the narration properly interferes with the emotions. This is a chicken rib. If not, the director has no confidence in whether he can convey the ghostly parts clearly.
From the very beginning of the film, with the narration turned on, the film is precisely positioned at the level of leisure and entertainment, preferably under the age of 20. And with the progress of the plot, this record is constantly refreshed.... What is more gratifying is that this PG-13 action film has equal technology, uniform style, and average level for most of the time, and has always maintained a level that can make junior high school students. The excitement of the teenager is so intense, and it continues the viewing habits of ordinary audiences in the last century...except for the ending that just became sad and difficult--the end of the resurrection in the blink of an eye.
The silly and naive story isn't the biggest disappointment for enthusiastic moviegoers who were fooled by the trailer, as there was little hope for the plot in the first place. The more purpose is to see prehistoric beasts with bizarre shapes, and to see humans and beasts fighting hand-to-hand. However, the few key fighting scenes are simple and scribbled, which cannot satisfy the viewing desire that has been bombarded by audiovisual blockbusters for many years.
The most regrettable is the "fighting elephants" at the beginning, the "cockfighting" in the grass, and the confrontation with the saber-toothed tiger in the second half. The special effects of the beasts are very rough, there are very few static shots and close-ups, and the picture effect is not delicate enough. The strange bird can't see the overall effect, and the tiger's two appearances are not realistic enough. The tricks of the duel are simple and old-fashioned, and the key to victory has no bright spots....
In the second half of the film, the only key "suspense" is revealed, allowing people to see the origin of the oldest pyramid. In terms of the sense of space and the number of people and animals, the effect is still very shocking. The problem is... For many viewers who watched "Stargate" in 1994, this picture freezes as a big embarrassment in an instant—____—||||... This "Prehistoric" also participated in Roland Emmerich The screenwriter, just like the "Stargate" system was created back then... It may be out of fascination with ancient Egyptian objects, and the entire momentum and shape almost completely continued the landscape of "Stargate".
Pyramids, temple towers, galaxies in the sky, rock murals, shemale pharaohs (a wordy sentence, Roland Emmerich, you are too out of sight this time).... Except for the scene that has been enlarged several times, everything else is "star gate" style. Of course, no matter whether it is borrowing or the director's conceptual limitations, the final scene of this final suspense can still satisfy the primary imagination. But for Roland Emmerich himself, there is no progress.
The final riot was to be expected, and the scene had merit, but as the bravest spear was thrown, the blood that had just accumulated was instantly poured out... There is a plot of bravery.
In comparison, the sensationalism and the more absurd "borrowing the soul to return the corpse" are not necessary to care about. Even the most dramatic conflict scenes can end so neatly, and the whole film is qualitative. As far as the script is concerned, there is no room for manoeuvre.
It may also be worth mentioning the individual dialogues in this film. Although the Spider-Man (“Greater ability, greater responsibility”)-style preaching color is inevitable, it reminds the later direction of the film, and does not entangle in expression and meaning. Too much, it's still well-planned. For example, at the beginning, there is a paragraph about returning the white spear, followed by a lesson from the elders: some people draw a small circle for themselves, some people draw a larger circle for their family members and themselves, and some people belong to the tribe and themselves.. ..greater people are divided into more compatriots...(roughly speaking)
this is the third clue of the movie (the other two can be seen as "Where did the evil people come from?" and "Where did the father go" ), foreshadowing the suspense of saving the woman, the tribe or the whole. This suspense is perhaps the most thematically meaningful in the film, more worthy of expansion than other plot clues... However, the director is completely commercial, numb to these conceptual issues, and has absolutely no interest in continuing. Just like that, let the warrior take the liberty to throw the winning spear and end all contradictions.
I admire Roland Emmerich's simplicity and blood heat.
View more about 10,000 BC reviews
