Aneesa Wardle
The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
SimonJack
This movie, "The Ten Commandments" is from a TV mini-series of 2006. The size of scale and use of special effects are pluses, although the CGI was overdone for the bottom of the Red Sea. The film has just half of the 10 plagues, and glances over most of these – the waters turning to blood, frogs, locusts, fiery hail, and death of the first-born. After the Red Sea crossing and destruction of Pharaoh's army, the film has only three more signs of God's power. The first is Moses sweetening poisoned water. The second is his striking a rock to bring forth water, but it eliminates the significant second strike by Moses that was his sign of doubt for which God would deny him entry into the Promised Land. The third is the appearance of manna in strange circles on the ground, with no name for it or explanation beforehand. The film has an account of the Ten Commandments, the making of a golden calf, and the killing of the dissidents' families. It shows the Israelites carrying the body of Joseph out of Egypt to be buried in the Promised Land. It gives a glimpse of the Ark of the Covenant, but doesn't explain what it is. The film leaves out the earthquake that swallows up Dathan and other dissident leaders. It glosses over the Passover, showing only the marking of Israelite homes with lamb's blood on the door posts. And it omits a crucial event and major aspect of the exodus. That was the scouting of the Promised Land for 40 days by young men from the 12 tribes. They returned with fruit of the land, but 10 of the 12 said they could not hope to conquer the land. We can grant license to all films with their imagined accounts of Moses growing up in a royal household in Egypt. The entire story of the birth and childhood of Moses covers a mere 10 verses in the Bible (Ex. 2: 1- 10). Nothing is said of his upbringing except that after his weening, he was brought up by Pharaoh's daughter, Bithiah, as her own son. We learn of the names of his parents, Amram and Jochebed, in Exodus 6:20 and Numbers 26:59. Bithiah's name doesn't appear until First Chronicles 4:17. Pharaoh banished her for having brought an Israelite into the house of Pharaoh, pretending him to be her own. By tradition, Bithiah left with Moses on the exodus. She was part of the "mixed multitude."The next five verses of the Book of Exodus (2:11-16), tell of Moses killing an Egyptian and fleeing to Midian. The last 10 verses of Exodus cover more than 50 years of Moses' life. Moses was 120 years old when he died (Deuteronomy 34:7), which was 40 years after the start of the exodus. He marries Zipporah, eldest daughter of Jethro; their son, Gershom, is born; and Moses shepherds the flocks of his father-in-law. God's calling of Moses from the burning bush takes up the next four chapters of Exodus, 3-6. The next six chapters (7-12) cover Moses and Aaron confronting Pharaoh, the 10 plagues and the institution of the Passover. The flight from Egypt begins with Ex. 12:33. The last 28 chapters of Exodus cover the Ten Commandments, the grumbling and rebellion of the people against Moses and God, the Ark of the Covenant, and the wandering in the desert. After the 10 plagues, God gave more than two dozen signs of his power to the people in their flight from Egypt. Some of this is repeated, more events occur and more details are provided in the next three books of the Bible. At the end of Deuteronomy, the Israelites reach the Promised Land. Moses sees it from atop a mountain, but is not allowed to cross the Jordon River. He dies and is buried there. No one knows the location of his grave. This 2006 TV film is very heavy with dialog and melodrama. Dougray Scott plays Moses as an angry man, believing in God and his power, but lacking connection to the God of his fathers – Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. His character is unlike Moses as he describes himself in the Bible – "not eloquent
slow of speech and of tongue" (Ex. 4:10). The film seems heavily weighted on portraying God as vengeful and hard, rather than as impatient and angry because of the unfaithfulness of the people, and their rebellion in the face of all the signs he has given them. It was due to their lack of faith and trust just a few months after leaving Egypt when they scouted the Promised Land, that the people were condemned to wander for 40 years in the desert – until all those over age 20 had died. But this film omits this major event, which is crucial to the Bible lesson. One very curious account is a fictitious couple who commit adultery and are then stoned to death. This distraction is woven throughout the exodus and takes up considerable film time. But, it has no bearing on the exodus, and no grounding in scripture. Another lengthy piece of fiction is the training of the Israelites for combat. By the end, we see warriors with shields, spears, swords and big bows. This version of Moses and the exodus has too much fiction that detracts from the story. Its focus is not on a God who repeatedly forgives the people and then disciplines them for their unfaithfulness, which is the tenor of the Bible accounts. The character of Moses seems quite different from scripture. The film has a scale of the immensity of the exodus and has good special effects, but it skips far too many details and events. It drags on far too long with made-up material.
carflo
I didn't expect much when I decided to watch this thing on TV, but thought it might be entertaining enough to pass an evening. I was wrong.It has even more inaccurate and/or made up stuff than the 1956 version. I am not a church going person, but I have read the Bible and the story of the Exodus. At least most of the made up stuff in the 1956 version is just drama and doesn't seem to change the meaning of the story that I read in the Bible. This movie seems to reflect a theological meaning that is different from what is generally believed by modern Christians and Jews. There is so much more "drama" during the course of the Exodus itself. There is very little about Moses and God but a lot about soul searching and dark nights of the soul. I don't think Moses would have given The Ten Commandments as if he wrote them himself. If God had chosen this Moses, I don't think they would have made it. Moses whines and feels sorry for himself. He does not act like a man who has had God talk to him directly. I really do feel like Charlton Heston was probably closer to the real Moses than the Moses in this movie.Besides my religious distaste for this movie, it is a bad movie. The acting poor and melodramatic. The sets and costumes are only a few steps above a play put on at church.The 1956 movie was so much better. It had the grandeur and the reverence this new movie lacks. Don't waste your time on it. I gave it a 2. I only give a 1 to a movie so bad it is funny. This wasn't funny.
justdad
I had never really thought of the mindset a slave would have & what kind of paradigm shift would have to take place to get one out of a slavery mindset... or a wilderness mindset for that matter. I never really thought about how the Israelites came out of Egypt, but were so infused with Egypt that they had to wander all that time not to find the Promised land, but to prepare them to fight for what was rightfully theirs. There was so much revelation & insight in this movie, it really has helped me see how I still have some Egyptian thinking in me that needs worked out! I'm a fanatic about continuity, costumes, sets etc. So much so that it takes a really good movie to take me in & not be in analytical mode about how it was made. This movie took me in lock, stock & barrel.Even though I've read the story a hundred times, this was a fresh, beautifully done film.
fatla00
I found this this version to be fairly interesting. It had pretty good acting and the story, well, it's The Ten Commandments. The story got a little low at times but it brought it back up and maintained an interesting and want-to-know-what-happens-next thought. I thought that the Narrorator that comes on every so often to explain things was a bit odd. It pulls you out of the story to hear what he has to say when it would be much better if they just showed it. I don't know how much they added to the story but then again, this isn't really my subject. All in all, I believe that ABC did a really nice job putting this mini-series together.