The Bible remains a valued source for Hollywood, and no
wonder; it contains just about anything any producer could want. The Old
Testament features the usual sex and violence, war and conflagration, but also
great stories, compelling characters, and of course, the presence of a powerful
supernatural being. To top it all off, it’s always been a bestseller, and
nobody needs to worry about the authors showing up on the set or demanding a
percentage of the gross.
In the
aftermath of the absurd “Noah,” Ridley Scott uses another Old Testament story
for the basis of “Exodus: Gods and Kings,” the tale of Moses, the first great
Jewish leader, and his deliverance of the enslaved Hebrews from their Egyptian
oppressors. Although the picture sticks relatively close to the Biblical
narrative, it surprisingly omits some elements — the Golden Calf for example —
and adds a few unusual touches.
To begin with,
the Egyptians and Hebrews both speak with various types of British accents. One
of the more laughable examples occurs near the beginning of the movie when John
Turturro of all people, heavily made up, swishes
around in a long gown, addressing Ramses (Joel Edgerton) and Moses (Christian
Bale) in a good imitation of the Queen’s English; they reply in kind.
The most
innovative and surely controversial directorial decision, however, involves the
interpretation of the deity. Instead of the paternal, authoritarian figure
traditionally associated with the Old Testament, this God is represented by petulant
12-year-old boy (Isaac Andrews), who frequently scolds Moses in a quite good
upper-class accent. Unlike the numerous church responses to “The Passion of the
Christ,” that character alone will probably prevent most organized religious
groups from patronizing the movie.
Most of this very long movie dwells
on the years of enslavement and suffering of the hundreds of thousands of
Hebrews in Egypt rather than on the Exodus itself. It focuses on the
relationship between Moses and Ramses; Ramses will inherit the throne, while
Moses, an adopted cousin, though smarter, stronger, and braver, can only serve
as his friend and advisor. Along with that relationship, the film shows Moses’s
growing realization, under the tutelage of Nun (Ben Kingsley) that he is not an
Egyptian, but an Israelite.
Its oddly
constructed time scheme compresses some events while expanding mercilessly on
others, showing the long approach to Moses’s banishment, then skipping through
nine years of exile, his marriage, and his children, before he returns to Egypt
to lead a revolution. Although he trains his people in warfare and leads them
in several battles against the Egyptian armies, Moses disappoints God, who
decides to do the job Himself.
ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย No doubt
delighting any filmmaker with a penchant for the spectacular, God sends that
famous series of plagues against Ramses and his people. Crocodiles attack
fishermen on the Nile; the river flows with blood; plagues of locusts cover the
crops, the land, the people; and, my favorite, thanks to computer generated
imagery, thousands of frogs swarm over everyone — a better example of
amphibians than the ones who flopped all over the ridiculous “Magnolia” of
several years ago.
After the
worst divine assault of all, the killing of all the first born sons in every
family, including the Pharaoh’s, Ramses asks Moses the obvious and disturbing
question, perhaps suggested by the title. What kind of god is this, he cries, who
kills innocent children for revenge. Like any other minister, priest, or rabbi,
Moses can offer no adequate answer.
Of course the picture moves
inevitably, if painfully slowly, toward the grand exodus itself, when the Hebrews flee the pursuing Egyptian army, led by Ramses
himself, vowing death to them all. The exodus reached the great climactic
moment that everyone expects, the parting of the Red Sea. Oddly, after all the
other cinematic magic, the climactic sequence seems somewhat disappointing, not
even as spectacular as Cecil B. DeMille and Charlton Heston accomplishing the job in “The Ten Commandments” back
in 1956. (Those Commandments, by the way, receive short shrift in “Exodus”).
At its best,
the picture demonstrates Ridley Scott’s excellence as a composer of striking
visuals. The battle scenes, with hundreds of archers, cavalrymen, and chariots
sweeping across the desert to clash with their enemies — initially the
Hittites, then the Hebrews — exhibit his skill at its best. The majestic scenes
of the pyramids under construction, the statues in the Valley of the Kings, and
the temples and palaces perfectly suit the grandeur of the story, its time and
place.
The actors
and their performances all work adequately, but despite the length and breadth
of the movie, they never develop beyond some simple initial characterizations;
everything and everyone hums along on one note. The spaciousness of the
locations, the magnitude of the sets, even the importance of the original
source, tend to dwarf the people anyway, so that when the actors engage in
anything like normal behavior, they seem strained and unconvincing, just, well,
acting. Like a lot of spectacles, “Exodus” works best on a high degree of emotional
intensity, but sags badly when it attempts something like ordinary life.
This article appears in Dec 10-16, 2014.
