User reviews

If you ever wondered how the human race first came up with the idea of fire and cooked dinners then this may be the movie for you. Over the course of this little adventure involving prehistoric women and dreamboat guys, both these incredibly important discoveries are made. Although it's interesting to note that these enormous human advances were evidently uncovered only after the discovery of beauty products.

Prehistoric Women is, naturally, camp nonsense of the first order. And it certainly knows it is as well. To ensure some, ah, authenticity these primitive characters only speak in a series of grunts. Events are explained to us by an ever-helpful voice-over man, who often simply describes what we can already see. And what we see includes an exciting fight between a caveman and a small cat…I mean dangerous panther, a girl-on-girl cat fight, an attack by a pterodactyl and, best of all, the fiery demise of a marauding, evil giant. This 50's exploitation flick is generally quite amusing but not really entertaining enough to be fully recommended. It's goofy enough to be quite likable though, although a better example of this kind of thing is The Wild Women of Wongo (1958).

By junking at least twenty minutes of extraneous footage (including two totally boring dance sequences that are spun out to excruciating length), this little effort would make a passable feature for those of us who enjoy leg shows (if nothing else). It's true the fights with the giant and the pterodactyl are mildly effective, but the story, acting and production values are so lacking in quality that connoisseurs will find the whole movie a chore to sit through.

It's startling to find one of Paramount's top photographers, Lionel Lindon (later to win numerous awards for Around the World in 80 Days), working on this cheap-jack Poverty Row independent—and contributing such below-par work at that. Yes, all the shots are in focus, but that is the responsibility of the camera operator and focus puller. The director of photography directs the lighting, and just about all of the many night scenes are so badly under-lit, you can hardly make out what's happening!

I will be honest.The only reason I bought this DVD was to see more (in every sense of the word) of Laurette Luez.She first caught my attention in the 1950 film "D.O.A." when I wished she could have had a more substantial part.In "D.O.A". I was struck by Laurette's exotic looks and when I looked up her biography on IMDb.com, it did not surprise me that she was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.I have a serious weakness for beautiful 1940s film actresses with raven black hair.I have every film Jennifer Jones ever made as well as examples of Ava Gardner, Margaret Lockwood, Patricia Medina and Vivien Leigh; not that I am putting Laurette Luez on a par with those film goddesses but as said by a reviewer above she meets my need for agreeable "eye candy".

During the film I wondered what Professor Leakey (the famous British anthropologist whose family live in South Africa) would have made or said of the plot!The ladies looked like they had just come out of a Hollywood beauty salon, which indeed they had i.e. the film studio's make-up dept.Tigers are only found in India.Where were the 9 foot giant's mother & father, did they have any other giant children?The giant (I bet he was a cute baby), reminded me of a latter day Richard (Jaws) Kiel.The pterodactyl was extinct by the time man evolved onto this planet.Unfortunately film companies/producers have a stubborn obsession with evolution and insist man must do battle with prehistoric monsters as it looks good on film and is what audiences want.That's the problem with playing chess like I do, it makes you think too logically! But of course the real reason people (mainly heterosexual men) would watch films like these is to see scantily clad beautiful stone age women ministering to the capricious urges of their stone age men folk and I am including myself in that category.There was some S&M scenes in "Prehistoric Women" which will appeal to men of that disposition and persuasion.Again the logical side of my brain kicked in, with all that stone age muscle around, why did the men meekly submit themselves to be held captive by those glamorous primitive women?.Could it be that they wanted to be held by them as their prisoners? Films like this trigger prehistoric urges in all of us.I noticed when I started to pen my review that IMDb.com only rated it 2.7/10.That seemed a little harsh for the entertainment factor alone, so I scored it 4/10.

This cinecolour gem tells the tale of a prehistoric tribe where some of the women fled with some the female children to escape to tyranny of the males. However, as the young girls get older the mating instinct takes over. The women kidnap and enslave some males for mates. Along the way the male lead invents fire (and cooking), battles a giant bird that resembles a rubber chicken, and a giant played by real life circus giant Johann Petursson. The whole picture is told by a narrator who informs us of such things as "the swan dive was invented before the swan."

I doubt if anyone connected with making this minor little picture was taking any of this seriously, unlike the similar 1967 film of the same title made by Hammer. And you shouldn't take this film seriously either. Some people have expressed an almost psychotic dislike towards this minor, trivial little film, but I can't see what there is to get angry about. PREHISTORIC WOMEN is entertainingly ludicrous, lively, good natured harmless fluff. If you watched this film expecting an serious anthropology lesson, thats your fault for being so naive. Some self-anointed enlightened types say its sexist. So what! What does that word really mean? I'm going to be the first admit I happen to like seeing sexy Laurrette Luez running around in skimpy outfit. Got a problem with that?

I can't believe nobody's seen this movie. Not even 5 votes registered. This is a real cult classic, guys. Dinosaurs, women running around in fur bikinis, catfights; it has it all. Not a whole lot of talent, mind you, but that's not what we're looking for in exploitation, is it? The plot? Who cares. It's simple enough to follow with the sound off. Just sit back, put some heavy tunes on, and enjoy the action.

Plot of this somewhat engaging loincloth romp: girl beats boy, boy beats girl, enlightenment, happy ever after. And if you can't follow the plot, don't worry, because the Worst Narrator of All Time will be happy to spell it out for you.

After her mother is clubbed one time too many by her caveman domestic abuser, Tigri and her gal pals take to the jungle with their pet panther and "the Wise One" (an irritating old crone). There they mature into leggy swimsuit models and "dance restlessly" "without knowing why", although we know why, and it has something to do with Loincloth Boy and his rugged pals, with whom and their ilk the lonesome doves have had nothing to do these many moons.

There is some marginally amusing reversal-of-sexes stuff as the gals club the caveboys into submission, but the tables are soon turned. Before we get too far into male dominance a visit from a pelican/ugly puppet, followed by a giant, nicely resolves our conflict.

The outstandingly Bad aspect of this otherwise modestly bad film is the narration. The dialog is spoken entirely in Cave-ese, which we moderns of course do not understand, so a helpful narrator is along to fill us in. Unfortunately in addition to translating the dialog the narrator insists on telling us WHAT WE HAVE JUST SEEN, EACH AND EVERY TIME, so that the entire movie consists of the viewer watching things like: the girls gesture at the guys to pick up a dead panther, whereupon the narrator solemnly intones in his best pear-shaped tones: "and the women force the men to carry the panther back to their jungle home", which of course is WHAT WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT. Since the narrator continues to state the bleeding obvious throughout the entire flick from beginning to end, it draws the viewer out of the story and into an "I can't believe how stupid this is" state of mind.

However there are people who take pleasure in doing exactly this, and for such people this is an under-appreciated candidate for Worst Film of All Time lists. I recommend it highly.

After watching Prehistoric Women I could not figure out why of all the film companies out there, Eagle-Lion Studios was the one that released it. Or a better word would be inflicted it on the movie-going public on both sides of the pond. Eagle-Lion was the creation of Great Britain's J. Arthur Rank to get a foothold in the American market and Lord Rank a notoriously prudish gentleman. Did he see he was producing something of a skin flick?

My guess is that someone got the bright idea to try and make a version of One Million B.C. in a color process called Cine-color. The version I saw on TV was quite washed out and something tells me Prehistoric Women will not be a candidate for restoration.

No dialog among the characters who are played by no name actors. It's all done with a narrator who probably is used to educational films, his voice has got that kind of monotone. Not even an entertaining one like Ben Stein's.

The plot such as it is involves the woman of the tribe rejecting the male chauvinism of the men strike out on their own with some of the younger females. But as time goes by everyone concerned develops itches that need scratching.

Curiously enough unlike the prehistorically inaccurate One Million B.C. only mammals are shown, the age of the reptilian dinosaur having long passed before homo sapiens arrived on the scene. One flying pterodactyl like creature does threaten the tribe, but he looks more like a dehydrated Big Bird and the newly invented fire deals with him.

Did J. Arthur Rank ever see this thing he unleashed?

"Prehistoric Women" was obviously never meant to be taken seriously. It certainly doesn't seem to take *itself* seriously, which helps me overlook its dated plot, "cutesy" narrative and crypto-exploitation themes. By this I mean that this is the kind of film that leers at its scantily clad female characters even as it supposedly celebrates their spunk and grit. It's as if Ed Wood decided to make a family film for Mom and Dad to enjoy along with the kids.

But I am OK with that.

Obvious care and effort went into the sets and the special effects, at least considering the "B movie" nature of the material. The women are cute and the men are personable and virile...although I found it curious that the "hero" of the movie had less muscle mass than a 14 year old girl; that the monster who attacks the clans at the climax of the film looks like a stop-motion rubber chicken with a pteranondon crest taped on; that the men didn't figure out the part where they picked up rocks and threw them back at the women, but managed to invent fire and cooking...etc. etc.If you are looking for logic, consistency or real 'weight' in your adventure story, you won't find it here.

This was probably a lot of fun for a date movie in the local Bijou when it was released in 1950. But it's hard to imagine anyone watching "Prehistoric Women" for anything other than camp or nostalgic value these days. Still a decent effort for what it was.

A tribe of scantily-clad but well-coiffed women search for mates at the dawn of civilisation. After some adventures and inventive moments, they finally find 'deserving' men and settle down (with proper 1950s propriety, having had their unions sanctified by the appropriate antediluvian marriage ceremonies). A bargain-basement independent, the film is almost unwatchable. The dialogue is all in 'caveman', so exposition is provide by constant (and after a while irritating) narration (voiced by David Vaile), which gives the opus a pseudo-documentary feel (but for a more realistic depiction of Paleolithic life, consider watching 'The Flintstones' (1960)). 'Prehistoric Women' comes across as a cheap knock-off of 1940's 'One Million B.C.' but with negligible 'special effects' beyond a brief fight with some sort of duck-footed flying 'dragon' (never shown clearly). The characters' main nemesis is a 'giant' named Guadi (played by the 7' 8" Icelandic actor Johann Petursson), a slow-moving threat who never looks as menacing as the narrator makes him out to be. The distaff cast is led by Laurette Luez, a bit-player 'exotic' with 1940's pin-up looks and negligible 'mime' skills (notably her attempts at 'knowing smirks' when she watches captive Engor (Allan Nixon) try to move a huge rock). With the 'educational' narration, the titular women all wearing short, tight, thigh-baring skirts, and lots of lingering-leg shots, the film is borderline 'exploitation' (if the women had been topless, it would have been a typical 50's 'nudie-cutie' (especially with the alternate title 'The Virgin Goddess')). Surprisingly, considering the apparent budget, the film is in colour. All in all, a silly and dull entry into the 'sexy cavewomen' canon of adolescent fantasies and an obvious antecedent of such ogle-classics as 'One Million Years B.C.' (1966) and 'When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth' (1970). One positive comment: the scenes with the panthers suggest that they had a competent cat wrangler.

I was 10 when I watched most of this movie being made in El Monte California. The "jungle" this was filmed in was where we played, and was also the wintering headquarters of the Clyde Beatty Circus. The special effects were nothing compared to the computer generated effects of today, but in 1949 they were spectacular. From the Giant, the Lion Pit, the Cave, fighting the Pterodactyl, to the slingshot fight across the "river" took imagination and talent to create. The night scenes were done in broad daylight with smoke lenses so we could watch everything that summer. If you watch this with a child's eye, it is a fantastic movie. If you watch it with an old fogey attitude, it will be a waste of time.

Comparable, I think, to Wiesmuller's Tarzan flicks, Prehistoric Women is honestly kind of good. The voice over, done documentary style, helps. The segments done with stuffed animals are hilarious by todays standards. Its like Tarzan wrestles Lavern and Shirley's BooBoo kitty. The prehistoric women? Champions of women's liberation and really pretty both at the same time. The photography? Decent given what they had to work with back then. The plot? Hey, there actually IS one. Even a sub plot. Characters? They function. Especially the nine foot tall rampaging giant, who is so obviously misunderstood. I'm kidding. But I'm NOT kidding when I say that if you like Tarzan style flicks from that era you'll enjoy Prehistoric Women.

In the standard prehistoric tribal environment, the women are rightfully subjugated. One rebellious woman has a problem with authority figures and opts to correct that with a rock to the male cranium.

Realizing that this might provoke the other males, she heads for the woods or jungle with a handful of women and girls. Of courses being a moral film in the time fo censorship the females must be punished so, they are dragged off by a giant; thus, they leave a hand full of girls to be brought up without males by a wise old woman.

We come to the opening scene where the women not knowing what they are missing have to dance to exhaustion (we get exhausted watching).

Soon after being told that men can be useful for propagating, they set out to subdue some feeble men for this nefarious purpose.

In the process, we see the invention of fire and its consequences.

I recommend that this film should not fall into the hands of women.

And here I thought our distant ancestors were small, stooped, hairy and naked. But now, thanks to Prehistoric Women, I know the women were long-legged, with curled hair, mini-skirts, and from a Las Vegas chorus line. Plus, the gene pool was big enough to include some shapely blondes. In fact, I'm now wishing I was born a lot sooner. Except the prehistoric men look a lot better than I do, like maybe they were recruited off Muscle Beach and had just left the barber shop. Oh well, the women aren't very cooperative anyway; that is, until the men ply them with big hunks of cooked meat. See, up until that time, the girls were eating their meat raw so no wonder they were always in a bad mood.

Along the way, we get to see how fire was discovered, how the lever was used, and how the swan dive was invented before swans. We also get to see how the full moon makes the girls go into a dancing frenzy long before the sounds of heavy metal, and how the feminist movement got a really, really early start. But what about that nasty giant who keeps growling and menacing all those beautiful prehistoric bodies. Too bad there wasn't a basketball recruiter to put all his 7' 8" under contract, that would have been a lot easier than burning down the jungle.

Anyhow, I think I enjoyed this cartoon version of prehistory, even though I don't think it matches my high school textbook. However I'm bothered by one really bad thought. After looking at all these wonderful prehistoric specimens and then comparing them with myself, I'm beginning to doubt the whole course of human evolution. You think maybe it's the cooked meat.

I must say! I didn't realize that the hair comb was invented even before fire was?! And I certainly didn't know that the prehistoric women walked so upright, and with such grace. No wonder people started evolving. I mean such well cared for women even had men taking up the hygiene - for they're all squeaky clean. It's all so very accurate (including the giant).

OK, the movie has some naive and primitive charm, but I guess the main reason for making it was to show a bit more feminine skin then the regular movies would allow. Still not accurate. The costumes look more like sleeveless fur coats then the clothing actual prehistoric people would wear.

I'd be really surprised if the maker of this movie ever even saw a book on the prehistoric world. It's just so silly.

Still, you might get slightly entertained by this movie, trying to sell itself like a national geographic documentary (including the most appealing part - the showing of the native women), but I'd recommend you just about any other movie.

Oh well. I had it in a collection and watched. It has that narration that makes it sound so National Geographic. Meanwhile, the subjects of this "film" run around and act out their impulses. It makes you wonder how they ever evolved as far as they did with so little knowledge. There is one scene that reminded me of a PBS thing about cave people. The tribe keeps pushing the women to keep up with them, to where they pretty much end their civilization. Apparently the Neanderthals were so hard on the fairer sex, they became extinct. Let's see. No women. No _______. No civilization. Hmmm. Let me think. In this movie, the women take matters into their own hands and with the help of a big rock, move on, leaving their hairy counterparts to fend for themselves. There is one really great character, a nine foot giant, who likes to pick up women (literally). The men, who sort of like these ladies (thought they themselves are going to become extinct if they don't figure out a couple things), get embroiled in the capture or destruction of this big guy. There are lots of other scenes that are pretty ridiculous. I love those stupid dances that they do. Then there's that sling shot fight. Unlike the Wonga movie, this has a little personality, and though it's ultimately stupid in every way, it has some charm.

Due to physical abuse from the males in the tribe a couple of prehistoric women leave and take some young girls with them into the jungle. Eventually, the young girls grow up and one of them named "Tigri" assumes leadership of the all-female tribe. However, as they become women they realize that something is missing and so they decide to capture some men and take them by force back to their camp to become their husbands. Anyway, so much for the extremely basic plot which is mainly told in the narrative style barring a few unintelligible words spoken every now and then. Although the females were moderately attractive and some of the action scenes weren't necessarily bad the movie as a whole was just plain awful and easily belongs in a list of the most horrible films ever made. In short, I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone except those with masochistic tendencies and I have rated it accordingly.

Believe it or not, I often like to watch low-budget bad movies. They often can be unintentionally funny with their inept acting, writing and direction. However, some bad films manage to be bad but not particularly watchable--they're just dull beyond belief. This is exactly how I'd describe PREHISTORIC WOMEN. Now you'd think perhaps with a title like this that there might be some sexy cave-babes, but frankly none of the well-groomed ladies looked particularly attractive--even if they all had nicely permed hair! And as for the men, apparently these cavemen almost all have smooth shaven faces and decent hairdos as well! They looked even less like cave people than Fred or Wilma Flintstone!! As for the rest of the film, although it was filmed in color, the print I saw was very, very muddy looking and ugly. And, most of the film either was done in pantomime or was narrated--creating a film that managed to be even less interesting than either version of 1,000,000 BC--plus, unlike the 1960s version, there was no Raquel Welch as eye candy! The only positive I can see about the film is that there was only one goofy looking dinosaur (a pterodactyl) and the rest of the animals were all tigers, panthers and an elephant with mammoth-like tusks added.

Goofy grunts, strangely coiffed ladies and insipid narration, this film is a sure cure to insomnia. While not among the very worst films I have seen, it sure was among the dullest.

Thousands of years ago, six jungle women and their pet panther go on a hunt for men, so that their tribe can continue for a new generation. They mate-minded women battle to defeat four men, who are out hunting a tiger. After their fight, female leader Laurette Luez (as Tigri) succeeds in making three of the men sex slaves (alas, this part isn't fully shown). Meanwhile, men-folk leader Allan Nixon (as Engor) vows to recapture his cave-dwelling pals, and in turn make the women slaves. And, the rest, as they say, is history. In faded color, and narrated throughout, "Prehistoric Women" never gets hot, although the hero does get to "invent" fire.

** Prehistoric Women (11/1/50) Gregg C. Tallas ~ Laurette Luez, Allan Nixon, Joan Shawlee, Mara Lynn

I just saw this film at the request of a friend. How pleasantly surprised I was - this movie is fantastic! Girls in animal skins fighting giants and dancing like animals in the moonlight ... it can't get any better. My favourite line: "The dominant male is happy and contented. Women wait on him as though he were a king." The 60s Hammer film is great, as well, but this is pure enjoyment