La Bible : Au commencement des temps...

In her memoirs ,Ava Gardner wrote that she hated some of her lines,notably when she had to tell her servant she would give children to her husband ."I just cannot say that,it's not my style" But the director answered:"my dear,you will".

"The Bible" is par excellence the movie Huston's fans love to hate ;other examples are "the roots of Heaven" or "the barbarian and the geisha " .Hindsight displays its charms:first,it is an accurate rendition of the Genesis (the title reads "in the beginning" and it is exactly what it is).There's more voice over than dialog but if you have read the Bible (and I'm sure you have)you know that the characters have only a few lines to say .

Chapters include the Creation and the wonders of nature ;Adam and Eve;Abel and Cain (should Abel have gone veggie,crime would never happen );Noah 's ark where the animals went in two by two just to get out of the rain and the huge hippopotamus -featured in the movie- did not get stuck in the door ,thanks to the patriarch's watchful eye (played by the director himself);Nemrod (a hardly recognizable Stephen Boyd)and the tower of Babel;Abraham whose segment is the most important in the whole movie (about one hour is given over to his alliance with God,Sara and Agar -the scene of the pieces of dried fruit is worth the price of admission-,Isaac,Jehovah asking the patriarch to kill Him a son );and Loth's adventures in Sodom where the Angel warns him :do not

look back when you escape from the doomed city .Poor wife! The cinematography is splendid ,particularly in the first sequences .But the most satisfying sequences are to be found towards the end: Abraham's sacrifice takes place in the desert among ruins and here Huston seems to transcend his subject whereas in the other segments ,he only makes a picture book.

Compared to Sergio Leone's "Sodom and Gomorrah",is it so bad?

I was impressed by the various settings of the book, and the depicting of various accounts in the Bible, all the way from beginning to end. And as a minister I'm sensitive to this. Seldom if ever have I seen, in particular, the accounts of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, and then the slaying of Abel by Cain. (As Cain, Richard Harris was his hostile, feisty self, perfect for the role of the vindictive brother.) Also, I have never seen any depicting of the flood of Noah, nor of the fall of the tower of Babel. I have seen the depicting of Sodom and Gommorah, but this was unusually well-done here. All the scenes appeared to be authentic.

And I liked the cast. Michael Parks was adept at playing Adam, and his female counterpart was excellent as Eve. I was impressed with, again, the flood of Noah, though in places it maybe was a bit more comical than it was intended to be. John Huston performed well his part of Noah, and he had a good voice, that of God and his narration voice was excellent. Stephen Boyd was as mean as ever as Nimrod. George C. Scott conveyed well an aging Abraham, Peter O'Toole acted well his triple role (that of the three angels who visited Sarah,) and Ava Gardner was her beautiful self as she betrayed to the screen that Sarah was still a beautiful lady even in her older years. But I do have one objection to the production. While I liked the scenes and, again, the manifestation of the various Biblical stories, I frankly thought the acting left something to be desired. I'm not trying to rescind, but while I still think the actors came across well in their individual roles, they seemed to just say their lines and, thus, in places did not put much feeling into what they said.

But overall, it was an outstanding work for Dino DeLaurentiis and John Huston, and is highly recommendable.

I've always noticed an interesting trend among critics when they review a Biblical movie. Since most critics are of a skeptical nature, they usually carry with them the bias that unless the movie deviates from a traditional telling of what the Bible says it is somehow dull cinema. That somehow there can't be anything compelling in seeing the stories of the Bible dramatized in a straightforward manner with no inane attempts to "humanize" the tales through the lens of a modern, secular society.

Well, I make no apologies for being one of the devout and saying that I prefer my Bible stories straight, without any modernistic elements that are meant to make hidden slams at why the stories are important to begin with. For me, "The Bible" is one of the best Biblical epics precisely because it takes its subject material seriously and only alters a few details (Nimrod for instance is not identified as the king at the time of the Tower of Babel) to get a coherent cinematic presentation in place. Christopher Fry, whose uncredited rewrite of "Ben Hur's" screenplay helped make that film a literate masterpiece of cinema brings the same touch here. And Huston does a fine job of directing.

Those who bash this film, much like those who are given to bashing movies like "The Greatest Story Ever Told" while praising garbage like "The Last Temptation Of Christ" are often saying more about themselves than they are about the film they've just reviewed. What they regard as "boring" I regard as a noble effort to give a visual understanding to the events of the Bible. And "The Bible" despite only covering the first half of the book of Genesis succeeds brilliantly at it.

Seemingly eposodic, there is little segue between the "stories." Even the title is misleading, since this film only covers from Creation through the story of Abraham - the first 22 chapters. But if the whole book was made into a movie it would be 162 hours at this rate. Too long for most audiences! (Hint - hint - miniseries).

Most of the acting comes across as stilted, except Huston, who's tongue-in-cheek portrayal of Noah wavers between refreshing and cloying. The highly touted "nude" scene of Adam and Eve may have raised a few eyebrows in 1966 but seems pretty tame by today's standards thanks to a few well-placed fern fronds. Scotts's rendering of patriarch Abraham was strong but uninspired.

This pic is adequate if you're not looking for in-depth religious interpretations. More could have been done with characterizations, but in the time given, was satisfactory. Just watch and enjoy for its face value.

Spectacular as well as extravagant production of the first part of the book of Genesis and dealing with five of the early stories in the Old Testament .The title is a bit of a misnomer as the film only covers the first 22 chapters of the first book of Genesis . It covers various Biblical episodes and and open with the Creation of the World and arrive at the Garden of Eden with Adam (Michael Parks) and Eve, Cain and Abel (Richard Harris and Franco Nero play brothers-turned-enemies) Noah (John Huston , though Charles Chaplin and Alec Guinness was also offered the role ) and the Flood and the story of Nimrod (Stephen Boyd) , King of Babel and the emergence of man's vanity . Furthermore , Lot (Gabriele Ferzetti) , Lot's Wife (Eleonora Rossi Drago), Sodomah and Gomorra destruction , and three such Heavenly Messengers (Peter O'Toole) appeared in the course of events along with Abraham (George C Scott) , Sarah (Ava Gardner) , his slave Hagar and sons Isaac and Ismael.

This overblown all-star cast Biblical treatment contains emotion , religious feeling , human touch and grandeur events . The best episode results to be Noah tale in which John Huston gives an intelligent as well as sympathetic acting ; when God talks to Noah, that's actually the voice of John Huston speaking to the actor John Huston . Filming of The Tower of Babel sequence was disrupted when Egyptian extras staged a rock-throwing riot . One of the first mainstream American films to feature male and female nudity -albeit artfully filmed in a light-and-shadow style- in the Garden of Eden sequences . Reportedly , neither Michael Parks nor Ulla Bergryd used body doubles for these scenes . Lavishly produced by Dino De Laurentiis , he originally announced that this would be the first in a series of feature films based on the books of the bible ; however it didn't take place . Rousing and extraordinary musical score by Toshirô Mayuzumi and uncredited Ennio Morricone ; though Huston wanted Igor Stravinsky to score the film . As with many epics of the 1950s and 1960s Paul Francis Webster was called in to supply promotional lyrics to the main theme. The song was entitled "Song of the Bible" and Webster devised the following lyrics to fit Mayuzumi's opening theme music . Colorful as well as evocative cinematography by Giuseppe Rotunno , Fellini's ordinary ; this was the first film shot in the Dimension 150 process. This process was credited as simply "D-150" .

This luxuriously mounted production was well directed by John Huston who gives the feel of a Cecil B De Mille spectacle . However , French director Robert Bresson was firstly hired in 1964 and wen he shot the deluge, he requested the use of all the animals in Rome city zoo , but the only thing Bresson filmed was the tracks of the animals upon a sandy beach , then Bresson was fired, John Huston took over the project, delaying production a further six month. Rating : 6,5/10 . Well worth watching . Better than average . The movie will appeal to religious and epic films buffs .-