Hoooooooollllllyyyy shit you don't know what you've done. Wife almost kicked me out if bed , I was laughing so hard I woke her up. Jesus 50 knows how to get back at people. Thanks for posting this.50 liked it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Exodus: Gods and Kings |OT| From the visionary director of Prometheus
- Thread starter Toa TAK
- Start date
- Status
Dang, now I'm sad it didn't happen.
Yeah God in Noah was done really well. Exodus gave me flashbacks to Mass Effect 3.
Yeah God in Noah was done really well. Exodus gave me flashbacks to Mass Effect 3.
Let's not EVER bring that abortion of an ending into any conversation ever again, please.
Anyways,
seeing this in a few hours.Sorry, but not sorry for double post.
So what the hell? I didn't even get my "battle-between-two-armies-as-the-tides-come-in" epicness that I was hoping for. Bummed 4ever at that climax. =\
However, aside from the laughable casting (and no, not because of the race thing) and the portrayal of God (which wasn't as bad as everyone was making it out to be at all), it was enjoyable for me. Turturro's accent I had no idea where to place it, he came off really silly as Seti I. Ripley and Aaron Paul were glorified extras and both looked equally ridiculous. Bale's beard was funky, too. The whole cast looked bad in their makeup and felt SUPER out of place in their roles that even Heston felt natural in his acting. The minor characters were better actors.
The way Ridley did God here was kind of annoying, but at least the movie itself through Zipporah is all like, "God's not a small British boy (I hope)." If the movie wants me to buy into the fact that Moses' image of him was manufactured in his head, that's cool, I liked that a lot, but then you want me to buy into the Angel of Death/Final Plague where the firstborns die? I mean, they rationalize the entire movie (even insultingly as if the audience doesn't know basic ecology), but then that happens. They just do it in a really boring, "grounded" way. The Red Sea receding was more acceptable (and cooler) then that.
Each character's relationship to one another really wasn't developed that well either, which is a huge shame when you have something so EASY to latch onto (the brothers). But then instead of doing something simple, they complicate the original telling by something with Ripley wanting Moses dead, assassins, "IS SHE YOUR SISTER?!" etc. Ramses in this film is a different guy than the 10 Commandments or POE, in that he's not super menacing or a guy who wants to strive for greatness. He just wants shit to be working well and let things be as he makes cool statues for himself. They hint at daddy issues (like in real life), but damn it's never enough.
But for the good stuff, everything else I enjoyed a lot. Ridley Scott's productions look amazing and the cinematography is top notch. The shots of Egypt and the barren sea were fantastic. Like, man, this is why I came to see this film, and I wasn't disappointed aside from some CG shots here and there. The Plagues looked great, too, especially all those locusts and frogs. The score was pretty good, too, as I came in not really expecting anything from it.
Anyways, what I'm trying to say through all this about the movie and if people should see it or not is that it should've had more Zipporah.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Go read up on Somalian genetics.
Lionel Mandrake
Member
What really fucking gets me, even days later, is that Joshua is built up in the narrative. The first time you see him is him getting whipped with a sneer on his face. "They say he feels no pain." And when Moses comes back years later, "Joshua? Do you still feel no pain?" Like, from a storytelling standpoint, that feels like foreshadowing. In the original story, Joshua picks up where Moses leaves off, so someone with that knowledge could say, "Oh. He's strong against pain, which will be useful when he has to take Moses's place," but if you watch this movie and don't know that part of the Bible, then it has absolutely no pay-off.
Every other time we see him he's watching Moses yell at a rock. "Oh! Is he going to think Moses is crazy and doubt their mission? Is he going to start dissent among the Hebrews?" Nope. He just stares at Moses with a confused look on his face, at least twice (Maybe three times?).
We already get a flash-forward to old Moses taking the Ark. I think the most logical way to end it would have Moses die and Joshua take up his staff and continuing on with the Hebrews following behind. Of course, even that wouldn't be all that rewarding since the guy barely speaks.
Every other time we see him he's watching Moses yell at a rock. "Oh! Is he going to think Moses is crazy and doubt their mission? Is he going to start dissent among the Hebrews?" Nope. He just stares at Moses with a confused look on his face, at least twice (Maybe three times?).
We already get a flash-forward to old Moses taking the Ark. I think the most logical way to end it would have Moses die and Joshua take up his staff and continuing on with the Hebrews following behind. Of course, even that wouldn't be all that rewarding since the guy barely speaks.
There was no point in having Joshua in this film, unless there's some director's cut where he says more than 4 lines, he's a terrible character. I mean, AARON brought more to the story, and he's the guy who usually gets the shaft in the re telling of this story.
What a waste of Aaron Paul and $$$.
What a waste of Aaron Paul and $$$.
I'm well aware of Somali genetics but what does that have to do with Iman's specific autosome profile?
Please provide Iman's genetic profile in order to support your statement.
Man, these days it feels like because Ridley has marshalled such an efficient filmmaking team he can just put a movie up without any proper thought or rigor. He has become so lazy. Not Clint Eastwood 'lets use a fake baby in this scene' lazy but still lazy nonetheless. There were takes with Joel Edgerton as Ramses that just made me LOL. The line delivery, the body language, the pharaoh get-up. It was self-parody. And the cameo of the dude from Pearl Harbor with the speech/stuttering problem who tries to explain away the plagues was sooo bad.
Yeah, I mean the guy still has an eye for visuals but he needs to take a harder look at other aspects of his films like casting and the script.
Dreams-Visions
Member
agree. most of the film was pretty grating to me. visuals were top notch, but that's about all I have positive to say. except for the dead Pharaoh's son. I fuckin lol'd at how bad that floppy rubber corpse looked. wtf were they thinking.
I think he just works too quickly. The guy churns out a new movie every year, and with that kind of schedule, there's just no room to take your time. Maybe he feels like he's in a pretty comfortable groove and doesn't need to slow down, or maybe he's filling up all time with back-to-back filmmaking as a way of coping with his brother's death, but it seems to me that his rapid work ethic is progressively hurting the quality of his output.
I did think he delivered on the spectacle and the depiction of the plagues was really quite brutal. The stuff with the children was dark as hell. But really, why was this movie made? It's not for true believers. Moses comes across as a fanatical terrorist. God is portrayed as a petulant, vengeful child. Was this movie supposed to be subversive? There wasn't enough substance. It's no Last Temptation of Christ in that regard.
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
I didn't even notice in theaters. Wow.
He's had this problem a long time. The theatrical cuts always pale in comparison to the director cuts.
Anton Sugar
Member
Holy shit, this movie has so many of the same beats as Gladiator. There is even a "he sleeps so peacefully because he is loved" scene where the psycho ruler stares at a young sleeping boy of royalty.
Yeah, you are right, I forgot for a moment the clusterfuck of editions Blade Runner has lol
Is it the length? Has he problems with the producers?
- Status