This is by far Ray Harryhausen's worst work, a disappointment on every level. Although there is some good stop motion dinosaur action,there is also plenty of disappointing lizards on green screen action. It has a slow moving story and absolutely NO dialogue. They should have gone with less grunting and more action.The cave people seem to know everything except how to communicate with each other and that's lame.And why do they all live in one cave?Being able to watch a young Raquel Welch makes it bearable. I'd recommend this to fans of Welch and Harryhausen but all of them have probably seen it already.Otherwise,only watch this if you like to be very bored.

I'm not well 'up' on my prehistoric mammals, the ones which inherited the Earthy from the Dinosaurs, or I'd suggest remaking this film to be little bit more accurate from a natural history standpoint. You wouldn't want to set it in the Ice Age. You'd have had to cover Raquel in fur, and covering so much as an inch of her skin (beyond what's needed to avoid an 'R' rating, of course) was to be avoided at all costs. After all, that was what people, especially guys, paid to see. But how about having the hero defend the village from an attack by a saber-toothed tiger? Hunting Woolley Mammoths would be out; they, from what I know, lived in cold, snowy climates, and that would have required covering Raquel up, as I noted above. That's why the extra research would be needed. What monsters would people have faced in those days in a warm climate, where Welch could stick with her doe-skin bikini? What about hunting horses no bigger than dogs? Harryhausen did fine with that little project in 'The Valley of Gwangi', and they did exist. It;s known that these little horses lived in North America and they were hunted to extinction. It took the Spanish to introduce ridable horses to their possession in the Americas in the 1500s.I'm sure Ray Harryhausen would have done as well with a saber-toothed tiger as he did with a T-Rex or a triceratops. The basic plot needn't have changed, but the relationship between Tumac, his father, and his brother might have been softened a bit. You don't have to get rid of the sibling rivalry entirely, but it doesn't have to be lethal.Still, fun to watch.

I saw the original film "One Million B.C." less than a year ago so I still remember the story line pretty well. This remake is just about the exact same one down to the character names and situations, but with the benefit of Ray Harryhausen's dinosaur creations that appear quite an improvement over other prehistoric monster tales from the Fifties and early Sixties. Even his giant lizard has a scale to it that makes it an improvement over say, "The Giant Gila Monster" from 1959 which looked rather ordinary most of the time.And then there's Raquel Welch. Ah yes, looking divine in that bearskin bikini; the poster that graced the walls of thousands of male teenage bedroom walls a decade before Farrah Fawcett took over when she hit it big with "Charlie's Angels". I had to do a double take here though since I'm not used to seeing her as a blonde. Not bad but I'll take the natural auburn hair.All the expected dinosaurs make their appearance here - a brontosaurus, your requisite triceratops versus tyrannosaurus battle, and a pterodactyl that swoops away with cave girl Loana (Welch) in tow. I wondered how she was going to get out of that scrape but needn't have worried. No way was Raquel going to become dinosaur fodder, even if the pterodactyl nestlings were hungry.Well I can take these cave man/cave girl flicks in small doses so I've had my fill again for the time being. However if your tastes lie in this direction I would direct you to the aforementioned "One Million B.C", along with other luminaries of the genre like 1970's "When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth", and a personal favorite of mine if only because of the title, 1958's "The Wild Women of Wongo".

WARNING! - Never, ever judge a DVD by its enticing, bikini-clad, surfer-girl, cheesecake cover! Oh-me! Oh-my! Believe me, this prehistorically preposterous "Romeo & Juliet" love story literally set the art of romance back by about a billion years (B.C.). It really did.This film is a prime example of some of the most primitive-minded, stone-aged trash that actually makes the likes of The Flintstones cartoon seem about 10x more entertaining (and authentic) by mere comparison.From wrangling with supremely peed-off warthogs to claw'n'nail cat-fights between hot cave-girls in high-fashion fur bikinis (ooh-la-la!), One Million Years B.C. can only be fully appreciated if one chooses to view it as a demented, dim-witted, slapstick comedy, presented in the comic style of a Monty Python's farce.From my point of view - This neolithic nonsense of fighting, killing, raping and grunting scraped the absolute bottom of the primordial barrel.I'd say that about the only thing missing from this one's primeval tale of uncivilized romance (perfect for Valentine's Day) was to have had the gruff & grubby Rockman (Tumak) club the sweet & delicate Shellgirl (Loana) over the head and then drag her back by her long, blond locks to a convenient cave for a little bit of "you-know-what", caveman-style.When actually comparing this film's dinosaur effects (courtesy of Ray Harryhausen) to those of 1933's King Kong, I'd confidently say that what one saw in the latter picture (though filmed 33 years prior) was, indeed, far more superior to the former flick in every way imaginable.Anyways - The truth of the matter is - One Million Years B.C. was a total stone-aged embarrassment on all counts. Yep. And that also includes its climatic "erupting volcano" scene that was (obviously) hastily thrown into this primitive mishmash for good measure.And, finally, I ask you - How the hell can Man's future possibly be looked upon as being friendly when his savage, blood-thirsty past (which goes all the way back to one million years B.C.) certainly wasn't?