Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Film Glance Forum

  1. Home
  2. The Cinema
  3. Well, actually not a nitpick, a major objection.

Well, actually not a nitpick, a major objection.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Cinema
7 Posts 1 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • F Offline
    F Offline
    fgadmin
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Quest for Fire


    country_woman — 12 years ago(May 21, 2013 06:40 PM)

    Well, actually not a nitpick, a major objection.
    The two main tribes, the Ulam and Ivaka, are supposed to be Homo Sapiens Sapiens (us, anatomically modern humans) and the Wagabu (the tribe that attacks the Ulam in the beginning of the movie, which initiates the story) and the Kzamm (the cannibals) are Neandertals (Homo Sapiens Neandertalensis).
    Even when the movie was made, we knew that the Neandertals were a kind of human, and not apes. But the Wagabu are simply bipedal apes, and the Kzamm are extremely apelike.
    Further, the Ulam have the heavy brow ridges and jutting jaws that are truly Neandertal. Only the Ivaka are truly anatomically modern humans).
    This just makes no sense, scientifically. I read that J.J. Annaud, the director, spent years researching this movie. And he made such bloopers representing the humans.
    Other than that, terrific movie! I saw it when it came out, and again on DVD. Very evocative and gripping.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • F Offline
      F Offline
      fgadmin
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      playtoyer — 12 years ago(May 25, 2013 03:20 PM)

      yes you are right you have in the movie the ulam and the kzamm that are neandertals the ivaka that are homo sapiens and the wagabou that are homo erectus it,s not possible it,s a movie it,s fiction based on scientific facts the language used in the movie was invented by anthony burgess and they mixed 3 kind of humans group from differente evolution stages the film is based on a book

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • F Offline
        F Offline
        fgadmin
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        Blueghost — 12 years ago(June 01, 2013 10:43 PM)

        Yeah, sometimes directors don't always make the best decisions. I think Annaud is one of the great cinematic geniuses of our time, but even he's made a few missteps here and there. What you cite, to me at least, says that they just flubbed it when it came to determining which species of human goes where in what scene.
        I think if he went back and remade this film it would be much improved.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • F Offline
          F Offline
          fgadmin
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          shiftylee — 12 years ago(March 23, 2014 06:30 AM)

          It's based on a book that was made before that was known. The director knew ot was scientificaly incorrect but wanted to remain faithful to the source novel.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • F Offline
            F Offline
            fgadmin
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            lotr2004rotk — 11 years ago(August 20, 2014 01:48 AM)

            Shiftylee. That makes sense. I had no idea this was based on a novel. Even still, why have the tribes in dif stages of evolution? Took some of the realism away for me since I wasn't expecting that. Still a cool movie though.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • F Offline
              F Offline
              fgadmin
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              shiftylee — 11 years ago(November 22, 2014 06:43 PM)

              Because it was thought that Homosapiens and Neaderthals lived side by side when the book was written over 100 yesrs ago.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • F Offline
                F Offline
                fgadmin
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                shiftylee — 11 years ago(November 22, 2014 06:45 PM)

                The book was published in 1911 so that is the frame of reference.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0

                • Login

                • Don't have an account? Register

                Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                • First post
                  Last post
                0
                • Categories
                • Recent
                • Tags
                • Popular
                • Users
                • Groups