Regie:
Ridley ScottKamera:
Dariusz WolskiMusik:
Alberto IglesiasBesetzung:
Christian Bale, Joel Edgerton, John Turturro, Aaron Paul, Ben Mendelsohn, María Valverde, Sigourney Weaver, Ben Kingsley, Hiam Abbass, Ewen Bremner (mehr)Streaming (6)
Inhalte(1)
Ridley Scott, einer der weltweit erfolgreichsten und renommiertesten Regisseure (Gladiator, Prometheus, Blade Runner) bringt mit EXODUS – GÖTTER UND KÖNIGE ein neues episches Action Abenteuer der Superlative in die Kinos: die legendäre Geschichte eines Mannes, der sich mutig einem übermächtigen Imperium entgegenstellt. Mit atemberaubenden Visual Effects und in 3D erweckt Scott die Geschichte von Moses (Christian Bale) zu neuem Leben - der kühne Anführer, der sich gegen Pharao Ramses (Joel Edgerton) auflehnt und sein Volk von 400.000 Sklaven in einer monumentalen Flucht aus dem von grausamen Plagen gestraften Ägypten führt. (Fox Deutschland)
(mehr)Kritiken (10)
Ein Bibelepos über Moses, in dem man sich nicht detailliert mit den Figuren und ihren Beziehungen befassen muss, weil wir die ja alle gut kennen. Es reicht eine hübsche epische Auffassung mit atemberaubenden Außenszenen und schönen Kostümen, eine effektvolle Darstellung der legendären Katastrophen und des Übergangs über das Meer – und das macht aus dem Film einen Hit. Falsch gedacht. Ich bin Atheist und nur von den Ereignissen aus der Bibel war ich nicht begeistert. Die sollten nur eine gedankliche Basis für die gefühlvolle Darstellung der Beweggründe der Figuren sowie der schwierigen und historisch bedeutenden Etappe der Menschheit mit ihren politischen und ethnischen Problemen sein. Bei Exodus: Götter und Könige fehlt all das oder es wurde nur schnell erledigt. Ein todernstes Werk, das weniger unterhaltsam als der Unsinn Dracula Untold ist.
()
Die zig Mal erzählte biblische Geschichte... jetzt neu interpretiert von Ridley Scott. Nun, wenn ich nicht geahnt hätte, dass Joel Edgerton so ein extrem flexibler Schauspieler ist (die verschiedenen Masken, die Körperarbeit, der Akzent), hätte ich gesagt, es hängt alles von Bale ab. Aber Edgerton ist der wahre Held von Exodus. Insgesamt bin ich jedoch nicht begeistert, aber ich denke, es ist gut, einige Hollywood-Klassiker nicht zu vergessen. Aber ich halte den Animationsfilm Der Prinz von Ägypten für das Ideal unter allen Bearbeitungen.
()
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.
()
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.
()
Definitely better than Darren Aronofsky's Noah, but still, Ridley Scott could have gotten more out of it. Exodus is an epic and visually arresting sensation that is rather empty, cold, emotionless and with an excessive running time, that's what slightly hindered my full experience here. For an hour and a half nothing interesting actually happens apart from Moses' wanderings around the world, this could definitely have been cut down and instead more time spent on the Egyptian plagues, which are over rather quickly, but there can be no fault with them they are perfectly shot, gripping and breathtaking. The final tsunami will literally make your mouth drop, I've never seen anything better. It's amazing how technology is moving forward, it's a pity the pace didn't get more of a push on the throttle, it might have made me melt. Must see on big screen!!! 75%
()
It will sound empty or conceited, but I would really love for Exodus to have four or even five hours. For the brotherly bond, high intrigues, secondary characters played by famous names, or the paranoia of the main hero to have enough space for the key scenes to hit with full force and shake me. This way, most dialogues feel like filler, where Christian Bale can shine, but will never have a chance to turn a spectacular sight into a true epic. Views into the distant landscape, ten shots, or the final water are therefore just episodes awaited as attractions. I can't help but mention that The Prince of Egypt was an animated film of half the length and still said everything more comprehensibly and complexly at once.
()
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.
()
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.
()
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%
()
Trying to film a biblical story to have at least some semblance of a logical explanation is nonsense, which Ridley also realized towards the end. What he still hasn't understood is the fact that there's a much better portrayal out there that has been around for decades, and he doesn't even come close to it. Yes, for the modern audience, this is more digestible, but the story itself is good enough, and this shifting towards the action realm doesn't help it in any way.
()
Werbung