failfive A great problem of making a documentary film of this kind, is that you cannot merely make a film about archeology or history. For this to work coherently, you need to make a film about not only two subjects which already relate to each other deeply, but about other subjects that play large roles in the objective proving of text. Physics, Biology, Geology, Chemistry, are all subjects that you need to even make an attempt at stoutly reconciling a text of this kind, because in the end, the text does not only make historical and archeological claims, but it also makes physical claims as well, and on a broader scale, even biological claims. If you want to objectively, and that word plays a large role here, prove the bibles canon, you need to ask the questions: Is it objectively possible that Moses could have split the red sea? Is it possible to biologically survive in such conditions that the Israelites were in? Now, some of you may cringe at me asking those questions, because you may say that the bible obviously cannot be reconciled with modern evidence, however, the point of the film is to do exactly that, which is precisely why the questions need to be asked again. To even begin to prove the bibles claims, you would also have to make a book about philosophy and morality: Was it morally right that Abraham would so willingly kill his own son because he heard a voice in his head that told him to? I would estimate that to at least give a well researched viewpoint on such matters you would need a documentary of at least 20 hours long. But within the confines of a two hour film, of course the filmmakers bias would show, of course the research would be skew. These are obvious prerequisites, which is why the attempt to do so (That is, to prove a book in biblical cannon as true) is a futile attempt, and really is evidence of apologetic impotency.Modern history writing requires the critical evaluation of sources, and does not accept God as a cause of events, but in exodus, everything is presented as the work of God, who appears frequently in person, and the historical setting is only very hazily sketched, which makes it tirelessly difficult to accurately document. A critical observation is imperative in modern history, and this film is severely lacking in that area, and given its time frame, and largely comical prerequisites, it isn't surprising. Which really makes this film, from an academic point of view, almost unwatchable. And that is mostly due to its general premise.Now with all that being said, is it unwatchable for the general viewer? No. Of course not. If you are truly interested in the subject, or just want to hear a different viewpoint, no matter the lack of criticism, then this movie is not a terrible one. But I do think that the general viewer should also understand that the claims made in the movie, and in the bible itself, are all still just claims, that don't have much scientific or historical validity (At least compared with the evidence). The film itself is actually well made, the cinematography is surprisingly good, and the cgi, for a movie of its kind, isn't bad (But not good either). So I really would like to give the people behind the camera some sort of recognition.So I really wouldn't recommend watching the film per se, unless you're legitimately interested in the subject, but if you want something to pass the time and you're a bit curious, then go ahead. I just implore you to remember what I said about historicity, and to take the film for what it is: A film made by an apologist, trying to prove apologist points. Just as you would with anything else.

mrichmon-01055 First off, I am not a big fan of documentaries. I have never been. This is the first one I have seen that gave some really convincing evidence and it was well researched. The guy who did the documentary was non-biased while doing this research. It took him 12 years! What was amazing, he researched the patterns between between the events that happened in the bible and Egypt's history. The things he found was really intriguing.Don't listen to the other people here that are giving bad reviews, they say that there is no evidence when in reality, there is plenty of evidence that is in the video. It's almost as if they watched the video and picked out bits and pieces without listening to the whole movie which would have answered the questions they had. One person complained that *spoiler alert* the statue of Joseph was just a 3d version made on the computer. However, they showed the 3d version of what it would have looked like back when it was made and then they showed the actual statue.My advice is to go into it with an open mind and let the evidence speak for itself. Then go out and research yourself if you want.I really enjoyed this movie and would watch it again.

Johan Dondokambey I am Christian to begin with, and I'm proud to say that my faith is strong in The Lord. But I'm not a scientist, though I am curious and often times seek the truth. It's very much faith empowering how this film elaborates on the story of Exodus, at the same time comparing it with coherent scientific evidence. Yet this movie also still nicely leaves room for faith. As faith is the basis of things we can't see, one needs faith to understand the reasoning this movie presented, while the evidence itself still gets debated by scientists. I for one at prior to this movie wasn't aware of the gap of date settings between scientists, or even the whole counter-idea of the Exodus itself, as being a myth. At a skeptic's perspective this may prove that ignorance is bliss. But I see it as the fact that faith in God can't be distinguished by mere scientists' wisdom, which base their findings on mere rags and tatters.

cthaun The question of whether or not there is a God beyond the world who has sufficient interest in our world to occasionally intervene into human history is quite possibly the most profound question that we wrestle with. Patterns of Evidence: The Exodus is a documentary about one man's attempt to wrestle with this. Tim Mahoney is the name of that man. He comes across as a rather ordinary person. He's not an Indiana Jones with a pistol, a bull-whip, and a PhD in archeology. He's not a professor of history who needs to compete with his peers. He's not one of the sensationalist pundits of alternative history who talks about lost civilizations led by extraterrestrial beings. He comes across as a normal fellow. For me this is a plus to the documentary. He's ratable. He reminds me of me and hundreds of others I have met. Maybe the film is a bit slow at first--but this serves to build up rapport. It's easy to empathize and sympathize with his plight. The film starts of making it clear that Tim grew up believing that the amazing stories in the book titled Exodus were true. There is a God and that God isn't averse to embarrassing the mythological gods to make it clear that He is there, he's serious, and he has purposes for the people he created. This worldview of course created a lot of meaning in life for Tim. And all that gets shaken by the fact that there seems to be no evidence for these stories. Tim isn't just a fideist who can just believe something blindly just because he grew up with it. He really cares about what the leading voices in the scholarly disciplines of Egyptology and ancient near-eastern history have to say. The film starts with Tim's faith in a God-who-cares-and-acts being shaken. And this is not just for dramatic effect. The sincerity shines through in various ways. The very fact that he interviews scholars who have views that are hostile to his faith is one such way. Tim's quest begins not for evidence to prop up his wobbly faith but for truth. That shines through too and seems admirable. Also impressive to me is how Tim doesn't just collecting books by experts. He travels to those experts, interviews them in person, and tapes them! This film is very rich in interviews with some very fascinating people. He collects opinions from a variety of knowledgeable people and attempts to find out if there really is (or isn't) any persuasive evidence of Jews flourishing in Egypt, of Jews becoming slaves in Egypt, of Egypt suffering calamities, of Jews leaving Egypt en masse suddenly, and of city-states in Canaan being conquered and destroyed. Early into the film I was depressed as I began to hear so many respectable scholars say that there is no evidence whatsoever. But as the story unfolds it begins to become clear why so many scholars do not see evidence for these things. I was repeatedly impressed by how Tim's team interviewed the scholars who say the Exodus didn't happen as Moses wrote it, how they interviewed at least four Christian historians who agree that Exodus is true history but who don't agree with one another on all the details and dating, and how the main scholar they interviewed and paid the most attention to (David Rohl) was surprisingly an agnostic (unsure if there is a God) who happens to see that the Exodus account has a tremendous amount of evidence going for it--evidence that most of us have never heard of. As the plot thickens and the details and dates began to become too cumbersome for my mind to juggle, some color-coded, computer-animated timelines come to the rescue. They attempt to show different patterns of evidence that they found and attempt to see if the different patterns can possibly be lined up in a way the corroborative rather than conflicting way. The computer animation was extremely helpful for making the complex sensible and for helping to visualize what the archaeological digs prove. The quality of the CGI was very good. Thumbs up there. This film doesn't pretend to solve the problems of evidence patterns and problems in the standard system of dating. But it provides a very tantalizing and persuasive case that there really are a few different patterns of evidence that are very significant, overlooked, and likely able to be harmonized in the future. It serves as an encouragement and challenge to the scholars to look at the patterns again, rethink things, and not rest on their assumptions. It may also serve as an encouragement and challenge to the rest of us non-scholars to not be afraid to learn from the scholars (keeping in mind there is wisdom in having a multitude of counselors) and take part in the process of the seeking of the truth. I love how an ordinary guy with questions, cameras, and film editing software can care about a question enough to invest a decade of his life and savings into pursuing it. And I appreciate how he shared his tantalizing findings!