Exodus: Istenek és királyok

Mózesről szóló bibliai eposz, amelyben nem kell a szereplőket és kapcsolataikat boncolgatni, hiszen mindannyian jól ismerjük. Elég egy gyönyörű epikus koncepció, a lélegzetelállító külső helyszínek és szép jelmezek, valamint a legendás katasztrófák látványos ábrázolása vagy az óceánon való átkelés és a filmből kasszasiker lesz. Tévedés! Ateista vagyok, és a bibliai események önmagukban nem elégségesek ahhoz, hogy izgalomba hozzanak. Ezek csak támogató gondolati alap lettek volna a szereplők motivációinak és az emberiség egy döntő történelmi szakaszának nehézségeinek, politikai és etnikai problémáinak rokonszenves ábrázolásához. Mindez vagy hiányzik az Exodus: Istenek és királyok filmből hiányzik, vagy csak felvázolva jelenik meg. Egy remekmű, amely kevésbé szórakoztató, mint a hülyeség Az ismeretlen Drakula. (2014.12.28)

At first, I thought Scott was going to do the bidding of the Jewish lobby, which has long since failed to let the viewing public be moved by its bitter fate through a narrative sandal. Yet he goes about it in a surprisingly rational way, and so while the pragmatic appreciation of the seven plagues of Egypt by Pharaoh's croaker is still laughable, Moshe's revolution, in which he is on the edge of personal madness, is no longer feigned, and the unorthodox vision is definitely clamped at the bottom of the Red Sea, with even the slight shortcoming (the not-quite-functional portrayal of the bond between the "brothers," which is fortunately saved by both characters; and 20 minutes more would have helped) receding and both ordinary viewers and the those familiar with the literary work will be satisfied. (2015.07.20)

We can clearly see in every other scene, how much the movie was edited and it is more that obvious that Ridley has a much longer version of it in his drawer. Without this, it would have been even better. But even in its current not polished form, it is exactly what one would expect from it. In other words, it is a truly magnificent and handcrafted adaptation of one of the most impressive stories ever. The snag is mainly in the form of the already mentioned cinema editing, which should have either been shorter and free of all those ambitious subversive motives and themes (Moses' blinded madness, his unbelief, vengeful (not)God of preschool age, emphasis on the non-mythological line, doubting Joshua, Macbeth-like Sigourney, much more sympathetic Egyptians led by the pharaoh, etc.) and simply being an "precise" adaptation of the well-known or should have been even longer and should have been more focused on the above-mentioned and purely sympathetic ambitious subversions. In its current form, however, it is unfinished and halfway, because the epicness of Egypt, individual wounds and the exodus itself were prioritized in terms of footage. Which is a letdown on one hand, but on the other hand it is very enjoyable to watch. That is for sure. (2015.06.26)

An untraditional presentation of God (the comparison God as a kid with a magnifying glass and people as ants lacks metaphor) and a story of Egyptian plagues. Scott works with modern themes and reflects the contemporary wherever he can. Sometimes this is to the benefit of the movie, sometimes to its harm. The problem is the restricted length (Sigourney appears almost as an extra) which eats away at the sophistication of the characters and the significance of some decisions. Exodus reminds me of the movie theater version of Kingdom of Heaven which, despite its quality workmanship, didn’t manage to say what it was all about and that wasn’t fixed until the director’s cut came out on Blue-Ray. The exteriors and the effects are well-polished and the Egyptian makeup soon didn’t matter anymore. At all stages of Moses, Bale was excellent, but his friendly atheist becomes a believer schizophrenic far too soon and in the second part the good guy turns into a bad guy, God knows why... and Rameses just won’t negotiate with terrorists. The viewer understands this in the light of contemporary events, doesn’t he? Doesn’t he? Missed opportunities certainly, a bad movie definitely not. Compared to Prince of Egypt, just a little superfluous. (2014.12.27)

The retelling of a biblical story zillion times... this time reinterpreted by Ridley Scott. Well, if I didn’t know that Joel Edgerton is such an extremely flexible actor (those different masks, work with his body, accent), I'd say it all hinges on Bale. But Edgerton is the real hero of Exodus: Gods and Kings. Overall I'm not thrilled, but I guess it's good not to forget about some of the Hollywood classics. However, I consider The Prince of Egypt cartoon to be the best of all the treatments. (2019.08.24)

Ridley Scott did well in Gladiator, he caught a good period when people were hungry for swords and sandals and essentially started the resurrection of these films. It was a thematically simple and audience-friendly film. In Kingdom of Heaven, he turned it around and approached it from the end, which resulted in a box office flop, but now it is gaining glory and prestige with the passage of years. In other words, Balian's journey to self-realization and what he wants has matured like wine, just like Titanic, its timelessness is even more striking, and the film is of even higher quality. Exodus is a hybrid the two aforementioned pieces, but unfortunately, it is not very viewer-friendly because the classic story of self-realization is mixed with fantasy elements and religious themes. As long as it's a classic story with traditional values, everything is fine, except for the woeful PG13 rating. Scott knows how to handle panoramas and camera shots, and he always has. Unfortunately, as soon as the Bible comes into play, it becomes bad and starts to clatter. Go see it in the cinema because visually, it is good, and even without Hans Zimmer, it's okay. But as a whole, it is closest to Robin Hood – or less awkward at least. We'll see what the director’s cut will bring, and I hope it will be R-rated and at least 30 minutes longer. Maybe there will be the same boost in quality as in the case of Kingdom of Heaven. Even without the extended version, it is a film that will mature along with the viewer's life and film experiences. (2015.01.04)

A two-and-a-half-hour biblical recitation that will surely appeal to the religiously initiated, but fans of complex filmmaking and especially of Ridley Scott will not find a single moment that they would later recite with relish to their atheist friends. Visually, it’s on a high level, which is par for the course with Scott, but with zero narrative drive or a more detailed elaboration of the motivations of the main characters that would have given their relationship and development a much stronger (or rather at least some) emotional insight. In terms of craftsmanship, everything is sort of OK and it's still much better to look at than most of the wannabe cool CGI fantasy crap, but considering the ambition and depth of the story, Exodus is a film surprisingly devoid of soul and creative personality... 60% (2015.09.10)

Trying to film a biblical story in order to have at least a little idea for a logical explanation is nonsense, which Ridley also realized in the end. What he didn't understand is the fact that there is a much better portrayal that has been around for decades and he won't even come close to it. Yes, this is more palatable for a modern audience, but the story is good on its own, and this shift to the action level won't help it in any way. (2015.04.06)