Is it just me or was this movie terrible? Don't get me wrong, Dougray Scott as Moses was fairly convincing (no where near as moving as Charlton Heston's performance) but the second half of this movie was terribly written, and even more terribly directed. It seemed to me as though the director wanted Moses to come off as just the leader of some cult. I mean, it was as if NONE of his followers had any previous knowledge of God, like they were completely dumbfounded by the words of "I am who I am." And like they all still somehow doubted the power of God, even after he brought about the plagues on Egypt and gave Moses the power to part the Red Sea. To tell you the truth, I am going to ask my minister/pastor/priest/rabbi what his/her take was. Surely I'm not the only who saw this as an inappropriate representation of Moses and his followers. This film really let me down, the first part (of two) was overall pretty good, but the majority of the second part was just awful.
whoa!!! Don't everyone reply at once! Was this movie so terrible as to make no one want to so much as even mention it? You won't go to hell for complaining about a bad movie on a message board (well, depending on your what religion you are). Maybe I'm just way off base and this movie deserves 5 stars and two thumbs up...
I guess if I kept just one person from seeing this film, then I have served my purpose. Unless you weren't going to watch it anyway...
I thought the second half sucked as well. But then my idea of moses is charlton heston. I mean the pharoah did not compare to ul brenner (sp) The plagues sucked, the whole thing was not good.
the parting of the sea was fairly good for a TV movie, but the burning bush, plagues, and branding of the tablets was terrible for today's special effects. You're right though, Ramses was terribly portrayed. Come to think of it, when did the Egyptians ever instate an English pharaoh? or English slaves? Not to dog the Brits, but that was terrible casting.