Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Eric Stevenson I remember reading the Leonard Maltin review and how he said that this was definitely a time where you should read the book over the movie. I personally found this movie to be just okay. Despite the name "The Bible" it doesn't describe that much of the Bible. It's only the book of Genesis. In fact, why not just name this movie Genesis? You could make sequels that cover all the other books in the Bible.That being said, there isn't anything too bad about this film. It's mostly well acted, but it has a major flaw. It doesn't really have anything unique about it at all. When you take a story as famous as the Bible that's been adapted so many times, you need to have something extra. I guess it was faithful, but it came off as bland. It's still got some good acting, it's just nothing to remember. **1/2

beresfordjd I have been watching this for over an hour and it is boring me to tears. The only worthy thing about it so far is the handling of the animals and the ark - given there was no CGI in those days Huston makes a great job of it. All this film manages to do is convince me (not that I was not already convinced) that the bible stories are just that - vividly imaginative stories which explain the inexplicable. That all this guff is the basis of humans' faith in gods is just astonishing. Huston makes a very good Noah - he looks like he may have looked in my opinion. Other casting is not so great Richard Harris is wasted and acts as though he were in an early silent movie - Adam and Eve are coyly displayed in their nakedness (a product of the times) but make little or no real impact. Cain leaves Adam and Eve after killing Abel and he goes to the land of Nod where he marries - who, exactly as there are only supposed to be Adam, Eve, Cain and the dead Abel on the earth?

Randwulf This film was released in September of 1966, which placed it at the close of a long tradition of Hollywood Biblical epics. I was around ten years old and had a vinyl LP of its great musical score which I played over and over before I finally saw the movie on the big screen of a theater. Our family was not particularly religious, but this film was one of those that had a profound influence on me and made me interested in knowing more about the Bible.Looking at it today, I see more depth. The opening footage from all over the world of the days of the Creation is still breathtaking. As a child I felt uncomfortable with the partially nude scenes of Adam and Eve, and even now I believe nudity needs to be implied. Otherwise my mind stops focusing on the story and thinks "I just saw a naked actor!". Also, a theory of some Bible commentators is that animals are clothed with feathers or fur, and Adam and Eve were clothed with a glow of light emanating from within them. When they sinned that glow disappeared and they were then totally naked before they hit on the idea of fig leaves. (This interpretation would not likely have been known to John Huston). Beyond that, the film rolls on quite nicely through the first twenty-two chapters of Genesis. The cinematography is rich and beautiful. I do think a few too many scenes were interpreted as desert settings, since many of the Bible lands were lush and only outskirted by desert as a result of the climatology of the region being somewhat different more than 4,000 years ago (though of course that's controversial). Either way the storyline still follows the episodes of salvation history. One reviewer said it looks like they just kept shooting until they ran out of film and decided to call it quits. To me it was essential they kept going until they climaxed the film with the sacrifice of Isaac, which pointed forward to the day when God would inaugurate a new creation. Thus there is a great arc of theme in the epic from "In the Beginning" to "The New Beginning".Overall the movie looks like a live-action version of Sunday School art. By that I mean most of the scenes are like pictures I've seen in religious artworks. For example, Adam and Eve are portrayed by clean-shaven white people. Cain bashes Abel over the head instead of slitting his throat (like the sacrifices he'd watched - see I John 3:12 in the original Jerusalem Bible [1966], not the New Jerusalem Bible [1985]). This Tower of Babel somewhat rightly resembles a Sumerian ziggurat, yet more resembles Renaissance paintings of it. Modern researchers have discovered that Noah could have been a king, and the ark was actually a huge flat barge shaped like a giant shoebox to ride the tidal waves of the Flood. The movie pictures things like I've seen them all my life: a peasant Noah, and a rounded boat with a house on top (and that shape would capsize in no time). The only thing they didn't have was a giraffe sticking out of the window.Nevertheless, you may enjoy these traditional depictions. I'm just preferring literal Biblical research combined with the look of what has been discovered in archaeology. Yet, for me the overall effect of this film is still profound and quite moving. It's been said that George C. Scott's portrayal of Abraham was the low point of the movie, but I thought his crusty performance was inspiring! (I was also thankful they didn't picture Abraham like Santa Claus). For the most part, watching this film was an enjoyable and uplifting experience. Any Biblical movie should give us a taste of what things were like, and then we should always go back and read the Book. There we will find the authentic atmosphere of the actual words. Still, one line the scriptwriters put in the mouth of Abraham is not found in the Bible, yet it does reflect what the Bible says of him. It has helped me with my faith. It is the line where Abraham asks, "Shall the Lord speak, and Abraham not believe?"

les6969 Well made considering the time it was done, even the special effects are quite believable and the sequence with the Animals entering the Arc were quite amazing considering. Of course there are inaccuracies but that's to be expected. The animals went in by twos and others in sevens depending if they were clean or unclean, the Arc was more likely box shaped and not shaped like a boat. ( Read Secrets of the Lost Races ) Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden scenes were a bit dark with too much in the shadows and the garden didn't really seem like a paradise to me. Noah and ALL his family, including his daughters in law were all white which seems a little odd considering they populated the whole earth afterwards. Noah's daughters sleeping with him to have children wasn't covered but then this was a few decades ago and Isaac was most likely in his early 20s not the teenager portrayed in this film. Having said all that it is a very watchable for all the family.