jean M. Auel. To me the film takes the best part of Auel's story and makes a pretty good movie. The later Auel stories become more romance novel fodder and to some that may be more entertaining. "Clan of the Cave Bear" is not romantic. It captures the brutality of prehistory very well for a fiction film. I've seen documentaries about the Neanderthal and was surprised how accurately "Cave Bear" showed that time. The flaws in human nature are shown in all their rawness in this movie. There is prejudice, oppression and abuse in full force. What makes it bearable for me is how the Darryl Hannah character is able to deal with this and eventually over come it.
"Cave Bear" also shows some of the ritual of stone age culture with the Shaman and the hunting rites of passage. There is some beauty in that culture. But the bottom line for these people is survival and that was a very difficult thing to accomplish. They were scratching and clawing (literally) just to eat and raise children. And sadly we know that they are doomed (except for a few Neanderthals who possibly interbred with Cro-Magnons).
This kind of documentary approach in "Cave Bear" will not thrill those who want a stone age comedy-romance, "Caveman", or a special effects absurdity of prehistoric people fighting lots of dinosaurs, "One Million BC", (which is historically impossible). But if you can appreciate an intense story of a young woman's survival in the wild and her experience with a lost stone age culture, then I recommend "Clan of the Cave Bear". 9/10
I am not trying to compare "Cave Bear" to the books by Jean M. Auel. To me the film takes the best part of Auel's story and makes a pretty good movie. The later Auel stories become more romance novel fodder and to some that may be more entertaining. "Clan of the Cave Bear" is not romantic. It captures the brutality of prehistory very well for a fiction film. I've seen documentaries about the Neanderthal and was surprised how accurately "Cave Bear" showed that time. The flaws in human nature are shown in all their rawness in this movie. There is prejudice, oppression and abuse in full force. What makes it bearable for me is how the Darryl Hannah character is able to deal with this and eventually over come it.
"Cave Bear" also shows some of the ritual of stone age culture with the Shaman and the hunting rites of passage. There is some beauty in that culture. But the bottom line for these people is survival and that was a very difficult thing to accomplish. They were scratching and clawing (literally) just to eat and raise children. And sadly we know that they are doomed (except for a few Neanderthals who possibly interbred with Cro-Magnons).
This kind of documentary approach in "Cave Bear" will not thrill those who want a stone age comedy-romance, "Caveman", or a special effects absurdity of prehistoric people fighting lots of dinosaurs, "One Million BC", (which is historically impossible). But if you can appreciate an intense story of a young woman's survival in the wild and her experience with a lost stone age culture, then I recommend "Clan of the Cave Bear". 9/10
I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of this book adaptation. The storyline mostly stays true to the original and the changes that are made make sense. The acting is really good, considering most of the language is nonverbal. The costuming and cinematography are believable.
- Calicodreamin
- Aug 13, 2020
- Permalink
I really wanted to like this movie, since the book series were so good. Sadly they had changed multiple critical moments in the movie and the whole story lost it's meaning. It was also difficult to see how anyone could understand the whole movie, without reading the books first. I wish someone would try to remake this as it should've been done. Honoring the book series.
The popularity of DVD has exploded the past couple of years like no new entertainment technology before. We are seeing more and more older films released on DVD for a pittance, like this one, "Clan of the Cave Bear", which I purchased for under $6US. There isn't much sound in this film, but the images, all shot in British Columbia, come through really well.
The setting in time is prehistoric, during the brief overlap of the Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon humans. Ayla (Daryl Hannah), a very blonde Cro-Magnon, was orphaned as a small girl, wounded, and found by the dark-haired Cave Bear Clan of Neanderthals. Against the wishes of the leader, she is taken in and nursed back to health by the medicine woman. As she grows up we see that she is innately smarter than her adopted family, learns things quickly, begins to innovate. The Neanderthals are portrayed as if they had perhaps an IQ of 80, while Ayla certainly has an IQ of 120 to 140.
This causes difficulties for her, because the women are totally subserviant, and one of them showing smarts or initiative is punished. A woman who even touches a hunting weapon is sentenced to die. But when Ayla does to defend a tribesman, she is only exiled in the winter and, if she survives, allowed to come back. She does, but finally realizes her "spirit" is different, and leaves to look for her own kind. After she fights and defeats the young "alpha male", who earlier had raped her thus giving her a child.
Some critics scoff at the primative community portrayed here, but it in fact is very accurate. In the DVD commentary we learn that much of the design for this film came from watching a few crude videotapes that were actually made by the Cro-Magnons during that prehistoric period and were discovered, well-preserved, in far northern sub-freezing caves in the 1960s. Not surprisingly, they were in the Beta format.
The whole film is about acceptance of someone different and of change. This is a common theme in many many films over the years, and is closely related to the popular "Pleasantville" of 1998. What makes this one different and enjoyable is the setting in time, the depiction of community values of these prehistoric peoples. I rate it highly overall.
The setting in time is prehistoric, during the brief overlap of the Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon humans. Ayla (Daryl Hannah), a very blonde Cro-Magnon, was orphaned as a small girl, wounded, and found by the dark-haired Cave Bear Clan of Neanderthals. Against the wishes of the leader, she is taken in and nursed back to health by the medicine woman. As she grows up we see that she is innately smarter than her adopted family, learns things quickly, begins to innovate. The Neanderthals are portrayed as if they had perhaps an IQ of 80, while Ayla certainly has an IQ of 120 to 140.
This causes difficulties for her, because the women are totally subserviant, and one of them showing smarts or initiative is punished. A woman who even touches a hunting weapon is sentenced to die. But when Ayla does to defend a tribesman, she is only exiled in the winter and, if she survives, allowed to come back. She does, but finally realizes her "spirit" is different, and leaves to look for her own kind. After she fights and defeats the young "alpha male", who earlier had raped her thus giving her a child.
Some critics scoff at the primative community portrayed here, but it in fact is very accurate. In the DVD commentary we learn that much of the design for this film came from watching a few crude videotapes that were actually made by the Cro-Magnons during that prehistoric period and were discovered, well-preserved, in far northern sub-freezing caves in the 1960s. Not surprisingly, they were in the Beta format.
The whole film is about acceptance of someone different and of change. This is a common theme in many many films over the years, and is closely related to the popular "Pleasantville" of 1998. What makes this one different and enjoyable is the setting in time, the depiction of community values of these prehistoric peoples. I rate it highly overall.
- cruztacean
- Dec 8, 2006
- Permalink
This movie is deffinately not as good as the book, it disappoints me, as the book is so good, and this movie so dismal! It is so loosely based on the book, it isn't even really the story of the clan of the cave bear story because they changed it so much!
In this adaptation of the popular Jean M. Auel book (scripted by none other than John Sayles), Daryl Hannah is well cast as Ayla, a lovely Cro-Magnon in the early years of humankind. As a child, she loses her mother during an earthquake, and she is eventually taken in by a clan of less-developed Neanderthals. Sometimes, she is on shaky ground, as she dares to go against their social mores (such as handling a weapon and hunting, which are forbidden for women), but she is determined, and *has* won the friendship of medicine woman Iza (Pamela Reed) and the deformed, one-eyed Creb (James Remar). She also makes an enemy out of the brutish, rotten Broud (Thomas G. Waites).
Those who have actually read the book tend to consider this a lousy adaptation, but for this viewer, the picture is okay taken on its own terms. It tells a decent enough story in capable enough fashion. The director is Michael Chapman, who may have been in over his head given that he's usually a cinematographer (known for, among other things, shooting "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull" for Martin Scorsese). But the performances are adequate to the occasion, with Reed, Remar, and Waites (the last two having co-starred in "The Warriors" together) doing okay in the more fleshed-out roles. The makeup is fine; one of the artists involved was Michele Burke, who'd previously won an Oscar for work on the thematically similar "Quest for Fire". Given that Chapman was a cinematographer, he at least makes sure that this picture LOOKS good; his D. P. here was the equally adept Jan de Bont. ("The Clan of the Cave Bear" was filmed on location in various provincial parks in British Columbia.) It also has a lovely score by Alan Silvestri.
It will likely work better the less people expect to see any sort of history lesson; it's just Hollywood entertainment that fortunately gets some things right, enough to keep it watchable for 99 minutes.
Six out of 10.
Those who have actually read the book tend to consider this a lousy adaptation, but for this viewer, the picture is okay taken on its own terms. It tells a decent enough story in capable enough fashion. The director is Michael Chapman, who may have been in over his head given that he's usually a cinematographer (known for, among other things, shooting "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull" for Martin Scorsese). But the performances are adequate to the occasion, with Reed, Remar, and Waites (the last two having co-starred in "The Warriors" together) doing okay in the more fleshed-out roles. The makeup is fine; one of the artists involved was Michele Burke, who'd previously won an Oscar for work on the thematically similar "Quest for Fire". Given that Chapman was a cinematographer, he at least makes sure that this picture LOOKS good; his D. P. here was the equally adept Jan de Bont. ("The Clan of the Cave Bear" was filmed on location in various provincial parks in British Columbia.) It also has a lovely score by Alan Silvestri.
It will likely work better the less people expect to see any sort of history lesson; it's just Hollywood entertainment that fortunately gets some things right, enough to keep it watchable for 99 minutes.
Six out of 10.
- Hey_Sweden
- Dec 11, 2021
- Permalink
Lacking some of the minor details. And changing it slightly. As in that she hadn't seen her mother fall into the pit. She was playing in the river. And she doesn't learn to speak until quite a bit later. Or that in the beginning, she never touched a weapon. Of course, Book to video always changes. So that much was already expected. The progression of the movie, compared to the book was startling. And Why was there a flock of doves or pigeons living in the cave? They completely forgot the whole ceremony for the cave, and the feast. and the whole reason broud hates her. I find them very important aspects of the story. But they held some accuracy at least. It wasn't completely all there, but it wasn't a bad movie, overall.
Good intentions and a fairly faithful adaptation of Jean M. Auel's novel help keep this forgotten 1980s adventure on an almost watchable level, despite some obvious shortcomings. One of these is director Michael Chapman's oblivious attention to detail and anthropological observations - which was the very basis for the success of Auel's book. Another is the lack of nerve and intensity in the storytelling. As the story is portrayed here, the characters' actions and lives don't feel as relevant and defining as they should and as Auel intended them to be. Her Ayla may seem like a superbeing, but she's not only a lovable character, she's also used as a vanguard for human development by Auel - something Chapman fails to communicate completely. The result is that The Clan of the Cave Bear lacks the facets and layers of the novel. Instead Chapman seems content with launching Daryl Hannah (who is right for the part, incidentally) as a rebellious feminist cavewoman. In line with 1980s action conventions, yes, but sadly flat for a story of these proportions.
- fredrikgunerius
- Oct 24, 2023
- Permalink
so far, aside from the comments here at IMDB, i have not seen one positive review for this film. i just don't get it. i honestly think it's a political assault against a film that threatens reviewers jealously guarded dogmas.
for me the film is escapism at it's finest. it's a film about cave dwellers that doesn't condescend by having the characters speak in english, but instead in subtitled "neanderthal". it gives the film believability as far as i'm concerned.
it's not a film about great conflicts and battles in pre-history, it's merely a character study about the final days of the neanderthals and how they are threatened by cro-magnons (daryl hannah).
it isn't an overly flowery movie. a couple of times it gets down and dirty in it's portrayal of mob rules mentality and racism. maybe the film offends viewers because they see themselves in the characters and don't like the comparison. all of the unpleasant behaviors, although simplified in the movie, still happen today in "more civilized times". people are still threatened by anyone different, women still get raped, sexism hasn't gone away and populations are still ruled by ruthless dictators.
for me, clan of the cave bear is a totally believeable story of life as it may have been 50,000 years ago. it protrays primitive people with primitave language, laws and beliefs with an honest affection. it's more of a "documentary" about daryl hanna's trials and tribulations in her adopted tribe than it is a plotted story. it comes off more like real life.
while anyone is entitled not to like the movie for whatever reason, i find the movie highly entertaining and an excellent escape into the world as it might actually have been long ago. it easily holds a spot in my top 50 list for it's totally unique experience.
i give it a 10 for bravely going where few films dare to and succeeding admirably without following boring hollywood formulas. it just doesn't deserve it's bad reviews at all. i don't give 10's out to many films either.
for me the film is escapism at it's finest. it's a film about cave dwellers that doesn't condescend by having the characters speak in english, but instead in subtitled "neanderthal". it gives the film believability as far as i'm concerned.
it's not a film about great conflicts and battles in pre-history, it's merely a character study about the final days of the neanderthals and how they are threatened by cro-magnons (daryl hannah).
it isn't an overly flowery movie. a couple of times it gets down and dirty in it's portrayal of mob rules mentality and racism. maybe the film offends viewers because they see themselves in the characters and don't like the comparison. all of the unpleasant behaviors, although simplified in the movie, still happen today in "more civilized times". people are still threatened by anyone different, women still get raped, sexism hasn't gone away and populations are still ruled by ruthless dictators.
for me, clan of the cave bear is a totally believeable story of life as it may have been 50,000 years ago. it protrays primitive people with primitave language, laws and beliefs with an honest affection. it's more of a "documentary" about daryl hanna's trials and tribulations in her adopted tribe than it is a plotted story. it comes off more like real life.
while anyone is entitled not to like the movie for whatever reason, i find the movie highly entertaining and an excellent escape into the world as it might actually have been long ago. it easily holds a spot in my top 50 list for it's totally unique experience.
i give it a 10 for bravely going where few films dare to and succeeding admirably without following boring hollywood formulas. it just doesn't deserve it's bad reviews at all. i don't give 10's out to many films either.
An interesting and dramatic take on the origins of the homsapien genus. The storyline is progressive and emersive with strong performances, good visuals and a enjoyable sondtrack. Overall a pretty good film.
- jkennard-97972
- Apr 29, 2020
- Permalink
This film was shot in a remote part of a beautiful park in Southern British Columbia, Canada. That's the good part.
The premiss of the film is that at some point Neanderthals and Cro- magnons must have encountered each other and interbred. There is now DNA evidence that this happened approx 100,000 years ago, likely in several places, perhaps including Southern Europe and Southern Turkey.
Unfortunately the tale that the film tells is about a young woman (the Cro-Magnon) who plays a headstrong righteous person seeking emancipation at the hands of tyrants and an oppressive culture. The development is painfully slow, people communicate through the kind of hand signals and repeated utterances, as you might see in Mexico while watching stupid tourists. Darryl Hanna is easy to look at but boring otherwise. Her repertoire consists of cliché movements and faces.
In short, it's a combination of bad entertainment and an awful documentary.
The premiss of the film is that at some point Neanderthals and Cro- magnons must have encountered each other and interbred. There is now DNA evidence that this happened approx 100,000 years ago, likely in several places, perhaps including Southern Europe and Southern Turkey.
Unfortunately the tale that the film tells is about a young woman (the Cro-Magnon) who plays a headstrong righteous person seeking emancipation at the hands of tyrants and an oppressive culture. The development is painfully slow, people communicate through the kind of hand signals and repeated utterances, as you might see in Mexico while watching stupid tourists. Darryl Hanna is easy to look at but boring otherwise. Her repertoire consists of cliché movements and faces.
In short, it's a combination of bad entertainment and an awful documentary.
When I saw it was on the TV I got up at 2 in the morning to watch this film! I just couldn't wait until the morning! I thought it was really good but advice to anyone is READ THE BOOK! The story is absolutely captivating and involving from the start. Darryl Hannah is a good Ayla (if not a little old - she is supposed to be 12!) and the film does well with the language problem. The hand signals are good and there aren't too many sub-titles. I really like the music as well. I think this is a good attempt at summarising Jean Auel's work (which is really very difficult to film successfully) - But summary is the right word so you are really missing out until you read the novel - there is so much more to it- I think the film could be a little longer - it is a 800 page book! Even though it doesn't live up to the book it's still really good fun to see. I also think that a film of her later books would be a success - especially as the language isn't a problem then. My sister watched it before reading the book and she was hooked, so it's definitely a success whether you are familiar or otherwise with this compelling story. I think it's a real shame that it's deleted in the UK! It should be on TV more often so people have a chance to watch it.
On the whole I would advise any fan who is prepared to be open-minded to watch it - you are in for a treat. If you are just going to nit-pick about the plot - Forget It!
On the whole I would advise any fan who is prepared to be open-minded to watch it - you are in for a treat. If you are just going to nit-pick about the plot - Forget It!
- milady_1625
- Jun 18, 2000
- Permalink