Sometimes I go to the movies to learn something. Sometimes I don’t. I think 10,000 B.C. falls into the latter category. Directed by Roland Emmerich, who has made such blockbusters as Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow, 10,000 B.C. follows the story of D’Leh, a prehistoric tribesman forced to embark upon a long and treacherous journey to find and take back his kidnapped love, Evolet. Yet on his way D’Leh must fight the forces of nature, both human and beast, to save her. I know, I know, the story is obviously nothing too abstract. Don’t even get me started. Let’s just agree that it’s safe to say that we won’t see Emmerich getting nominated for Best Original Screenplay any time soon.

What I couldn’t stand, however, about 10,000 B.C. wasn’t the plotline at all. Nor was it the acting, which was equally bad, yet still passable. It was the originality factor. The film was shockingly similar to last year’s 300, a hugely successful moneymaker for Hollywood. It comes as no surprise that Hollywood executives would greenlight a film that is essentially a reincarnation of last year’s cash cow, as profit is the ultimate goal of Hollywood, after all. Still, I couldn’t help but be bothered by it. Practically everything and anything about the movie breathed “This is Sparta!” all over again. From the no-name actors to the epic landscapes, there are far too many similarities. Let’s take a look at the posters of each film, for instance:.

Here we see, oddly enough, two eerily-similar portrayals of man at the edge of a cliff. Crazy, huh? And although you might not be able to clearly see the release dates at the bottom of each poster, in addition, each movie (strangely enough) happens to fall on the exact same weekend, just one year apart from each other. March 9 for 300, March 7 for 10,000 B.C. It should come as no surprise, then, that each film’s title happens to be a number as well. Coincidence? I doubt it!

Nevertheless, 10,000 B.C. actually lacked something 300 had going for it, for once. The movie is instantly forgettable. I’m having trouble recalling the film just a day later! Chances are we won’t see too many posters for 10,000 B.C. in college dorm rooms next year like we see 300 posters all over the place these days. That sense of epic, grandiose style as in 300 seemed missing.

Still, like 300 (once again), 10,000 B.C. might be stupid on the surface, but it still caused some part of me to embrace my inner idiot. I really did enjoy the narration, and I couldn’t help but be wowed by the wooly mammoths and the final scene of rebellion. However, don’t think that that makes up for the film’s obvious flaws. For those previously-mentioned reasons, I’m giving 10,000 B.C. thumbs down. Not only does it lack the originality I saw in 300, but it also lacks the same true sense of an epic. It’s not a thumbs down that I earnestly and sincerely want to give, but I’m giving it anyways because I’m pretty tired of talking about it, to be honest; I’ve got work to do. Good luck on your exams, guys!