lah@miro.berkeley.edu.BERKELEY.EDU (Commander RYN Leigh Ann Hussey) (01/28/86)
I really don't want to spend $5.50 if I don't think I'm going to like a film. So if any of you out there have seen _Clan of the Cave Bear_, please post a review. What I am mostly worried about is: "is it just another _Quest for Fire_" (one of the great dogs of all time, but that's another discussion...)? Thanks, Leigh Ann
ronc@fai.UUCP (Ronald O. Christian) (01/30/86)
>I really don't want to spend $5.50 if I don't think I'm going to like >a film. So if any of you out there have seen _Clan of the Cave Bear_, >please post a review. >What I am mostly worried about is: "is it just another _Quest for >Fire_" (one of the great dogs of all time, but that's another >discussion...)? >Leigh Ann ***** My girlfriend read the book. I have not. When it opened on Friday, she had to see it. After hearing Ms. Hannah was in it, I wasn't too sure about seeing it, but reluctantly agreed. I liked it. She did not. My comments were along the lines of "Wow, they did this and this" and hers were more along the lines of "But they didn't do this and that". She was particularly annoyed with the way they changed the ending. Although after she explained how it was *supposed* to end, I can see why the change was made. I recommend the movie. Especially if you haven't read the book. I think it had flaws, and that some parts were put in to keep the audience awake rather than to advance the plot, but all in all the movie did OK. Then again, I liked Quest for Fire. But Quest was almost an art film, where Clan has more of the gimmicks that appeal to the masses. Ron -- -- Ronald O. Christian (Fujitsu America Inc., San Jose, Calif.) ihnp4!pesnta!fai!ronc Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: "If you are seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it."
spencer@oberon.UUCP (Randy Spencer) (01/30/86)
---------------------------------------------
|*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***|
---------------------------------------------
It just ended at such a point of "...yeah, and the point is...?"
I was fascinated by the things that the actors (well, not the actors)
had come up with to communicate with. To a 20th century man watching
a subtitled movie in downtown LA it seemed like the hand signs were
very authentic (of course, who knows). I just saw Iceman on cable
and I didn't really get that much more out of this show. The real
deep interest and conflict never got started.
The book is very thick and I guess they never had the time to really
dig into the scenes. The opening scene is a young Daryl Hanna walking
through the woods and before you can say anything there is an earth-
quake and Daryl's mom is sucked into the ground, and we never got to
see her before she is almost dead. The majority of the opening of the
film seemed to me to be just fragments that were included so they could
later be refered to, then as soon as they had been on long enough to
register, off they went, "we have to get through this in 2 hours!".
I was really looking forward to this since my sister seemed so taken
by the book, and since I have been so impressed by Daryl Hanna since
I saw her in Blade Runner (back when), and since they have plastered
LA with that great photo of her on huge 12 foot posters everywhere.
Alas, I wish I had seen it on cable.
Life goes on...
==============================================================================
Randal Spencer Student DEC Consulting - University of Southern California
Home: 937 N. Beverly Glen Bl. Bel Air California 90077 (213) 470-0428
Arpa: Spencer@USC-ECL or Spencer@USC-Oberon Bitnet: Spencer@USCVAXQ
------------------------------------------------------------------------------boren@randvax.UUCP (Pat Boren) (01/30/86)
I saw this movie last week at a midnite show, which is partly why the movie seemed long to me (it's not, only 2 hours). The other likely reason it seemed to drag a bit is the type of story it is -- really no conversation, lots of trial-&-error stuff (which gets repetitive), such a slow plot. But on the other hand, to speed up the action would be wrong and people would be saying, "Now how did they get from A to C? Where's B?" It's just the type of story that has to proceed slowly to be told. My friend, who has read the book, says the movie follows it very closely. We both thought the technical aspects were very good. I'd say we enjoyed it, but it's no blockbuster, if that helps any. -- Patricia Boren decvax!randvax!boren boren@rand-unix.arpa
cc-30@cory.BERKELEY.EDU (Sean "Yoda" Rouse) (02/01/86)
I just read the other review of this movie, and since I disagree with the
recommendation, I thought I'd post my views.
OK, the movie was good-looking, bright, funny, touching....
BUT
I was expecting a bit more.
The movie runs like an old cliche. It's almost like a Disney film
in the incredibly unsophisticated way it characterizes. If you're
willing to be charmed by it, then fine, go see it.
But if you are expecting a little more than B-movie archetypes,
stay away. The characters are just cave-people versions of old familiar
faces. Most of the lines are seen before they arrive.
I will admit that I was entertained. The overall craftsmanship ofthe
film was good. Costuming, makeup, photography, etc. But then, I saw the
film for free.
Let me try and summarize: It was a charming movie.
In my mind, I would NOT pay $5.00 to see it, unless I was
feeling particularly sentimental and schmaltzy.
--Kathy Li
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
ARPA: cc-30@cory.berkeley.edu.arpa
UUCP: ucbvax!cory!cc-30
DISCLAIMER: The opinions here are those of the author's and not of the
University of California. Sticks and stones may break my bones but flames
will never hurt me.
Say! That's the cover to the heating unit!
Yup.
Hey! You're not supposed to have that out, ***THAT'S DANGEROUS***!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (02/10/86)
CLAN OF THE CAVE BEAR
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule review: Modern feminist issues create havoc in
a society of 35,000 years ago. Darryl Hannah as a career
cavewoman fights prehistoric prejudice. Somehow, though, the
film transcends all that and is really engrossing at times.
A durable genre of fantasy is the prehistoric man melodrama. Cavemen
like Alley Oop and B.C. hang around in our Sunday funny papers. Chic
magazines like the NEW YORKER have cartoons showing how primitive man first
came up with the idea for taxes. Saturday mornings children listen for
caveman calls like "Yabba-dabba-doo!" In films, the stories go back at
least as far as Willis O'Brien's DINOSAUR AND THE MISSING LINK, made for
Edison in 1917. More recently, there were films like ONE MILLION B.C. and a
string of prehistoric films from Hammer. Most recently we have seen the
surprisingly funny CAVEMAN with Ringo Starr, which could have ended the
genre, but we also saw QUEST FOR FIRE, which claimed to be trying for
realism. Now based on the first book of Jean Auel's series about
prehistoric man (and woman) comes CLAN OF THE CAVE BEAR.
Somehow the film gave me every reason to hate it, yet I didn't. It is
about an unmarried woman doctor with a child who has to decide if she wants
to settle down with a man or continue with her career. Set it in modern
Manhattan, and you would not want to see this soap opera, but set in 33,000
B.C. this sorry plot had some novelty. Ayla is a Cro-Magnon child
grudgingly adopted by a clan of Neanderthals. The clan's attitude about the
place of women is medieval--which is progressive by Neanderthal standards, I
suppose. This is the story of how Ayla grows up and wanders into the
careers of hunter and medicine woman. Ayla is played by Darryl Hannah. As
a Cro-Magnon she is tall, thin, and blond. This means that she is not squat
enough nor does she have a thick enough forehead or nose to attract a
Neanderthal man so she turns instead to healing and secretly becomes the
first female marksperson.
The story is simple (but then it IS hard to envision what a complex
story about Neanderthals would be like). If it seems anachronistic to put a
feminist in this period, let me assure you if is far more so to have a
dinosaur. Some of the details did bother me. The film gets off to a shaky
start (quite literally) when there is an earthquake that destroys the clan's
home. It seems to be a cliche of prehistoric films that the Earth was just
forming when the action takes place so they have volcanos or earthquakes as
often as we have hailstorms. The question I ask is: how did an earthquake
leave them homeless? It is not like they have skyscrapers to knock over.
They live in huts or caves. Both are pretty earthquake-proof. Any cave that
you find in earthquake country has to be quake-proof. If it isn't, it
wouldn't still be a cave.
Auel's books do have pretty paintings on the cover and the photography
does a good job of creating the same feel.
The story is definitely the weakest part of this film, but for a soap
opera, it is still a watchable film. Give it a +1 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeperplw@panda.UUCP (Pete Williamson) (02/25/86)
Just saw "Clan" on Saturday and was not disappointed at all! I'm one of these people that really got hooked on the books. I knew that no movie could really do justice to COCB, especially the intricate detail and customs and character development, et al. I also knew that filming realistic hunting scenes would not be possible, nor was it likely that Hollywood would be able to find "flatheads". But the movie was a real delight. The screenplay was very close to the book in most major parts. Particularly authentic was the Clan's mechanisms for communication. If you approach the movie from the point of view that it simply isn't and can't be THE BOOK, then I think you'll like it. I recommend the movie. I recommend that you read the book before you watch the movie. This is not an action packed "Rambo" or anything so don't judge it that way. It is basically a superb rendition of what life might have been like at the dawn of man. Sure glad I didn't live back then! Can't wait for "Valley"! -- Pete Williamson "By hook or by crook, we will !!" ... #2