Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

JohnHowardReid The chief problem in filming the Bible for large-scale commercial release, is resolving the conflict between Christianity and commerce. On the one hand, there has to be more than an inkling of spectacle and sensationalism to draw in the paying customers. On the other, there has to be an acceptable level of traditional reverence to forestall the censor. This has resulted in your standard religious epic — of which The Bible is a representative example — in which scenes of movement and destruction, teeming with thousands of costumed extras, jostle with episodes of interminable boredom in which the bad characters are berated and "good" morals are indefatigably promoted. This traditional, reverential approach to the Bible by the churches — both Christian and Jewish — imposed upon Hollywood's traditional preoccupation with sex and scandal, results in films that are unsatisfying, both as Biblical interpretations and as entertainments.Underlying this problem is the failure by both Hollywood and the churches to understand what the Bible really is. If we look below its surface layer of viciousness, cruelty and intrigue — the aspects always so well played-up by Hollywood — we find the Bible is not primarily a blueprint for well-ordered moral and ethical behavior, but it is principally a record of God's dealings with Man in the past (and a dismal record of Man's failures to respond to God's repeated invitations at that!) and an indication of how God intends to deal with Man now and in the future. Admittedly, most churchmen are ever ready to point to the Bible's dire warnings of future punishments, but they see the present only in terms of the Bible's moral and ethical teachings — Thou shalt not do this and thou shalt not do that!The relationship between God and man, expressed in the Bible is actually one of intimacy and vitality. This is the experience and the ideal relationship we should all be seeking to-day. This in fact is what the bible is all about. Yet this film sees its characters as quaint and even ludicrous, its relationships outmoded and its events as dusty and dead as antiquity. As far as fidelity to the text is concerned, both in letter and especially in spirit, this film fails utterly.In fact, this movie could justly be described as ridiculously blasphemous and sacrilegious. It's clothed in unintentionally risible dialogue — with Huston himself sanctimoniously quoting Genesis. In fact, thanks to its laughable off-screen commentary, in addition to its pretentious photography and special effects, it becomes hard to say a good word about "The Bible: In the Beginning". True, Richard Harris does half-nobly by the thankless part of Cain. Unfortunately, his efforts to make Cain a sympathetic character (Cain tills hard at the unyielding soil, whilst Abel lazes around, blowing his pipes of Pan. It's no sweat for Abel to offer God the first of his flocks, he did no work at all to produce them), are rather at odds with your traditional Sunday School interpretations. In any event, the part is not all that large. Cain has only a few lines of dialogue — including the famous "Am I my brother's keeper?" which Harris delivers in a striking fashion. A couple of other times, however, Huston has him acting in outrageous pantomime: uplifting his fist to heaven, rolling his eyes...In fact, rolling my eyes, is precisely my over all reaction to this disappointing monstrosity of a movie!

gridoon2018 "The Bible" was pretty much the swan song of the big Hollywood religious epic (with a few exceptions over the years), and you can sort of see why. The story is a complete fairy tale, of course, but the director, John Huston, brings off some spectacular effects, and they, along with his tongue-in-cheek approach in the Noah's Ark segment in which he also stars, help dilute the proselytizing. The film has some extraordinary moments (like King Nimrod shooting an arrow into heaven from the top of the Tower of Babel, or Peter O'Toole's (dis)appearance(s)), but it's too episodic and frequently tedious. Also, Huston should have chosen someone with a more imposing voice than his own to provide the voice of God - George C. Scott maybe? **1/2 out of 4.

utgard14 John Huston takes us to Sunday school in this overlong biblical epic that covers the first 22 chapters of Genesis. Huston directs and narrates as the voice of Sominex...I mean, God. Opening creation/Adam & Eve segment is boring and not the best way to start the movie. The next part is Cain and Abel's story, which is okay but short. Richard Harris' overacting as Cain would have been interesting to see for a little longer. Then we have the story of Noah, played by John Huston. This is the most light-hearted part of the movie and also the best. The Tower of Babel part that follows is interesting but too brief. The final, and longest, story is that of Abraham. This includes Sodom & Gomorrah and Abraham being asked to sacrifice Isaac. This segment is worth watching solely for the hilarious love scene between George C. Scott and Ava Gardner.Huston seems more in love with the language of the Bible than the content. His presentation is lacking in artistry, save for snippets such as the scene where God first speaks to Abraham. It's overlong and dull to the point of putting you to sleep. They really should have cut a lot out. Read the book instead.

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.