LeonLouisRicci It's rather a Weak and Flaccid Film. Although the Hammer Remake with Raquel Welch/Ray Harryhausen is much Better, it is Amazing how many Non Monster Scenes are virtually Identical. Of course there are No Excuses (except maybe making it on the cheap) for the Lame and Less then Impressive live Animals made up to Look Prehistoric. Not Seven Years after "King Kong"(1933).It doesn't look bad, but it ends up a Ho-Hum, rather Banal Trip back in Time. A Good Musical Score and fairly Good Pacing keep things from Petrifying, and the Cast is Willing and Able. The Success of this Movie is probably what brought Willis O'Brien out of Retirement and gave Ray Harryhausen the Opening for Better Things to come, that New Cycle started with "Mighty Joe Young" (1949).

MARIO GAUCI Although I am not that much of a fan of the 1966 Hammer color remake to begin with – or caveman epics in general – I had always been intrigued by the original 1940 black-and-white version which, apart from being arguably Hal Roach's most ambitious undertaking, was (ostensibly) a pioneering work in special effects and, furthermore, served to give Victor Mature his first starring role. Although a friend of mine (who is the No. 1 fan of the latter that I know of) does have a 16mm print of this under its British title MAN AND HIS MATE, I eventually managed to track it down via a TCM USA screening. Having now watched it for myself, I cannot say that it has served to endear the genre in my eyes or make the thin plot any more compelling than in the Hammer version. Firstly, the special effects may have been nominated for an Oscar, have a primitive {sic} charm about them and been re-utilized in many another cheap production thereafter (notably the abysmal ROBOT MONSTER [1953]) but the various anachronistic dinosaurs look far too much like magnified-lizards-shot-on-miniature-sets to be believably dangerous; a long-drawn out battle between two such 'monsters' is a particular liability! Besides, the grunt-laden 'dialogue' grows alternately silly and tiresome as the film progresses; at least, the film-makers have provided a prologue in which modern day travelers take shelter from the rain in a cave and a residing(?) anthropologist entertains them by interpreting the age-old illustrations on the walls as re-enacted by themselves. At the age of just 33, Lon Chaney Jr. is made up to look much older and play Mature's dad while the latter – sporting a full head of hair a decade before SAMSON AND DELILAH (1949) – appears decidedly schoolboyish; still, what is even harder to accept is how blonde Carole Landis blossomed amidst these surroundings! This is not to say that the film is unentertaining or badly made because it really is not; in fact, the climactic volcano eruption is very well staged and the film's undeniable highlight, the set decoration appropriately atmospheric and Werner R. Heymann's rousing score was deservedly singled out by the Academy for Oscar consideration. Incidentally, for years it was believed that forgotten cinema pioneer D. W. Griffith – whose famous two-reeler MAN'S GENESIS (1912) may well have inspired the film to begin with – had been actively involved in the production before getting the sack from Roach, but his contribution has since been disputed as having been all too minimal (unless our resident Griffith expert wants to give his informed account of the matter).

TheUnknown837-1 Imagine a world one million years ago. With people who inhabit a dark and dangerous unfriendly world, where they tend to dwell in the shadows of prehistoric reptiles and other ancient monsters. Where men live in caves and use the most primitive of weapons for competition, defense, and hunting the great beasts of their age. And you have a picture of what you will see in this 1940 adventure film, "One Million B.C." This film, while it may be ahistorical on many accounts, is a rather unique, entertaining little gem reminiscent from the dawn of the 1940s. If this were a documentary, the professors would be offended. Yes, cave men and dinosaurs did not inhabit the same world. And there are no records of iguanas and sail-backed crocodilians in excess of a hundred feet in length. But in my opinion, that is what makes movies like "One Million B.C." special. They are examples of what filmmakers thought about in the past. And the kind of movies that the naive audience found spectacular decades ago."One Million B.C." is pretty much your kind of ancient love story and it may even be trying to symbolize that the people from the ancient world were not all barbarians and like animals and that they had their own way of life with emotions and problems very much like ours today. This is explained after the first five minutes or so, because the film is basically a flashback. Starting in the present day and then remembering what happened long ago. And while it may not be an incredibly powerful romantic film, it is a great look at old film-making.The special effects used on the monsters that no longer exist are acceptable for the time the film was made. Obviously, the constraints of the budget did not allow for the expensive stop-motion animation technique from the 1933 "King Kong" or the even earlier 1925 "The Lost World". Dinosaurs here are portrayed in three different ways: men in rubber suits, puppets and props, and most commonly used graphically enlarged lizards and other reptiles. Its a look into the time when visual effects were still under development. And maybe it was the filmmaker's way of trying to convince the audience that what they were seeing was real. And by adding sound effects as the reptiles opened their mouths, could have frightened the audience back then. Some special effects weren't as keen, though, most primarily the tyrannosaurus and the triceratops. The triceratops was a small prop that was nearly immobile. And the tyrannosaurus was a man in a suit that provided very choppy, revealing motions. Nonetheless, the sequences with these two creatures was quite fun. Campy, but fun. And as for the graphically enlarged lizards, they worked out fine on the most part. But they had to be formatted with the actors to make them appear gigantic. There are many cases in the film where you can see the creatures were altered to make them look ancient. For example, there is a crocodilian in the film with a sail upon its back. Obviously, a small caiman or alligator with a rubber fin placed onto its armored hide. It just shows how the special effects artists at the time were being forced into using their ingenuity and imagination."One Million B.C." is a nice little gem and in my opinion, it's an underrated film. Maybe it started out of a bit of a weak level and kind of rushed through to the main part of the story, but the rest of the film was entertainment at a naturally fine level. Also featuring a very well, Academy Award-nominated musical score that was dark and ominous, perfect for enhancing the appearance of a world gone. In actuality, a world that never really existed according to science. It's an imaginary world, but one that you can look at and believe.

smokehill retrievers This has to be one of the funniest, most simple-minded morality plays ever put out by the mincing socialist nancy-boys in La-la-Land. With a couple of huge bowls of popcorn and a few alcoholic beverages -- or the recreational substance of your choice -- there is no better way to spend a few hours laughing at the primitive attempts of the early Hollywood leftists to influence political dialogue.Note the evil, crude, warlike Republicans .... er, "Rock People" ... a pack of dirty, hairy, unkempt thugs who live in filthy caves, hate everyone and everything, murder poor innocent animals to eat meat, and generally are just plain nasty, hurting everything they touch. Not a very attractive group. We're never sure why they keep those nasty, vicious-looking Irish Wolfhounds that never help them hunt or do anything else, but it's just the sort of thing those awful conservatives would keep. Think of them as prehistoric Pit Bulls.Then when Victor Mature is cast out and saved by those wonderful Communis ... er, "Shell People," he sees the delight of socialist cooperation where everyone smiles a lot and laugh, eat mostly fruit and vegetables, and are so, so culturally advanced -- their so-called speech is lilting and musical, instead of guttural conservative grunts; they have musical instruments and methods of signalling, and only use their next-generation spears to kill fish ... no doubt with much regret and tenderness. They help each other, are kind, and though we don't see any pets, we're fairly certain they probably have a Persian cat or a Lhasa Apso or a tropical aquarium there somewhere, hidden behind their communal food locker. And of course the village helps with the children playing merrily in this tropical paradise located apparently only a short walk from the craggy active volcanoes of the Republican Tribe.Since this was manufactured by Hollywood leftists, they diddle with the facts and history in order to make things fit in their Communist ...er, socialist .... paradise. We're not sure what those big lizards with rubber prosthetics are supposed to represent -- maybe the Nazis, or Herbert Hoover, or Standard Oil, or the Rockefeller/DuPont/Hearst cabal. As our heroes show, it's best to just keep out of their way and avoid confrontation (worked so well for Neville Chamberlain that year).All in all, this hysterical morality play is almost as silly as the Scientology space fantasy they sell to only their "advanced" students. But unlike Scientology, this one is genuinely funny and can be enjoyed with pizza and beer.I believe I'd give it at least a 7, maybe more for those cow ponies decorated up with plastic ox horns and buffalo hides. Loved it.