The Prince of Egypt

[Tani Coyote]

What were your thoughts on the Prince of Egypt, if you've ever seen it?

It's a rather enjoyable movie, an animated adaption of the Exodus story of the Bible. It has received great praise, and from all I can see, is very enjoyable regardless of a person's religious beliefs.

Like many of the critics, I'm with them on what's really enjoyable is how they humanise Moses. Whereas in the Bible, Moses seems to do God's will without question, Moses in the movie dislikes how much suffering he has to bring down upon Egypt. He views the Egyptians his people as much as the Hebrews, having grown up among them, and it tortures him to see the land he once called home being brought to ruin.


Link to video.

Further emotion is shown by the Tenth Plague(the scene is linked above) - whereas Moses didn't even bother to try and convince Pharoah to release the Hebrews in the Bible prior to the Tenth, in the movie he desperately tries to warn Ramesses of what will soon come.

There's some eery foreshadowing - it cuts to a mural of Egyptian soldiers throwing Hebrew babies into the Nile with the crocodiles, and the Pharoah's son is standing right between the crocodiles. The Angel scene itself is very unsettling, due to how eerily quiet and subtle it is that all the first borns are being taken.

Once the deed is done, he tries to comfort his brother over his son's death. Upon walking outside, Moses drops his staff and loses his footing, sinking down the wall and sulking that victory had to come at such a terrible price - the deaths of so many people. (Never mind how to make it personal, his adoptive nephew was among the victims)

The musical scores are rather enjoyable - a particular favorite of mine is the intro song, "Deliver Us," and "The Plagues / Let My People Go." The former is quite notable for how Ofra Haza (RIP) sang it in all the languages the movie was translated into, half of which were sung phonetically.

The music is wondrous, the story simple yet great in evoking emotion, and the animation spectacular. Many of the movie's strengths rely in using subtlety. (God, for instance, doesn't speak or appear much beyond the miracles; the movie's primary focus is Moses and his adoptive brother, Ramesses)

I first saw it in the sixth grade in school, and recently watched it again. It's more enjoyable than I remember.

So, your thoughts/opinions on it, if you have seen?

 

[Thorvald of Lym]

Seen it, and I gotta agree with Doug Walker: the characterizations of everyone (even God!) are head and shoulders above The Ten Commandments.

 

[aronnax]

One of the best movies I seen ever.
Regarding the characterisation of Moses and so on, I did not actually notice the differences until you mentioned them and I am glad they made Moses' character a difficult and hard one in the actions he made.

 

[Commodore]

I must also nod in approval of this movie, and I'm an atheist.

 

[Agent327]

Can I just say this is just a tiny bit unhistorical? If these events are supposed to have happened during Ramesses II´s long reign (who lived c. 1303 BC – July or August 1213 BC), he actually reasserted Egypt´s control over Canaan. Yet there are no Egyptian records of the events in Exodus, which now is generally believed to have been writ during the 6-5th centuries BC.

 

[holy king]

would you complain about a movie version of the iliad being unhistorical?

 

[Commodore]

Can I just say this is just a tiny bit unhistorical? If these events are supposed to have happened during Ramesses II´s long reign (who lived c. 1303 BC – July or August 1213 BC), he actually reasserted Egypt´s control over Canaan. Yet there are no Egyptian records of the events in Exodus, which now is generally believed to have been writ during the 6-5th centuries BC.

Of course it is, but that doesn't ruin the story at all. I used to get upset about supposedly historical movies being inaccurate, but now I realize movie makers don't care about accuracy so I just gave up the fight. Now I just sit back and try to enjoy the story.

 

[Tani Coyote]

One of the best movies I seen ever.
Regarding the characterisation of Moses and so on, I did not actually notice the differences until you mentioned them and I am glad they made Moses' character a difficult and hard one in the actions he made.

He's also a more humble character. In the Bible, he DOES visit the Pharaoh after the ninth plague to see if he'll yield(he knows he won't as God is making the Pharaoh stubborn so the remaining miracles can play out). He arrogantly claims that before long, Pharaoh will be offering sacrifices to God himself, and the Pharaoh states he will be executed if he visits again. (I suppose they re-imagine this as Ramesses going off the deep end and talking of how he plans to kill all the Hebrews in the movie)

Based on what I could read, it doesn't seem the Pharaoh in the Bible is Moses' brother. (Indeed, he was raised a Hebrew in the Bible, unlike in the movie, where he develops a sympathy for both factions as a result of his upbringing) I'm glad they changed it around a bit to make Moses a more emotional character in the movie.

Another touch I like is that in the movie, Ramesses is stubborn simply because he doesn't want to be the weak link his father said he would be. (Ironically, this stubbornness is what causes Egypt to fall into ruin) As a contrast, in the Bible, he was only slightly stubborn, but God eventually interfered with his emotions so that the last few plagues would play out.

I believe it is this minimisation of God's role apart from the major events that helps make the story enjoyable, myself.

Can I just say this is just a tiny bit unhistorical? If these events are supposed to have happened during Ramesses II´s long reign (who lived c. 1303 BC – July or August 1213 BC), he actually reasserted Egypt´s control over Canaan. Yet there are no Egyptian records of the events in Exodus, which now is generally believed to have been writ during the 6-5th centuries BC.

There are plenty of movies that are ahistorical. 300 has a lot of inaccuracies, for instance, and so on.

But even with inaccuracies, it doesn't mean you can't enjoy the movie.

Where problems begin is when such ahistorical movies are taken at face value as what happened.

As for Ramesses - he's half the reason the movie is banned in Egypt. Egyptians revere him as one of the greatest pharaohs, so in addition to prophet depictions being banned in Islam, it's a reason the movie is banned in Egypt.

 

[Agent327]

Yes, I read that, but didn´t consider it very relevant. Didn´t see 300, sorry. But as a general rule I get annoyed by historical inaccuracies in movies, yes. (As in that US U-boat movie, where they had Americans capture the Enigma-device or something, while it was the British that actually did...)

would you complain about a movie version of the iliad being unhistorical?

That depends. Are there still people that believ the Iliad is a ´true story´, depicting actual events?

 

[Commodore]

Yes, I read that, but didn´t consider it very relevant. Didn´t see 300, sorry. But as a general rule I get annoyed by historical inaccuracies in movies, yes. (As in that US U-boat movie, where they had Americans capture the Enigma-device or something, while it was the British that actually did...)



That depends. Are there still people that believ the Iliad is a ´true story´, depicting actual events?

The thing is, when they say a movie is "inspired by true events" that doesn't necessarily mean it will be accurate. For example: The movie "The Devil Inside" claimed it was based on true events. What true event was it based on? It was based on some teenager murdering her elderly neighbor just because she thought it was fun. The teenager that did this shared the same name as the lady who was demonically possessed in the movie. There you go, the only basis in truth the movie had was a name. They took the name of a common murderer and made a story of demonic possession out of it. That goes to show you just how loosely something can be based on fact when making a movie.

That is why I stopped getting annoyed with the lack of historical fact in movies and I just laugh at the people who are too ignorant to realize that "historical" movies are far from being 100% fact.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Never mind, ignoring history entirely, the story isn't even entirely true to the Biblical story of the Exodus. Many of the overall themes are there, yes, but the movie even posts a disclaimer before it begins that some creative license was taken.

Examples:

-In the Bible, the Pharaoh is influenced by God to ensure the miracles play out. In the movie, Ramesses is just hellbent on not being the failure his father feared he'd be. (Though he does, during the Plagues, say "Let my heart be hardened" as a reference to it)

-In the Bible, it is God who says a great cry will be heard throughout Egypt. In the movie, it is Ramesses.

-In the Bible, Moses was raised a Hebrew by his sister after being adopted. In the movie, Moses genuinely believed he was Egyptian and was shocked when he found out otherwise.

-In the Bible, Moses is rather cold, and arguably even a little smug, towards the Pharaoh. In the movie, he laments all the pain and suffering he causes the Egyptians and his brother, especially given that he knows that if the Hebrews were set free, both sides could live free of misery.

-In the Bible, the sorcerers are actual magicians. In the movie, they're just ancient age illusionists.

And so on.

 

[aronnax]

I rewatched the movie recently and I changed my mind about a few things.

Mostly... that story is horrible to watch. The whole destruction and genocide of innocent Egyptian people...

Great music and imagery though

 

[Traitorfish]

I rewatched the movie recently and I changed my mind about a few things.

Mostly... that story is horrible to watch. The whole destruction and genocide of innocent Egyptian people...

Actually, I thought the movie handled that pretty well. They make it very clear that Moses isn't parading around with an air of self-righteousness, he is completely torn up in side. It's not shown as being anything other than totally brutal, it just becomes necessary because Pharaoh is a stubborn jackass. It's not nice, but, then, it's not meant to be nice.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Actually, I thought the movie handled that pretty well. They make it very clear that Moses isn't parading around with an air of self-righteousness, he is completely torn up in side. It's not shown as being anything other than totally brutal, it just becomes necessary because Pharaoh is a stubborn jackass. It's not nice, but, then, it's not meant to be nice.

Let's also keep in mind in the movie, God does not claim to be omnibenevolent. He merely states that he wishes to answer his people's prayers for freedom. As such, he states he will smite Egypt with his wonders until they relent.

The sad part is all the horrors could have been avoided if Pharaoh had just relented.


Link to video.

Plus, I find the song depicting them rather moving. Short, yet it gets the point across - it displays a variety of emotions - Moses' pain, Ramesses' anger, the Egyptians' suffering, etc.

As for the Egyptians suffering... let's not forget the Hebrews are enduring plenty of pain and misery too - and likewise had their first born killed. If anything, I think that both sides enduring such horrid tragedies helps teach us empathy - does one group not shed the same tears when it loses its sons as another?

The Plagues have their fair share of symbolism, actually. The Tenth Plague is a direct response to Seti's murder of the Hebrew babies. The darkness is a direct attack on Ra, the Sun God, to demonstrate God's awesome power. The Nile turning to blood is simple, yet the effect is quite there - the life of Egypt can be easily ruined in a heartbeat if they do not relent. (Which is why I find it hilarious Ramesses is so smug he assumes making Kool-Aid is the same as turning a RIVER into blood)

 

[aronnax]

Actually, I thought the movie handled that pretty well. They make it very clear that Moses isn't parading around with an air of self-righteousness, he is completely torn up in side. It's not shown as being anything other than totally brutal, it just becomes necessary because Pharaoh is a stubborn jackass. It's not nice, but, then, it's not meant to be nice.

Let's also keep in mind in the movie, God does not claim to be omnibenevolent. He merely states that he wishes to answer his people's prayers for freedom. As such, he states he will smite Egypt with his wonders until they relent.

The sad part is all the horrors could have been avoided if Pharaoh had just relented.

I totally understand and sympathise with your points. It still doesn't change the fact that this is a terrible and horrible story to tell, full of cruel irony and definitely not suitable for a children's movie.
You could kill every first-born and make the heavens collapse but you can't just talk directly to Ramses can you? Nope, just throw everything and the kitchen sink at a man who feels betrayed by his brother's abandonment and has very serious father issues. I would have just negotiated with Ramses by getting him to abandon slavery for equal rights and fair wages in exchange for God blessing Egypt with the best harvest ever, no flooding and bountiful prosperity for both Egyptians and Hebrews.
God is a horrible creature in this film and is the real villain of the story. By the end, I am shocked by God than awed or inspired by him.

 

[Traitorfish]

There's a few problems with the idea of a compromise of that sort. Firstly, the whole point is to let the Hebrews travel to Israel, "the Promise Land", and that's exactly what Rameses wants to prevent. Any emancipation that does not permit this is no emancipation at all, just a more benevolent slavery. Secondly, it assumes that Rameses has any right to expect a compromise, and even if you set aside the religious aspect (i.e. that God can do whatever he damn well pleases), his position rests on the belief that he has in any sense a legitimate claim to own an entire race of people, which, well: no. The man simply has no leg to stand on, any more than a mugger could expect to "compromise" with a victim by taking only half of their money.

God is a terrorist in this film, no doubt about it, but in the style of John Brown rather than Osama bin Laden, and that's no small distinction.

 

[Tani Coyote]

All fair points, Traitorfish.

The Hebrews are to be freed 100% of Egypt, economically, socially, politically. This is either accepted at face value or ... well, you face the consequences.

I believe God does factor Moses' attachment to Ramesses into the equation. In the Bible, the Pharaoh accepts God as the one true deity after his army is destroyed, but drowns as he's too late to change his mind. In the movie, it seems God deliberately spared Ramesses; I assume because Moses cared for him. (Never mind, it means he has to live with the humiliation that he, the mighty Pharaoh, saw the loss of his empire to a bunch of "mere" slaves)

Until I saw the boils on Ramesses' back during the video, I assumed he was actually spared the first nine plagues - this would reinforce his belief in his personal divinity. Only when God would sweep in and take his son would it establish that he, just like everyone else, is beneath his power.

No one's denying God's not exactly a heroic figure in the story. In his defense, however, he never claims to be - he merely desires that his people be free, no matter what the costs. (Contrast to Moses, who can't believe that victory had to come at such a terrible price) Basically, God himself is further humanised as a character - he will do whatever it takes to benefit his people, even at the expense of others.

In the Bible, God intended for Egypt to be destroyed to show his might to the world - Egypt was the world's most glorious empire, and to bring it to ruin would show his power. I assume that was part of his motive in the movie too. In his defense, he does speak softly and carry a big stick - you can either give in to his demands with no real price to you, or he will bring you to your knees until you cave.

 

[aronnax]

Motives and intentions included or excluded, there are plenty of better ways for God to save the Hebrews and show his strength than whatever was concluded in the story.
I have to give props to Dreamworks for making the story more sympathetic and family-'friendly' than the Bible was, but the story herself is cruel and God in his ultimate wisdom is not wise.

I think we can argue all day on the morality of God and his intentions for days to come. For me however, at the end of the day, Genocide, justified or not, is not something I can let my children watch and say "Moral of the story, God is great".

 

[Traitorfish]

"Genocide"? In what sense?

 

[Commodore]

"Genocide"? In what sense?

Well, I would assume that if Rameses refused to yield God would have kept going until every last Egyptian was dead.