Maidgethma Wonderfully offbeat film!

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Majorthebys Charming and brutal

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

antonio-16075 In terms of what the movie is about and the time period of human existence the film deals with no other production comes to close to depicting and dealing with the topic of the surge of mankind in such a true, honest, subtle, but yet ambitious manner. This film is a must see for intellectuals, students and anyone having a keen interest of origin and history. The close minded, ignorant or disinterested should seek something else to do and as most people apply to the latter this is why the film is so underrated. As the Quest for Fire was made in the early eighties and a lot of insight and knowledge about prehistoric times has been gained since then this movie needs to desperately be remade for today's audience.

berberian00-276-69085 I read the reviews about this Movie - "Quest for Fire" (1981) - and a set of similar films on the same Prehistoric theme. I shall enumerate in reverse order and since there are only a handful of them dealing with certain degree of historical accuracy on the Ice Ages, Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens proper: viz., watch also "10,000 BC" (2008), "Clan Of The Cave Bear" (1986), "Caveman" (1981) and "One Million Years BC" (1940, remake 1966). All those movies deal with life and adventures of Cavemen in real surroundings, using (hypothetical) artificially devised language and there is no thread of modern civilization involved, which is another lead plot where time is disposed and Lost Worlds discovered with strange Nature and extinct Animals. The most often exploited of those are the "revived Iceman" theme or the "Dinosaur" theme revisited. A solid earring for the unabashed spectator is the most often repeated misnomer - that Man and Dinosaurs never cohabited together, the latter were long time extinct before the Homo species appeared in evolution ladder. Whatever, let go to the principal idea that made me write those lines and these concern the Mother of all Entertainments on Prehistory, less documentaries and other scientific stuff - the Pif Gadget and its Rahan Series.I am a good man and used to be a very inquisitive kid, at least for the standards of former Socialist Country. Today I have turned into a middleman, who is pursued by homeless dogs in the Streets and trekked by schizophrenics at Home. This dispatch have nothing to do with my political convictions and mishaps in personal life or work (Guess I don't sound convincing but will continue right on topic) As I said, Pif Gadget was a comic magazine that was in high circulation in France and less so in the United States. Maybe even Americans at my age haven't heard about these cartoons which originated shortly in post-war France, firstly about adventures of Pif the Dog and Hercule the Cat in an illustrated magazine called "Vaillant" which issued in big newspaper size. It also appeared on stands in Socialist countries because presumably was outlet from French Communist Party, whether its true or not I am not aware.From 1969 it changed its name and numeration to "Pif Gadget" with a smaller size (double A4) which was wrapped in celluloid nylon plus a simple toy attached to the whole parcel. So this bundle was my favorite pastime as kid in the 1970s and although I didn't understand French the pictures in the comic strips spoke for themselves and I was fascinated. Special interest deserved the adventures of Rahan the Caveman, but also other heroes such as Doc Justice the Medicine Man, Teddy Ted the Cowboy, Loup Noir the Indian, Nasdine Hodja the Turk, Jeremie the Pirate Kid, etc. Specifically the Rahan case, first series appeared in 1970s where bi-monthly for some 7-8 years came about 150 issues with Rahan (black-and-white, "to be continued" format). Thus I gathered the magazine for years in a row before I decided that have become grown-up and sold them half price to the local Antiquary. The whole collection would have been priceless today but unfortunately its unattainable at low price.Now let me return to the titular movie "Quest for Fire" (1981), based on sci-fi novel by J.H. Rosny (pseudonym of collaborative work by two brothers). Here the interested reader can get additional information from pages in Wikipedia. The more debatable problem, however, concerning Ice Age as a unity is "How control of fire became a turning point in human evolution?" Go to the adequate page in Wikipedia and you will learn important details on this enormous leap of humankind. Before fire ape-man was a carnivore and hardly bi-pedal. After that he became slowly more and more cultivated, get into shelter, get aware of sexual dimorphism, etc. The story of agriculture and first great civilizations come at much later stage, not earlier than 10 000 years ago. Thank you!

stupidus If you can get past the fact thata) 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.

runamokprods 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).