Exodus: Gods and Kings

I have never written a review in IMDb. This is my first time. Why? Because the movie hasn't been released in USA yet, and I just watched in India. Seeing just 5 reviews, I wanted to give mine too.

What's up with Hollywood? Other than spectacular visuals and 3-D, they don't seem to care enough about anything else. In Exodus, by the famed director Ridley Scott, he surpassed many elements in visual effects. I have never ever seen so detailed visuals of ancient buildings, slums of slaves, and huge ocean waves and what not. 3-D adds a lot of pleasure in viewing such effects.

That's it! There is nothing more that I could appreciate. It feels very empty. No emotions at all. Acting by Christian Bale is quite alright, but it is nothing special. Some scenes are memorable. But the lack of good writing, script, and no contribution from other actors diminish the effect of Bale as well. It is hard to imagine the same guy directed Gladiator (I haven't seen Aliens and blade runner). But there is everything missing in Exodus that made Gladiator a hit.

At many places, it is boring, even if the cinematography and visual effects are great. In the beginning, you would feel as if Ridley took you to the ancient Egyptian world, just because of the small details shown in the effects. However, any interest or so will end in next 10 minutes or so, when the story starts lacking.

So, my question remains. What's up with Hollywood? Is this much technology and huge funding to such directors destroying the creativity. Why no body cares about character building and good script? At one level, it feels extremely sad that with this budget and this talent in technology, even a slight efforts and honesty towards script, story, and dialogue can take such movies to a masterpiece level. But...no! "We are going to earn a lot of money. You are going to enjoy watching the magnificent sequence of millions of frog jumping in ancient buildings. Call it even?" Really?

This is a well known story and I have also seen the '56 movie 'The Ten Commandments'. So in this film could not foresee the modification, but it did in a slight manner like the later 'Noah' movie. The best part was the visuals, the graphics were so good, hard to resist the pleasure if you are vfx geek like me. That's the reason I love modern movie, especially remake of a classic like 'King Kong'. The problem in this flick was lie in the story telling.

As we know, Ridley Scott is an excellent narrator, but this movie was too short even though it ran 150 minutes. I felt it was just a brief, I mean there were no details or depth in the important scenes. You will know what I'm saying if you had watched '56 movie I mentioned in a above paragraph. That's drawback for the first timers at a same time advantage for not to fall in boredom for those who have already seen other versions. Christian Bale, awesome; Joel Edgerton, good; Ben Kingsley, never required; Aaron Paul, totally waste.

Overall, not cleverly stablised in the scenes that are very important, especially the final one about ten commandments should have been extended a little bit with a moral message. If it was a Peter Jackson movie, definitely it would have been a trilogy with an aggregated time of over 500 minutes. This movie was an entertainer like I enjoyed it than the message deliverer. Must be watched for the amusement and for the pleasure in updating technical aspect of the narration rather than inspiration.

7.5/10

All creative persons/artists go through a creative funk, it's just part and parcel of the business they're in. Whether it be a writer who suffers from the dreaded writers block, an actor that can't seem to buy a hit or a painter that can't seem to replicate the images in their heads, the creative lulls affect all. Famed British director Ridley Scott, the visionary master behind such classics as Alien, Blade Runner and Gladiator has found himself in one of these creative dead zones, but the most telling thing about his time in this lowly state is that his been there for the better part of a decade and after witnessing his new cashed up epic Exodus, it seems he is destined to remain there for the foreseeable future. Exodus is one of the most telling examples of storytelling mediocrity overshadowing impeccable production values that I've ever seen and it would be hard for anyone to argue against the pure visual value present on screen in what is a clearly lavishly splurged upon epic. From monuments through to the slums of the slave's right down to the extra clad streets, Exodus brims to life with a detailed and often incredible visual palette. While the wonders of the on screen production will consistently make you look twice, there seems like such little point to an exercise like this when all is surrounded by a script that never allows us in, alongside Scott directing proceedings like a man that wants to show off but not engage, direction more concerned with how to spectacularly kill of horses than making the characters and story come to life. Much has been made in the media of late surrounding the casting of actors in Exodus but more importantly to movie goers it's important to know just how tame the acting turns are here. Christian Bale makes for a watchable yet not entirely memorable Moses, his incarnation has moments of brief humanity but he feels more a caricature than a living breathing embodiment of one of the Bibles most well-known figures, we feel tiny bits of the weight Moses had on his shoulders, yet our care towards him remains dangerously low. On the other end of the spectrum Australian Joel Edgerton (in perhaps his biggest Hollywood gig yet) fails to deliver on what should've been a glorious big screen villain in the form of Rhamses. All eyeliner and grizzled looks, Edgerton fails to convince in his role and it feels from the get go that sadly he may've been miscast much like John Turturoo's Seti, Aaron Paul's Joshua and Ben Kinglsey's Nun, even the usually scene stealing Ben Mendelsohn as Hegep fails to make much of a mark which leaves the film but a few genuine moments of memorability, that being all largely related to the onset of the plagues. Impressive visuals, stunning sets and some genuinely wow inducing moments concerning the plagues aren't enough to save this emotionally void epic from a giant wave of the mundane. Scott sure knows how to conduct his production department and his sweeping camera sure can capture some outstanding action but the one time storyteller has lost sight of how to portray his characters, how to play out a story and Exodus looks set to become another Scott failure that looks likely to underwhelm audiences as well as Box Office's the world over. 2 shades of eyeliner out of 5

It has become somewhat fashionable to dismiss Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments because of the arcane Victorian era dialog. But I have to say that Ridley Scott's version of Exodus while technically proficient will never become the Passover viewing treat that DeMille's film has become.

Cousins Moses and Ramses are friends and rivals for the affections of the Pharoah who is Ramses dad. But when it is discovered that Moses is actually the son of Hebrew slaves that his mother Pharoah's sister drew him out of the Nile the succession of the Pharoah's line is secure.

What's not so secure is the kingdom itself as the Hebrews who came over as a family of 13 kids several centuries earlier now are in the thousands and are slaves and they ain't happy about it. In the funny way things work out in life, the adopted Egyptian prince is in fact the promised leader who is going to lead them back from whence they came which is Canaan.

In DeMille's version the dialog may be arcane, but it is also uplifting and inspiring and delivered by the ultimate DeMille leading man Charlton Heston. Yul Brynner as Ramses in that version was the arrogant Pharoah enjoying all his princely prerogatives. They made an evenly matched pair of foes and with them scrapping over Anne Baxter the conflict got personal as well as religious.

Christian Bale as Moses and Joel Edgerton as Ramses just don't give you people you can identify with.

DeMille was always good with crowds. Note how uplifting the liberation of the Hebrews is in his film. Also the small little vignettes of the various people in the crowd. They are a family/nation in his version. All they are is in Scott's version lumpen proletariat.

Whose idea was it to have the voice of God be that of a petulant child? Instead of the pyrotechnical wizardry of DeMille the Ten Commandments are given almost matter of factly by a kid to Christian Bale.

We've gone beyond Cecil B. DeMille in the art of film making. But there a things in his craft that he was the top, far and above anyone else. Not even a Ridley Scott should try.

I went into this film with an open mind. I have enjoyed Ridley Scott movies in the past, particularly Gladiator which is the same genre of film as this. Unfortunately, I was left feeling extremely disappointed. Although this is a classic, biblical story that most movie-goers are likely already familiar with, the film-makers have decided to pad this ancient tale with over-the-top action scenes, as well as one-note characters that feel more like cardboard cut-outs as opposed to actual human beings. The most shameful aspect of the film is the part that I was most looking forward to : The Actual Plague. While I was hoping to see harrowing images of Egypt being decimated in a genuinely frightening tale, we are instead bombarded with fake looking CGI that simply left me dry. The plague feels more like a computer montage than an actual scary event.Terrible script. Weak performances. An over-reliance on CGI instead of CHARACTERS and STORY! Overall, just a bad film. Didn't help that they chose big named actors instead of people that looked more like Ancient Egyptians. Pass.