Supelice
Dreadfully Boring
PiraBit
if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.
Ogosmith
Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.
Micah Lloyd
Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.
jericoduluth
Just watched this movie and I had to comment on how poorly it was put together. The direction was horrible, the acting was sub par, and the editing and post production lacked any notable sign of skill or understanding of how to present a story. I could forgive a lot considering that this was obviously made on a very small budget, but the areas that need improvement are not constricted by money. Everyone in front of the camera needs to take a lot more acting classes. Yes, this is a slow moving and very boring Bible story, but that is no excuse for uninspired acting. The acting is not helped by one of the worst directing and editing jobs I have ever seen in a movie. The shots look like they were set up without thought for the plot or character development. The ridiculous editing further adds a layer of confusion, making it painful to watch. They need to go back to the drawing board with this one. Start over and this time think things out before you shoot.
jo0853
As previously stated, there is much room for improvement, mostly with the sound in my opinion. The background noise (Wind, crowds etc) made dialogue hard to hear. However I am pleased somebody made a movie about Ruth's love for her mother-in- law. The gentleness of this movie makes it good viewing for kids and adults alike. The colours were bright and cheery, something not common in many Old Testament movies. I think someday someone will make a replica and it will be fantastic, just like "One Night With The King" - the book of Esther, and some of the other 'Bible Series' movies with 'big name' actors in the lead role. 10 lines is a lot to cover for a short review!
trixiedickets23
You gotta do better than this. Lackluster film making at its best. First you need to pick a more exciting subject. Picking the one Old Testament book that is a real sleeper was your first mistake. You have so many other books to chose from, why Ruth? Among the other books we encounter jealousy, pettiness, ethnic cleansing, misogyny, homophobia, racism, infanticide, genocide, filicide, pestilence, megalomania,and sadomasochism. Instead of picking any of these topics that fill up most of the book, the film makers opt for a bland interpretation of a very boring story. Yet they still manage to make this dull story even duller. The acting is sub par and it doesn't look as if much care went into the casting for each part. Some parts are incredibly miscast. Some are only slightly miscast. It is as if not wanting to offend anyone, the film makers ended up treading so softly that they barely made a footprint.
mskatherine-spencer
In some ways, I liked this movie. True, the acting could have been better, but the screenwriters', producers', actors' and directors' (and anyone else involved with this movie) hearts were in the "right place". When I compare this movie to the "Story of Ruth", which came out in 1960, I find that this movie is better because it follows the Bible; it is based on the scripture. I would'nt say it was exactly like the book in the Bible, but when I viewed certain scenes, I was thinking "they got it right this time". For me, I thought Carman was pretty good as Boaz; Sherry Morris made a wonderful Ruth. The actress who portrayed Naomi did a great job, too, although I thought she was a bit young to be the mother-in-law of Ruth.
