I have read Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean M. Auel several times and I have listened to it on book tape as well.
The book is magnificent. It is not high English Literature, but it is face-paced, engaging, thorough, realistic and very well researched. I have also read the Valley of Horses and the rest of the Earth's Children Series. However, I put Shelters of Stone down because is pales in comparison to her earlier work in Clan of the Cave Bear and Valley of Horses.
When I heard a movie had been made, I was both curious and concerned. Curious because I really enjoy the story and the "prehistory" genre - concerned because the vast majority of film adaptations from books are really disappointing.
I really enjoy this film and I now include it in my DVD collection.
The writers and directors did a very brave and wise thing by subtitling the language of the Clan, rather than making the "big dumb cavemen" speak some form of grunting English. They captured the dignity, culture and subtly of the Neanderthals as they were portrayed in Auel's novel, they didn't look like raging men in cheap gorilla suits as they did in Quest for Fire. What could not really be captured was the depth of herb lore and knowledge possessed by Clan, it would not have made for exciting film if a lengthy explanation of plants were included.
I thought Hanna did an excellent job. The reason why they could not use a teen-aged girl was most likely the height factor. Ayla is supposed to tower over even the largest man of the clan, "big and ugly." It would have been very difficult to find a teenager who could not only ACT convincingly in such trying conditions, but who would be tall enough in comparison to the Neanderthals.
The rape scene is horrible, but is realistic and it was necessary to include it. It is a pivotal point in the novel, a moment in time when Ayla's spirit could have been shattered, she suffers as a result and is the stronger for it. I would not let children watch it though, for that scene.
The hunting scene is very well done, it is real and tense and true to the book, so are the clan gathering and the sacrifice of the Cave Bear.
I do not understand how a fan of the book could dislike the movie.
***Spoiler*** The only things I disapprove of are the end when Ayla leaves and the lack of explanation of "Clan memories." In the book, Creb dies and Ayla is cast out of the Clan with her loved ones huddled together under the tyrannical leadership of Broud, which is what would have happened to a people who had become incapable of adapting. There was no satisfying reprimand from Brun, ripping the leadership away from his son, Broud. The ending is way too "Hollywood" and pink, and I do not know why they bothered to change it. The film is real and gritty throughout, why fluff it at the end? The vision of the shared memories that Ayla and Creb have at the Clan gathering is NOT the same as it is in the book. The vision in the book shows the journey through time from the primordial beginnings of life on Earth to the technological future and possible end. It is the main message of Earth's Children (In my opinion) and it is unfortunate that it was altered in this otherwise very meticulous film.
I am very pleased that the film was made, and I am disappointed that it did not get better reviews at the time, it deserved much better. It is quiet and patient and authentic. Real animals are used, no over-the-top musical scores are employed, subtitles and gestures are very well done, casting and costumes are detailed and the camera shots are long and unhurried . It captures the raw nature of the time.
Although I would be pleased to see Valley of Horses made into a film, to see Thonolan and Jondalar and the rest of the interesting characters and wrenching moments depicted, I hope that a sequel is NOT made unless someone who is true to the books bothers to pick up the project.
Most Hollywood movies are really awful nowadays and I would doubt that a studio and film-making team would be able to do it justice with the cast and the budget, and the patience they would need to do it right.
The book is magnificent. It is not high English Literature, but it is face-paced, engaging, thorough, realistic and very well researched. I have also read the Valley of Horses and the rest of the Earth's Children Series. However, I put Shelters of Stone down because is pales in comparison to her earlier work in Clan of the Cave Bear and Valley of Horses.
When I heard a movie had been made, I was both curious and concerned. Curious because I really enjoy the story and the "prehistory" genre - concerned because the vast majority of film adaptations from books are really disappointing.
I really enjoy this film and I now include it in my DVD collection.
The writers and directors did a very brave and wise thing by subtitling the language of the Clan, rather than making the "big dumb cavemen" speak some form of grunting English. They captured the dignity, culture and subtly of the Neanderthals as they were portrayed in Auel's novel, they didn't look like raging men in cheap gorilla suits as they did in Quest for Fire. What could not really be captured was the depth of herb lore and knowledge possessed by Clan, it would not have made for exciting film if a lengthy explanation of plants were included.
I thought Hanna did an excellent job. The reason why they could not use a teen-aged girl was most likely the height factor. Ayla is supposed to tower over even the largest man of the clan, "big and ugly." It would have been very difficult to find a teenager who could not only ACT convincingly in such trying conditions, but who would be tall enough in comparison to the Neanderthals.
The rape scene is horrible, but is realistic and it was necessary to include it. It is a pivotal point in the novel, a moment in time when Ayla's spirit could have been shattered, she suffers as a result and is the stronger for it. I would not let children watch it though, for that scene.
The hunting scene is very well done, it is real and tense and true to the book, so are the clan gathering and the sacrifice of the Cave Bear.
I do not understand how a fan of the book could dislike the movie.
***Spoiler*** The only things I disapprove of are the end when Ayla leaves and the lack of explanation of "Clan memories." In the book, Creb dies and Ayla is cast out of the Clan with her loved ones huddled together under the tyrannical leadership of Broud, which is what would have happened to a people who had become incapable of adapting. There was no satisfying reprimand from Brun, ripping the leadership away from his son, Broud. The ending is way too "Hollywood" and pink, and I do not know why they bothered to change it. The film is real and gritty throughout, why fluff it at the end? The vision of the shared memories that Ayla and Creb have at the Clan gathering is NOT the same as it is in the book. The vision in the book shows the journey through time from the primordial beginnings of life on Earth to the technological future and possible end. It is the main message of Earth's Children (In my opinion) and it is unfortunate that it was altered in this otherwise very meticulous film.
I am very pleased that the film was made, and I am disappointed that it did not get better reviews at the time, it deserved much better. It is quiet and patient and authentic. Real animals are used, no over-the-top musical scores are employed, subtitles and gestures are very well done, casting and costumes are detailed and the camera shots are long and unhurried . It captures the raw nature of the time.
Although I would be pleased to see Valley of Horses made into a film, to see Thonolan and Jondalar and the rest of the interesting characters and wrenching moments depicted, I hope that a sequel is NOT made unless someone who is true to the books bothers to pick up the project.
Most Hollywood movies are really awful nowadays and I would doubt that a studio and film-making team would be able to do it justice with the cast and the budget, and the patience they would need to do it right.