So 10,000 BC currently is ranking in at 7% fresh over at Rotten Tomatoes.
That’s really low. I can’t remember a movie ranking that low — yet it’s still the #1 movie for the weekend. God Bless America.
Let’s gloss over the fact that its only competition was really Raven Symone and Martin Lawrence — a match made in hell if ever there was one.
There is a silver lining to any movie ranked so poorly by critics — it can’t possibly be worse than your expectations. And that’s exactly how 10,000 BC won my heart.
I don’t study history much but I’m pretty sure there was no physical way that Eskimos could somehow travel across a mountain range, and then magically walk through the African Savannah and jungles, ending up in what appears to be Egypt on the Nile River.
So, early on in this film I chose not to view 10,000 BC as a story from earth’s past but rather a story from a galaxy far far away, or middle-earth, or some other fictional universe where history played out differently yet everyone is vaguely human. It was a lot easier to swallow that way.
The story is dumb. The plot is implausible. The cast is ethnically diverse in ways that mankind could not have been in 10,000 BC. The heroine isn’t all that pretty, and there’s an elder named Dik Dik (well IMDB says Tic’Tic, but they said Dik Dik in the movie; I’d stake my life on it).
But there are also Wooly Mammoths, and Saber-toothed tigers, and evil giant ostriches from the gates of hell who act like raptors but eat like chickens.
There are evil pharaohs on stilts, and pyramid constructions. There are plucky young men, and blind bald guys. There are mysterious white spears, mysticism, and wishes on bright stars.
In short, this movie has everything from every movie ever made crammed into under two hours. Isn’t that worth something?
Truthfully, it’s not worth much but it’s enough to make me not regret my trip to the theater. The measly 7% it’s getting on Rotten Tomatoes is harsh. It’s not that bad. It is dangerously close, though.
Verdict: D+