The Book of Ruth: Journey of Faith

2009
The Book of Ruth: Journey of Faith
5.1| 1h30m| en| More Info
Released: 15 December 2009 Released
Producted By:
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: http://pureflix.com/trailers/index.php/all-titles/the-book-of-ruth.html
Synopsis

The Book of Ruth, is a triumphant love story in the face of adversity. This selfless journey of love and devotion is seen through the eyes of a young widow. Choosing to leave her homeland of Moab, she follows her mother-in-law Naomi to Israel after the death of her husband. Upon reaching Bethlehem, she meets and marries a man named Boaz, who is of the Royal House of Judah. This chain of seemingly unrelated events, sets the stage for the future kings of the nation of Israel, and the glorious coming of the Messiah. A Biblical Cinderella story from the archives of the royal Jewish bloodline, this story reveals the redemption of their inheritance through the child Obed, who was the grandfather of King David.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Trailers & Images

Reviews

irishbelle98 The Girls' Group I am in is studying the Book of Ruth right now, so I was very excited when I found this movie on Netflix. However, it was a huge disappointment! The actors' make-up was far too prominent, and the costumes garish. Naomi even had a french manicure, and Ruth was wearing flip-flops! Boaz's plastic Mardi-Gras necklace was not much better. Overall, this movie showed a neglect towards accuracy. The Jewish customs and their view of God were misinterpreted- Naomi spoke of God as a Christian would, not a Jew. The conversation was casual and modern. There were also quality issues. When Ruth, Orpah, and Naomi were setting out, the wind was so loud you could hardly hear the dialogue. Also, the physical attraction between Boaz and Ruth highly disturbed me. And the fact that Boaz fired his workers simply because they could not tell him the name of ONE gleaner. In the book, Boaz treats Ruth well because of the kindness of his heart, not her beauty. In fact, her looks are never mentioned in the bible. His remarks are pointed and shmoozy- not appropriate for the times. Ruth's mother-in-law was a case. It made it rather obvious why Ruth went with Naomi! She had nothing to go back to but an over-controlling pagan mother with serious gossip issues. Long story short, I would not recommend this movie to anyone who has read the book of Ruth or who knows anything about ancient Israel.
jericoduluth Just watched this movie and I had to comment on how poorly it was put together. The direction was horrible, the acting was sub par, and the editing and post production lacked any notable sign of skill or understanding of how to present a story. I could forgive a lot considering that this was obviously made on a very small budget, but the areas that need improvement are not constricted by money. Everyone in front of the camera needs to take a lot more acting classes. Yes, this is a slow moving and very boring Bible story, but that is no excuse for uninspired acting. The acting is not helped by one of the worst directing and editing jobs I have ever seen in a movie. The shots look like they were set up without thought for the plot or character development. The ridiculous editing further adds a layer of confusion, making it painful to watch. They need to go back to the drawing board with this one. Start over and this time think things out before you shoot.
kurtlink12 One would think that any film that takes the Bible for it's inspiration would be anything but boring. That is not the case. There is just so much nastiness going on in the Old Testament; mass killings, plagues, jealousy, hatred, etc. It would seem to be a gold mine of story ideas and hooks. The Book of Ruth proves that you can make a boring Bible movie. Granted, the story isn't one of the most compelling in the Old Testament, but the film makers have managed to take what little excitement and drama there is in the story, and leech it completely out. The actors are incredibly mediocre. They invest each scene with such blandness that it is hard to care about the plot or characters. At times they are so bad you would think they were given their lines a minute before they started to roll. I think the director wants you to notice that he has dressed up his actors in period wardrobe and that this is enough to create a Biblical flavor, so the acting is really secondary. It is not. Walking around in robes and sandals does not cover up poor acting and a lame story.
morrisey233 I can forgive the film makers for using the least offensive book from the Bible. You want the biggest audience you can and you lose that if you offend anyone. Or do you get more publicity that way? But anyway, least offensive can also mean least exciting. You might try Judges next time (esp 19!). So to begin with the story isn't exactly interesting or even mildly captivating. Yet faced with this kind of material to work with the director has managed to turn a bland story even more bland. The actors are out of place, out of character, and woefully unprepared for this period piece. The scenes are shot with little thought for dramatic effect or emotional emphasis. Not that there is much to be found anyway. The editing is uninspired, pedestrian, and often poorly executed. What you end up with is a weak story made weaker by a factor of ten.