IMDb > "The Ten Commandments" (2006) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
"The Ten Commandments" More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]
Index 71 reviews in total 

10 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

I have never been so disgusted in all my life!!!!

Author: eliz7212-1 from United States
13 April 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

And that is putting it mildly. To make a miniseries is to make a profit. I know this. Advertisers pay for commercial spots and that's how the producers sell a made for TV movie. Everything is for profit. Well in this instance, if I had been any advertiser that paid to have my commercial shown in this piece of trash, I should be shot. And I am NOT over-reacting believe me. Why am I mad? I couldn't care less that this mini-series didn't live up to the Charlot Heston one. That was a motion picture, in Technicolor and will always stand the test of time. Nothing can beat it. They should have never made a mini-series if they weren't going to make it bigger, better (especially with the special effects technology we have today). That didn't really bother me, it just made the movie less colorful (believe me, it is much less colorful than the original). Why am I so mad? Because they show the slaughter of children. I have never in all my life thought I would see ....

SPOILER ALERT.....

in the second half, when Moses' people turn on the others who were worship-ping the calf, Joshua turns to Moses and says "what do we do with the prisoners". (seems they let some live). And Moses says "kill them all", it's God's will". And there they went too far. With spears, with knives, they show grown men slitting kid's throats!!!!

Are the producers out of their minds. I shut off the TV immediately.

I know this is 2006 and we have to do more graphics because the audience gets bored easily. BUT THIS WAS OVER THE LINE.

That's all I have to say.

mel

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Cheap knock-off of an established 1956 classic!

2/10
Author: kcomp-68462 from Indiana
25 February 2016

This,clearly, is another example of the "Hollywood" mindset, trying to outdo an original movie, simply because of cgi graphics. Too often, movies are cranked out of the film industry under a host of, seemingly, underground, fly by night studio names, in a pathetic attempt to make money, simply by mesmerizing an ever-growing audience of drooling graphics-oriented imbeciles! This movie is no different. There is NO attempt to present another point of view, or shed new light on an age-old subject. These newer attempts at captivating audiences with a predominantly computer generated special effects, and then spicing it up with a "few actors" to round out the glorified cartoon,frankly...insults my intelligence. The fact that so many shallow people flock to this kind of drivel, and support these people, shows that we are digressing, as a species.

Give credit where credit is do, to a host of VERY talented film makers in 1956, who were able dazzle a far more sophisticated audience, with real story, dialogue, actors and several AMAZING special effects, that did NOT require some dweeb at a computer, cranking it out! If the original movie is a masterpiece, which this one clearly was, than why attempt to make a cheap copy with NO socially redeeming value?

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Too much fiction and distortion of Bible story

5/10
Author: SimonJack from United States
23 September 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie, "The Ten Commandments" is from a TV mini-series of 2006. The size of scale and use of special effects are pluses, although the CGI was overdone for the bottom of the Red Sea. The film has just half of the 10 plagues, and glances over most of these – the waters turning to blood, frogs, locusts, fiery hail, and death of the first-born.

After the Red Sea crossing and destruction of Pharaoh's army, the film has only three more signs of God's power. The first is Moses sweetening poisoned water. The second is his striking a rock to bring forth water, but it eliminates the significant second strike by Moses that was his sign of doubt for which God would deny him entry into the Promised Land. The third is the appearance of manna in strange circles on the ground, with no name for it or explanation beforehand.

The film has an account of the Ten Commandments, the making of a golden calf, and the killing of the dissidents' families. It shows the Israelites carrying the body of Joseph out of Egypt to be buried in the Promised Land. It gives a glimpse of the Ark of the Covenant, but doesn't explain what it is. The film leaves out the earthquake that swallows up Dathan and other dissident leaders. It glosses over the Passover, showing only the marking of Israelite homes with lamb's blood on the door posts. And it omits a crucial event and major aspect of the exodus. That was the scouting of the Promised Land for 40 days by young men from the 12 tribes. They returned with fruit of the land, but 10 of the 12 said they could not hope to conquer the land.

We can grant license to all films with their imagined accounts of Moses growing up in a royal household in Egypt. The entire story of the birth and childhood of Moses covers a mere 10 verses in the Bible (Ex. 2: 1- 10). Nothing is said of his upbringing except that after his weening, he was brought up by Pharaoh's daughter, Bithiah, as her own son. We learn of the names of his parents, Amram and Jochebed, in Exodus 6:20 and Numbers 26:59. Bithiah's name doesn't appear until First Chronicles 4:17. Pharaoh banished her for having brought an Israelite into the house of Pharaoh, pretending him to be her own. By tradition, Bithiah left with Moses on the exodus. She was part of the "mixed multitude."

The next five verses of the Book of Exodus (2:11-16), tell of Moses killing an Egyptian and fleeing to Midian. The last 10 verses of Exodus cover more than 50 years of Moses' life. Moses was 120 years old when he died (Deuteronomy 34:7), which was 40 years after the start of the exodus. He marries Zipporah, eldest daughter of Jethro; their son, Gershom, is born; and Moses shepherds the flocks of his father-in-law. God's calling of Moses from the burning bush takes up the next four chapters of Exodus, 3-6. The next six chapters (7-12) cover Moses and Aaron confronting Pharaoh, the 10 plagues and the institution of the Passover.

The flight from Egypt begins with Ex. 12:33. The last 28 chapters of Exodus cover the Ten Commandments, the grumbling and rebellion of the people against Moses and God, the Ark of the Covenant, and the wandering in the desert. After the 10 plagues, God gave more than two dozen signs of his power to the people in their flight from Egypt. Some of this is repeated, more events occur and more details are provided in the next three books of the Bible. At the end of Deuteronomy, the Israelites reach the Promised Land. Moses sees it from atop a mountain, but is not allowed to cross the Jordon River. He dies and is buried there. No one knows the location of his grave.

This 2006 TV film is very heavy with dialog and melodrama. Dougray Scott plays Moses as an angry man, believing in God and his power, but lacking connection to the God of his fathers – Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. His character is unlike Moses as he describes himself in the Bible – "not eloquent …slow of speech and of tongue" (Ex. 4:10). The film seems heavily weighted on portraying God as vengeful and hard, rather than as impatient and angry because of the unfaithfulness of the people, and their rebellion in the face of all the signs he has given them. It was due to their lack of faith and trust just a few months after leaving Egypt when they scouted the Promised Land, that the people were condemned to wander for 40 years in the desert – until all those over age 20 had died. But this film omits this major event, which is crucial to the Bible lesson.

One very curious account is a fictitious couple who commit adultery and are then stoned to death. This distraction is woven throughout the exodus and takes up considerable film time. But, it has no bearing on the exodus, and no grounding in scripture. Another lengthy piece of fiction is the training of the Israelites for combat. By the end, we see warriors with shields, spears, swords and big bows.

This version of Moses and the exodus has too much fiction that detracts from the story. Its focus is not on a God who repeatedly forgives the people and then disciplines them for their unfaithfulness, which is the tenor of the Bible accounts. The character of Moses seems quite different from scripture. The film has a scale of the immensity of the exodus and has good special effects, but it skips far too many details and events. It drags on far too long with made-up material.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

You Will Start to Appreciate '56 Version- 2006 10 Commandments **1/2

4/10
Author: edwagreen from United States
27 May 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In the event you have forgotten the 1956 masterpiece, your memory will be restored when you see this very weak version of the old testament tale.

This version has many different interpretations. Moses, as a young children knew of Amron and Yochobel, his true parents. In fact, Amron was alive when Moses was a child. We see a hesitating Aaron and that Moses had another brother other than the eventual King Ramses.

The dialogue here is not good. When the Lord reveals himself to Moses at the burning bush, Moses just about says-"I shall not go," 3 times as if he is a stubborn child.

Notice that Moses' mom never ages in this production. I thought that Zipporah would actually be jealous of her mother-in-law's beauty.

The plagues come in rapid succession movie wise and Ramses looks more like a mummy. The thespians merely state their lines. There is little to no emotion depicted here.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

waste of money renting this garbage

1/10
Author: giomanombre from Canada
15 April 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This has been one of the worst biblical adaptation movies I have ever seen, if not the worst. If you are a serious believer and looking to build a spiritual library out of 'visual bible' DVD components, then look away from this DVD. As other posters have said (and I now have to consider coming on here before I waste money on movies) this movie is not actually based on the bible - some scenes are really added on that don't belong there.

- example, Moses killing an Egytpian because he was going to rape someone's wife, and then that same husband committing adultery and murdering the woman's husband...is not found in the bible.

They essentially make their own movie that has no relationship to accurate historical biblical accounts. I'm going to make a mental note of the director/producer and will avoid renting or viewing any other movies from them that are biblically based. What a heresy.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Oh Leave it to Hollywood

1/10
Author: Brandy-28 from Los Angeles
11 April 2006

I really wish Hollywood would come up with some new ideas and quick. Instead they go around and recreate and mess up a perfectly good movie with a re-make. This movie is awful from the DeMille version. All the way through this movie I was saying to myself, Huh??? - What???? - I don't remember that part. The only exciting thing in this movie so far was the parting of the Red Sea. And in Heston's version - it was a heck of a lot better than this version. Did anyone else see an atomic or nuclear bomb cloud fade in and out when the Red Sea was being parted? I think I did. Anyway, I Might - Might - watch the last part tonight.

I wish Hollywood would tackle different ideas and subject matters when they are making new movies. Instead of re-hashing old films.

They should of left well enough alone.

UPDATE:

Well I watched the last part. Did Moses make up the second copy of the ten commandments with his own hand - or was I seeing things - please someone - email me and let me know. HORRIBLE

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

One word: Disappointing

2/10
Author: koolcaz from Australia
16 April 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I realise it's very hard to live up to the first The 10 Commandments movie (which was grandiose and personally not a Charleton Heston fan) but wow...this movie/mini-series was disappointing. Even the animated The Prince of Egypt was better.

The one thing that threw me off was Ramses. Compared to Yul Brynner's version, Paul Rhys's version just seemed so weak and un-Pharoh like. The acting really wasn't that great. For a modern adaptation, I was expecting something better. It just didn't look as stunning visually as the first one. I guess they were running on a tight budget or something. There's an occasional voice-over narrator which I found strange and unnecessary. It also broke up the flow of the story. And um...God's voice/lines were kinda weird.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

This was horrible

1/10
Author: firedragon19852002 from United States
6 December 2006

The reason why this movie sucks, have these people even read a bible? Everything in the movie was about moses, God was staying out of it. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN! God directed everything, he told them where to go and what to do. Also the people wandered for 40 years AFTER they arrived at Canan and betrayed God again! They didn't wander for 40 years then suddenly find it, It was a punishment for their doubts. Maybe if the people who made the film actually picked up a Bible first they would say oh no we got it all wrong try again. Everything in this movie was about Moses. They made God look like a jerk who was messing with Moses the whole time. NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!! God was their the whole time and he wanted the people to see he was taking care of them. How dare they say otherwise not even close to the passage. AND Moses was kept out because he was angry at the people and blatantly disobeyed God! He sinned badly and was told he would not be allowed to enter for it. When did moses run off and yell at God for everything in the Bible? NEVER!!!!!! Actually read your story before you make up whatever you think is a good idea. Also this whole God stayed out of it for the most part and made them do it themselves is not true!!! God did everything for the people, he provided for them in every way and God told them where to go. He was there the whole time. The whole we have to do it ourselves is true in some ways, but back then thats not how it worked! Yes today He doesn't work directly for everyone to see, but back then he actually killed people after the golden calf thing! God worked directly with the people. Read the Bible Next Time Echo Bridge or don't make another Bible movie!

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Good Special Effects, but still misses the mark

5/10
Author: smwhitfie from United States
12 April 2006

This was a mess. The continuity was a mess -half the actors spoke with English accents, King Herod looked like he never saw the sun, and the darkest person was Naveen Andrews who, while a fine actor, seemed out of place. Come on. Finally, out of all the great actors with tremendous voices, (James Earl Jones), the voice of God sounded like the local pizza delivery guy.

One good thing was the special effects and showing the darker side of the story. And the actors though, a little overly dramatic at times, did a pretty good job.

I haven't seen the original in a while, but will check it out this week 2 compare.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

painful painful painful

1/10
Author: scor24pio from United States
10 April 2006

if you're a fan of the original ten commandments, this movie will make you weep inside. granted, i'm only about 1/2 hour into it currently, but it's so painful, i felt it was my duty to warn away real ten commandments fans before they are subjected to this bastardization. i didn't think it was possible to actually make the special effects worse than they were in 1950s when the original was shot, but this 2006 remake proves me wrong. i can forgive some lame special effects, but the craptastic dialogue, melodramatic lifetime movie-style schlockiness, and the stilted we-are-wax-figures-come-to-life acting makes me hope they'll rewrite the plot and drown moses in the red sea.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 2 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history