Kent Strange I would like to start with the statement that I am an intelligent man who has actually read the bible. I know what is correct and what is not correct. This may not be the most glamorous or fast-moving adaptation of the Exodus by why have those when you have this which is truest to life and truest to scriptures?Moses stutters like in the bible and for an added bonus he feels inferior and and is laughed at by the Egyptian court. He became a man confused and tormented by his origins, wondered if he was Egyptian or Hebrew and when he killed an Egyptian in anger and he fled from his mistake. When he found peace in Midian, Moses begged God not to send him back to Egypt to free the Hebrews. This is a human Moses who doubts God at times yet still keeps his faith. This is a Moses that endured disappointments, hardships and setbacks and fulfilled his God-given mission. This Moses is Moses. As for the addition of Jethro advising Moses, it is a very moving scene and unless you are a heartless beast like some reviewers on here you will be moved by Jethro's advising of Moses. For another moving scene there is when Moses assembles the Hebrews to hear God's voice. While some flee in fear there are those who stand up and feel the spirit of God himself. Now, I would like to give some information about the choice of Pharaohs. Moses' date of birth was first given as 1391 BC in Seder Olam Rabbah, a second century Hebrew language chronology. Later the Christian Jerome gave it as 1592 BC. The final date of birth given is 1571 BC by James Ussher. Ramesses II was not born until 1303 BC meaning that "The Ten Commandments" got the Pharaoh of the Exodus wrong. By default this also means that Merneptah, the Pharaoh of the Exodus in this film, is not the correct Pharaoh either. Going by the dates of birth, Moses being eighty at the time of the Exodus and lining this up with Egyptian history the Pharaoh would be Horemheb (1311), Thutmose I (1512) or Thutmose II (1491). I don't hold the decision of Merneptah being the Pharaoh of the Exodus against the film, I find it preferable to the endless parade of Ramesses II that Cecil B. DeMille has spawned. Ramesses II still appears but thankfully he is the Pharaoh of the Oppression so I don't have to suffer any DeMille imitation. There is excellent actors in this, an excellent script and the production values are enough to put DeMille to shame. This is the most faithful and best adaptation of the Exodus out there. All you need is the intelligence and heart to see it.

SimonJack The 1995 TV movie, "Moses," is mostly faithful to the Bible accounts that it covers in the exodus. It has six of the 10 plagues, and it has several of the events during the desert sojourn, including most of the major signs of God's power. It has good scenes of the Ark of the Covenant, the Tabernacle and the meeting tent, although there is no discussion of these. It includes the important scouting of the Promised Land. God was ready to lead them into the land just a few months into the exodus, but the people balked. Ten of the 12 scouts said they would not be able to overcome the inhabitants who were there. The people didn't trust God to lead them in conquest of the land, so he condemned them to roam the desert for 40 years, until all those over age 20 had died. I give this film six stars for its story accuracy during the exodus. It could have been a couple notches higher but for its shortcomings. The special effects are only fair. We see a short scene of the Red Sea after it has parted. When the Nile turns into blood, it looks as though a red filter is sliding over the camera lens. The earthquake seems more like the camera moving around while the people fall and slip. One of the phenomenal things about the exodus was its sheer size. It involved two to three million people (based on Ex. 12:37). They set out with herds, flocks and belongings from Rameses, the great delta city that the Israelites had been building. This film fails to capture any of that. We see only a small area of adobe homes where the slaves live, and no sign of a great city. There are no scenes of masses of people. Most group scenes had no more than 100 people in them. Another weak aspect is the story of the early years of Moses, and his adult character. The Bible is silent on most of the first 30 years of his life. It says only that he became the son of Pharaoh's daughter. As such, he would have been taught physical skills and the "art" of combat in the royal household. We see just a glimpse of that in a stick- fighting scene with his cousin. Otherwise, Moses is a clumsy child, withdrawn, and insecure. It's not likely that Moses would have known or visited his real family in his early years. Would Pharaoh have tolerated someone from the despised Israelite slaves as a member of the royal household? There is more in scripture and tradition that attest to the very unlikelihood of this. Ben Kingsley's grown Moses is very good in his frequent internal conversations with God. But he is not the image of one who could rouse the people to follow him out of Egypt. In the Bible, Moses admits to not being an eloquent speaker, but that hardly equates to his being a lesser man physically. The scene of Moses at the well in Midian is quite novel. It seemed like another way to avoid his being portrayed as a strong man, physically or otherwise. But would Midian shepherds a few hundred miles away from the capitol of Egypt believe that this rag-tag character was from the royal Egyptian household? Or that an army of chariots had just crossed the desert and was about to put upon them? More likely, they would have thought he was an escaped thief. And, when Moses stays with Jethro's family for decades, he surely would encounter those same Midian shepherds in the days, weeks and years ahead. But where would Pharaoh's army be to back him up? No, I don't think much careful thought went into this character for Moses. The film also is weak in the names of characters, including some who aren't named directly in the Book of Exodus. The first pharaoh in the film, when Moses is growing up, is Rameses I. But his tenure was less than three years. Most scholars think that Seti I was the pharaoh at that time. His reign was about 12 years. His son, Rameses II, was about 30 years old when he became pharaoh and was the chief builder of the glorious city, Rameses. And, he reigned for 67 years which would encompass the time that Moses was in Midian and then leading the exodus. The name of the pharaoh's daughter in this film is Ptiri, but I could find no reference to that name anywhere. In the film, the Pharaoh tells Moses that she died while he was gone. But a later Bible entry (1 Chronicles 4:17) lists Bithiah as "the daughter of Pharaoh." According to tradition, she was banished by Pharaoh for having brought Moses, an Israelite, into the house of the Pharaoh and pretending him to be her own. And, she left with Moses on the exodus – part of the "mixed multitude."Some other Bible names are omitted, and fictitious names added. Zerack is a frequent complainer and critic of Moses in this movie. I can't find a reference to him anywhere. Dathan isn't mentioned at all, but in the Bible he, Korah and other leaders of the rebellion are swallowed up in the earthquake. Many movies have been made about the exodus. This one is good for its account of the exodus itself, but not very good otherwise. I would like to see an exodus movie someday that has the account of the seraph snakes that bite and kill many of the Israelites for their constant grumbling against Moses and God. And then Moses making the bronze snake and putting it on a high pole for the people to gaze on and recover from their snake bites.

Clayton Van March (Hallows_Eve_Chocologic) I have this on DVD, and I love it. I used to watch it all the time, until I bought The Ten Commandments miniseries, but I will have to watch it again sometime! This film is really good, it has a lot of accuracy, a touching yet dramatic screenplay, and it is a powerful epic production. Some special effects are great, and it has a great spiritual touch to it. I love it! I get emotional at the end when Moses dies, especially with the music, and the Israelites mourning. I am getting tears right now. Yet unfortunately it lacks something that takes two points away from my vote, making it 8 out of ten. One point was taken away in the matter of special effects. In The Bible book of Exodus chapter 9 verse 23 it says that Moses stretched up his rod towards the heavens and thunder hail were sent from God with fire running down to Earth. In this film, you see hail and thunder, but where is the fire? And what about the parting of the sea. Look at those piddling little walls of water! And you don't even see the sea part like in all the other versions! All these special effects could have been done so good by CGI! And the other point was taken because of how much it includes from the Biblical text. Where is the war of Amalekites and the sweetening of the waters at Marah? They should have included Moses getting nursed by his real mother Jochebed too! Anyway, I still recommend this, buy it, and the whole family will love it! Just make sure little kids don't see it, because it has a violent scene!

rainbow414 April 1, My husband and I watched this movie Easter Sunday and it seemed appropriate. We both agreed that it was very well depicted,and fairly accurate in it's portrayal of Moses and the events he was involved in. His compassion and frustration for his fellow Israelites was very moving. Ben Kingsley is a very good actor. And yes, we did find the exceptionally white teeth of some of the actors disarmingly distracting. What toothpaste do they use?????? :-) "No Christ,No Peace......Know Christ,Know Peace!."