Le clan de la caverne des ours

This is one of the films that I grew up watching, and even now, I love it and admire its beauty as much as I ever did.

First of all, comparing movies to their books isn't something we should do, because they are two different forms of entertainment, and can take different liabilities. What is important is if the movie still tells the basic story, and in the case of the Clan of the Cave Bear, it stuck to the original story in a very suitable fashion. I must admit that when I first saw this movie, I did not know that this was from a book. It wasn't until 15 years later that I read the book, and it confirmed my statement that the movie kept the story intact.

As far as the acting was concerned, I have to admire a cast that had to convey throughout an entire script in a totally different language, and manage to keep it consistent. Watching the film, you can see that certain gestures always mean the same thing, as well as certain grunts and sounds. Folks, that is the result of a lot of hard work, and to put down that part of the film is like looking at the Empire State Building as just the result of an erector set.

The basic story of the movie is to show prejudice against what is new and not understood. Ayla's presence is meant to show the Clan what the future holds, which is the underlying reason why they fear and hate her, though they are unaware of the reasons. Ayla endures many trials throughout the movie in order to gain their trust and approval, which ultimately prepare her for a journey into the world without the Clan.

A movie worth watching again and again. The book is great also, by the way, so I recommend them both.

If the movie lacks anything it is the beauty of the photography in films like "Quest for Fire" and "Windwalker". Otherwise I can't find any serious flaws. It is rare to find a decent movie about prehistoric peoples. "Quest for Fire" is the best movie of this kind in my opinion but "Clan of the Cave Bear" is a close second.

I am not trying to compare "Cave Bear" to the books by Jean M. Auel. To me the film takes the best part of Auel's story and makes a pretty good movie. The later Auel stories become more romance novel fodder and to some that may be more entertaining. "Clan of the Cave Bear" is not romantic. It captures the brutality of prehistory very well for a fiction film. I've seen documentaries about the Neanderthal and was surprised how accurately "Cave Bear" showed that time. The flaws in human nature are shown in all their rawness in this movie. There is prejudice, oppression and abuse in full force. What makes it bearable for me is how the Darryl Hannah character is able to deal with this and eventually over come it.

"Cave Bear" also shows some of the ritual of stone age culture with the Shaman and the hunting rites of passage. There is some beauty in that culture. But the bottom line for these people is survival and that was a very difficult thing to accomplish. They were scratching and clawing (literally) just to eat and raise children. And sadly we know that they are doomed (except for a few Neanderthals who possibly interbred with Cro-Magnons).

This kind of documentary approach in "Cave Bear" will not thrill those who want a stone age comedy-romance, "Caveman", or a special effects absurdity of prehistoric people fighting lots of dinosaurs, "One Million BC", (which is historically impossible). But if you can appreciate an intense story of a young woman's survival in the wild and her experience with a lost stone age culture, then I recommend "Clan of the Cave Bear". 9/10

The movie version of 'Clan of the cave bear' isn't really a bad adaption - but the very fact that this is a movie, running less than two hours, forces it to be a very compact version of the book. A lot of the details are left out, which of course is unfortunate.

Overall, the acting is quite good. How are we really supposed to act so it will be like neanderthals? Can you really put all their knowledge and way of life and act it out when modern man is so much different (or are we?). Daryl Hannah is probably a good choice for Ayla at the time, and thanks to the 80's still Allowing 'rougher stuff' to be shown, or as I prefer it: more natural, the abuse described in Auel's novel is to most extent included.

To sum it up: an OK adaption, but a 2-hour movie does not make this novel justice.

I saw this little unknown gem two days ago, and I was just blown away by all the horrible reviews for it back in 1986. I just don't understand why people didn't want to see a healthy Darryl Hannah as the cave girl, Ayla. Maybe it's because, Darryl Hannah didn't appear nude, even though the costumes are scantily. All in all, It is a nice movie to watch. It tugs at your heartstings seeing all of the brutal honesty presented on screen. And that music! Oh, I was the Niagra Falls from the beautiful music. The most heart-breaking scene of this movie is when Ayla is separated from her mother at 2, from a vicious earthquake. The ghastly "R" rating is unecessary, altough the rape scene is horrible and graphic, they could have sacrificed for a PG or PG13.Watch this one if get the chance. You won't be disappointed!

1986 98 minutes Rated: R CC.

I am not going to say it sucked because it was nothing like the book. I am merely going to say that if you have read the book, don't bother because it will only tick you off. And What ticks me off is not that it didn't follow the book closely enough, it didn't follow the book AT ALL. There are scenes that should have happened well after they did, and scenes that happened that would have explained other scenes that were in the movie that aren't. To the above commenter who said that the subsequent books were all romance fodder, first Valley was not, it wasn't until the end that most of the pleasures were added, with small intermittent scenes throughout. Yes, there are a lot of Pleasures scenes in the books, Yes, they could have been done without, but that doesn't mean that the rest of the story is not worth reading. That is not what I am writing a review on, however. I was more upset that the movie didn't even maintain a SEMBLANCE to the book, other than the character's name, almost as if the director skimmed the book, and took pieces from sections without thinking about how they would go together.