I went to see this film in hopes that it might be worth seeing. It was to the extent that it had a few good actors and ornate costumes. The problem was that there was so much focus on making it a romance. There is way to much of 'Xerxes' bare (or scantily covered chest) and much too little of dramatic story, which is the main strength of the story of Haddasah (Esther). Most of the acting was mediocre and some big name stars got very little to work with. Portraying Greeks and the Jewish people of the time as 'prodemocracy' is very much of a stretch. The story was muddled as was much of the history. There was very thin plotting and so many characters were introduced that one would have a hard time keeping track of them, or what purpose they served to the story.

26 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I saw this when it was aired on TBN, and I'm glad I did not waste my money on a ticket. This is a 'B' movie trying to be more, but failing miserably. Maybe it was better in the theater, but I sincerely doubt it.
Although this movie had promise, it appears that the filmmakers did not have sufficient grasp of the mechanics of film-making to produce an acceptable result. The dialog is stodgy and excessively verbose, and is not uniform. The acting is weak, and the characters were not well cast, especially the two lead roles of Esther and Xerxes. This is Esther remade as a harlequin romance, except there is no chemistry between Tiffany Dupont, who seems like an adolescent rather than a woman of presence, and Luke Goss, who seems especially unfit for the role of a Persian king. I could not believe in their romance. The score is nice, but mixed too loudly and therefore is distracting. John Noble almost saved the film, but was not given enough screen time. Although pretty, Tiffany Dupont lacks the confidence to win a beauty contest.
The pace of the scenes alternates from a spastic and confused flurry of flashbacks in the beginning to grandiose and overdone and pretentious pomp that was not true to history. There are many unresolved dramatic subplots that do not enhance the storyline. In fact the main casualty of all this excess is the plot, which bears no resemblance to the biblical book of Esther. Frankly, it was hard for me to determine what the filmmakers were trying to accomplish. Of what benefit was the portrayal of Haman as trying to choke Queen Esther, when the bible tells the opposite story? I have not read the Tommy Tinney book, but this movie gave me no desire to explore it further. The idea that Xerxes has to physically stop a sword from hitting Esther is preposterous in light of the biblical account. It could never have happened.
As a bible scholar I do not appreciate the departures from the plot from the bible story. Even worse is the propagandistic implication that the Greeks and the Jews were aligned in their love of democracy, which has nothing to do with the historical events. The dramatic scenes did not work, and the narration was excessive and detracted from the opportunity to tell the story. Cutaways were often poorly done and did not match the geometry of the scene. In fact, the picture has a remarkably flat or two-dimensional appearance for a picture that was shot on location in India. I don't think there was any clear concept of the space that the filmmakers were trying to portray.
Frankly, I'm both disappointed and dismayed by the hype surrounding this movie that did not correspond with the truth about the movie. Are we American Christians so shallow that we desire neither a movie that is true to the bible nor true to history? It might have been excusable if the drama worked, or if the cinematography was believable. But the cameo by Peter O'Toole seems to have been included only to enable the filmmakers to misrepresent the film by using his name in such a way as to imply that he had a lead role, which left a bad taste in my mouth. As a high school or a college film school project this would have been OK, but it did not measure up to the standards of Cecil B. DeMille, despite the promotional statements to that effect. This film was a resounding disappointment.

56 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

At first I thought it was going to be a disaster. I was not impressed with Tiffany Dupont early on. She was more of a 21st century character than a woman of 2500 years ago. She seemed silly and frivolous, and her dialog was ludicrous -- but only in the first 10 minutes or so. She definitely matured and grew gracefully into the role of Queen Esther as the movie progressed -- and fortunately her dialog improved as well.
I was very drawn into scenes that featured other actors from the beginning however. Each scene with Luke Goss was mesmerizing. He is a very charismatic actor and was perfectly cast as King Xerxes. I confess that I fell in love with this character and this actor. Another favorite was Tommy 'Tiny' Lister, who stole scene after scene. There were some very funny, touching, and powerful scenes built around this mighty actor. What a wonderful performance. My next personal favorite was James Callis. He probably turned in the most stunning performance of all, and I truly think he deserves a best supporting Oscar for this captivating role. That won't happen of course. No way that secular Hollywood will endorse this movie or praise this movie in any way -- even though it's deserved. So far, at least 75% of the reviews that I've read from the 'professional' critics dish this movie. I think their reviews are being filtered though their bias and intolerance.
I'm a Christian, and I'm not a supporter or fan of Gen8x or TBN -- but they finally got a movie right. Really right. And I hope it's a huge success for them.
I loved this movie. It has everything..a beautiful love story, humor, intrigue, great acting, noble characters, dastardly villains. Plus the locale, costumes, and music are magnificent. I'll go see it again..and again. I'm also going to buy the DVD as soon as it's released. I'll be thinking about this movie for some time to come. Doralynn

89 out of 128 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The sad thing about this movie is that the cast is SO great that you expect to have a great movie. But the plot is sketchy and disjointed, as are the transitions between scenes. The biggest problem as I see it is that with such a LARGE cast it does not really become clear until the movie is half over who is who. Jonothan Rhys-Davies is awesome as always, and there was not nearly enough Peter O'Toole for this fan. John Noble did a great job, and James Callis was terrific, wicked and relentless. Despite this, the movie had plot weaknesses, was confusing, pacing was too slow at times, the language was often flowery, and Luke Goss as Xerxes was just awful, his king dithering and weak. See it on cable, not really worth the money of a ticket. What a pity.

12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This story had all the elements that should make a movie attractive.. action, intrigue, romance, a little suspense.. but it was wasted on this film. The production was uneven, hopping from one seemingly unrelated scene to another, many of them making our leading lady appear at best adolescent and at worst delusional. The music was not well chosen for the action, and the directing was obvious (thunder crashes as Esther delivers what was supposed to be a dramatic line). The acting was mostly disappointing, with fine performances by John Rhys-Davies, Omar Sharif and a few others, but pretty amateur efforts from the rest of the cast. In all, the only thing I really enjoyed were the period costumes.

23 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The story of Esther has great potential, but this film limps along with mediocre acting (especially from Luke Goss as Xerxes) and a sub-par screenplay. Most actors employ bad British dialects. The dialogue can't decide if it's from the King James Bible (using the word 'thou') or modern America (using the word 'okay.') I know the story well, and I was often confused by pointless scenes about a Greek battle subplot. I know the Greek war is historical, but it isn't in Scripture and it doesn't serve the story. I didn't buy the love story.
On a positive note, John Rhys-Davies, Omar Sharif, and Peter O'Toole (on screen for about five seconds) are very good. Lovely Tiffany Dupont displays charm and fun as Esther, although the performance is uneven.
I'm a Christian, and I'm disappointed in most films that deal with faith. Let's hope 'The Nativity' is better.

46 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I enjoyed watching this movie but they took a lot of license with the biblical story. They especially changed time frames where they made months into weeks and days into hours. If you know your bible, you can really spot the differences.
I thought Tiffany Dupont who played Esther was charming. Luke Goss who played Xerxes was a bit overblown. The guy (James Callas) who played Haman was way over the top. John Rhys-Davies is always a joy to watch and he doesn't disappoint as Mordecai.
Even with that, I would rather see a movie like this than 90% of the stuff put in theaters these days. Would recommend seeing the movie and then go home and read the real story!

41 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This film does have a wonderful story to tell, and the location shots (it was filmed in India to imitate ancient Persia) are beautiful. That's the good news. The bad news is that the actual script for the story is weak and much of the dialog is stilted. Some of the acting is truly sub-par, although the girl who plays Hadassa/Esther really makes the most of some very bad situations script-wise. I felt that the direction was heavy handed in much of the film, but some gorgeous recreations and CG backdrops almost make up for this. Also,the fact that Peter O'Toole is advertised as a 'star' of this film is very misleading. He appears in maybe five minutes of footage at the beginning, and nothing more. Overall, I thought the film had good intentions, but not enough time and effort put into a convincing script.

18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

(Spoiler warning) I was rather disappointed in seeing the movie. A grand story was ripped to shreds to provide a vehicle for a theme that has been told a thousand times in a thousand mediocre movies. I had read a string of glowing reviews, but now that only makes me question the motives or judgment of those reviewers.
In sum, given the place of this movie's making, it becomes all too clear that this is a perhaps grand effort on the part of Bollywood (India's movie industry name) to make a film that might have some appeal outside of India. This is not to disrespect Bollywood. I have heard good things about their work ethic and success in India. But it is an industry devoted to and wholly reliant upon love stories with little or no significance. (I admit my low level of information about Bollywood, but seeing what has been done to this story, and connecting it to the place of its making, etc, I can draw only one conclusion.)
The saddest part is that they took one of the best stories in the bible, one where a strong woman character rises to save the entire Jewish race, and they reduced it to a maudlin love story best left for harlequin romances. It is a somewhat short story in the bible, so a film would have to add some elements but this effort goes to ridiculous lengths.
A better telling would be to approach some of the epics of decades ago, for example 'the Ten Commandments'. There, while many elements were added to make the epic length, the main story remains the heroic effort of Moses to bring the Jews out of Egypt.
The story is one of triumph of a people under domination. There is little about love in the story itself and I found the . The movie creates two love settings, or rather some kind of love triangle, that has no place in a telling of the story of Esther.
There is no character Jesse in the bible story. Haddasah does not have a boyfriend or love interest, and more importantly there is no plan for her to travel to Jerusalem. There is no expressed love between Haddasah/Esther and the King. In the story, the King chooses her for queen simply because 'she pleased him'. What that means is undetermined.
The rest of the story relates to how after a bit of low level intrigue, Esther is put in a position to be able to save the Jews. Unfortunately, again, here the movie goes to great lengths to create a storyline to put Esther in that position, but it relies on inserted and improbable events, when the bible story provides enough without the help of any average-skilled movie script writers.
That is, the movie is permeated with talk of war, with Greece no less, and that Greece's hated 'democracy' and its concept of 'all people being created equal' is a reason for killing the Jews since they are 'Greece lovers'. Holy Frijole, how timely! Boy, isn't it amazing how history repeats itself? The movie writers spend the entire movie alternating between invented love stories or invented references to war and hatred of foreigners. Not a bit of it is in the bible story. Bah, I could go on, but I am afraid I am going to simply sound redundant.
The acting, costumes, and camera work are very good. Sorry they got such short shrift in my review, but unfortunately the way the story was completely ruined in favor of some short-sighted effort to make pablum with broad appeal, it was hard to give credit where it was due.

11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I have seen the film and it delivers as much as I had hoped. The scenery is authentic ancient Persia, filmed in India and made with a fantastic cast of actors.
Newcomer Tiffany Dupont is so believable, and James Callis' Haman is easy to hate. John Ryhs-Davies brings chills in his portrayal of Mordechai, and it is nice to see O'Toole and Shariff in the same film again - and in the dessert no less.
See the film, take your kids, enjoy it. It's the story of Purim, and while we all know the outcome, it is powerful to watch.
It opens in theaters on October 13.

60 out of 98 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Please accept this letter as constructive criticism and not bashing. I am a dedicated viewer and lover of TBN, CBN, all it's programs and partners and most importantly the Lord!
Though the publicity and PR were excellent I have to honestly say that I was highly disappointed with the movie One Night with the King.
The start of the movie was very uninformative on the reason why King Xerses had Vashti dismissed as Queen. As a believer and for those who are not I think it key for the audience to understand how the people of that day and country lived and exactly why Vashti was being removed as Queen. This really in essence speared the way for Ester to become Queen.
I also feel that the audience did not get a good sense of passion between Xerses and Ester. Though this move was rated for audiences of all ages I feel that could have done a better job of showing just how much Xerses loved Ester. He loved her so much that he would have done and did anything for her. I really did not feel the love. Also, this really is not meant to be a put down but I don't think the physical features of the character playing Ester was right in this movie. The Bible story tells of a woman that is so beautiful. I recall reading that after the decision to depose Vashti as queen the council decided to have a beauty contest and invite all the most beautiful women from all 127 provinces so that the king could select the most beautiful woman to be the new queen. In the reading Ester was gorgeous in form and features. She was radiant, glowing, and glamorous. Again this is not meant to be a put down but the actress playing the role does not represent Ester physically. The movie also did not emphasize on the amount of preparation that was needed for these candidates to get ready for the king.
In addition the part in the move where Ester was running in the rain to get to Xerses to confess her true nationality and to save her people built up the audience but then nothing happened. Ester just fell in Xerses' arms and that was it. This definitely needed more substance. The audience needed to see just how much King Xerses loved Ester. The Bible indicates that when Ester approached the King without an invitation he faced her with a sword in his hand. The king gestured for her to touch the tip of the golden sword. When she did this she knew that she was safe. In the movie the king did not ask Ester of her heart's desire. The Bible indicates that the king said, 'Queen Ester. You look absolutely ravishing today. What would you want from me? I will give anything that you want, up to half of the kingdom.' The movie seems to show anger and uncertainly in the Kings eyes. I actually do not recall any part in the movie where King Xerses says 'What do you want Ester? I will give you up to half of the kingdom'. This was crucial. I don't feel that the King's deep love for Ester was really portrayed during any part of this movie.
Overall I felt lost during the movie. This was not only due to the fact that I know the story pursuant to the Bible. I felt lost through most of the move and found myself struggling to understand what was happening and what part of the story was being shown. If I feel this way as a believer I have to assume that the non believer may have even fallen asleep or given up on this movie.
Again, this is not mean to be bashing but I really want to give my honest and heartfelt opinion which I share with my Christian friends who have also seen the movie. I would be a hypocrite if I pretended to love it just because I am a Christian and only to show my support for the production team and Christina film.
God Bless,

53 out of 86 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

It was difficult to determine what ax was being ground at any particular moment of this film.
At times it seemed to prophecise the current state of affairs in the Middle East, at others it was a teeny whimsy which foretold the origin of the stereotype 'Jewish Princess'. There is much invective directed towards the 'Greeks' and their alleged attempts at imperialistic democratization, there is no attempt to correlate Greek history with Biblical narrative. If this is am attempt to provoke thought, it can only lead one to wonder how the Hellenes escaped the Holocaust.
In all, the film smacked of the type of inference from scripture which is promulgated on 'Christian' network tele-travesties.
Peter O'Toole was wasted in a farcical cameo as Samuel in the opening retrospective. I was saddened to see this monumental actor reduced to a couple of lines and a shake of a saber. It only added insult to the historic lack of recognition this great man of stage and screen has received from the film industry.
Omar Sharif, at least had a role with scenes throughout this boring spectacle. But, he and O'Toole were not utilized to elevate the film above the over-funded sophomoric babble of the script.
Throughout the 124-minutes of this feature I kept wishing that Sarah Silverman had been cast in the lead. An outright O.T. farce, on the order of 'The Life of Brian'(I know, a N.T. farce) would have been extremely entertaining. As it is, 'One Night..' seemed to drag on like an Arctic Winter. Nothing was illuminated.

20 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The only good thing about this movie was Esther's clothes. While she is lovely and even James Callis (Haman)appears more attractive here than in his other roles, look for screen caps and save your time. I rented this movie because I love Omar Sharif, Peter O'Toole,and John Rhys-Davies so expected a DECENT movie.
Instead it was utterly awful, terrible lines, wooden and over acting abounded. The simplest thing.. prismatic projections from her necklace.. which could have simply been done realistically, was so stupid we actually laughed every time it was shown. Without adequate lighting it spread images all over the house. Later it not only spread a multitude of images but spun. Silliest of all, when they were kissing in the tent and it no longer even being HELD in the light, it still decorated the entire tent.
It is not worth the 2 hours of your life you will spend on it. In fact, not worth the 2 minutes you spend putting it in your DVD player.

15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I'm so tired of being embarrassed by amateurish film-making representing Christians and Christianity. But then.. we make it worse by having our leaders shout out to the world about how amazing the film is.
Mixed race casting, student-level direction, differing accents on actors, inept acting in key roles and a disjointed story structure kept breaking the reality of the world this film was trying to create. It was painful to watch.
Please TBN. There are really good Christian writers, directors, etc. out there. You need to stop making films for public/secular consumption unless you are committed to doing it well.

15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Just back from seeing 'One Night with the King,' allegedly the story of the Biblical character Esther. The film has been ignored by Hollywood and the media, supposedly because of its religious content, but it had a lot of rave reviews on the internet, so we thought we'd try it.
Well, we're with Hollywood and the media. Any relationship between this tale and the Book of Esther is purely accidental. It's mostly noise and special effects. And if it's religious, I'm Pope Gregory.
Not only that, the theater showed us eight or ten ads before the feature, Coca Cola, Chevrolets, etc. Ads are bad enough when you don't pay to see them. When you do.. Grrrrr!

10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This movie stunk. I mean a real big time stinker. I haven't walked out in a movie in years, but gee-whiz! Right off the bat it white washes the Biblically recorded genocide of the Cannanites and then goes down from there. Peter makes his small appearance (not one of his more memorable roles) as the irritable homicidal prophet Samuel taking King Saul to task for not murdering a pregnant Queen along with the rest of the inhabitants of the kingdom including the Livestock! Then we are transported five hundred years later to Persia and a totally stupid, insipid love story, with all the sex appeal of Ozzie and Harriet! I felt that I needed an insulin shot! I finally had to leave the theater or go into a diabetic coma! I did catch the last half of the Departed next door, now that was a MOVIE!

22 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I am a Bible believing Christian who loves the story of Esther and went into the theater with high expectations. I was deeply disappionted with the quality of this movie. the script was horrible, the acting was the worst I've every seen, and it did not stay true to the biblicial account of Esther. Even though the film was horrible I am more dissapionted with TBN and the many christians who give this movie positive review just because it was produced by christians. I've seen countless Bishops and Pastors praise this movie like it was a work of art. If we as christians continue to settle for mediocrity thats all we will receive I think its time for us to expect excellency, especially since it has been so highly praised by many tele- evangelist. Highly disappionted with them and I'm highly disappionted with us.

22 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

My summary title pretty much sums it up. That should have been the name of the movie. I am a Christian. The story of Queen Esther was one of my childhood favorites, but this was a poor attempt to put it on the screen. This has bad directing, bad cinematography, bad sound, intermediate acting--only as good as its weakest link, and it has a lot of weak links. It was completely inconsistent. They were even changing speech from thee and thou such as the King James Bible is written in to modern-day colloquial speech. Fox Faith films realized that there is a market for faith films since The Passion of the Christ made so much money, so they want to make more. However, this is just a bunch of crap put out for youth groups to see and say 'it's a step in the right direction.' I disagree. This is a step in the wrong direction. It didn't even feel like the story of Queen Esther. Don't waste your money and two hours of your life. Don't even watch it once ever. I advised the same to my family who did not watch it with me. My family who did agreed with me. We were in one accord on this one!

19 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

If you have not seen it, don't!! I took the movie from a video library seeing the names of some of the great legendary actors like Peter O'Toole and Omar Sharif being highlighted on the DVD cover. They appeared in the movie I guess for only a couple of minutes with the least dialogues (although Omar Sharif had a few minutes to his credit!). The rest of the actors were pathetic! John Rhys-Davies as Mordecai was the only relief in the entire movie. Some of the backdrops were original, but the computer generated ones looked pretty obvious and too extravagant. It could have been such a magnificent movie if presented well. Sitting through the movie was a torture!

16 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

My wife and I went to see the movie last night. We both were very disappointed because it neither followed the book nor the Bible. I guess I'm more disappointed that it totally disregarded the Biblical account of several things. Here's just a couple: *Esther did not run through the rain looking like a peasant. Esther 5:1, 'Esther put on her royal robes'. *Haman was not mad when he ate the meals (2 in the Bible). 5:9 'So Haman went out that day joyful and with a glad heart'. *The movie showed Haman trying to get Esther to beg for 'her' life. Esther 7:7, 'But Haman stood before Queen Esther, pleading for 'his' life. Then in verse 8 he was so upset he threw himself on top of Esther on the couch and the King thought Haman was sexually assaulting Esther. 'Will he also assault the queen while I am in the house?' Read the book of Esther yourself. Just disappointed we played to Hollywood instead of staying true to the Scriptures.

16 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This movie was the most melodramatic two hours of my life. The constant re-playings of flashbacks and wordy narrating was enough to put the man on my left asleep. To add to the poor quality of this movie there was the quality of the picture, sound, and animation which were cheap ploys. The story line dragged out, accompanied by climatic musical overtures, bad acting, and side-conflicts the screenwriter presents, then leaves unanswered.
Though this movie did have some strong aspects: the wonderful wardrobe and makeup of Queen Ester, the monkeys that were quite comical, and three inserted light humored lines, it lacked in everything else.
I love the story of Ester, its up there with the story of Rehab. It just was very tedious to seen it interpreted so poorly. This would have been good if they had inserted some chorus numbers and choreography.

21 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

When I saw that somebody made a film about the story of Hesther I was excited. Great some filmmaker has the nerve to make a Biblical story. The Bible is a book I love. Gods word or not Gods word it contains the History of the Jewish People and the Fantastic story of Jesus and his followers. The Bible is a book of deep spiritual conviction. That spiritual conviction comes about because of disaster, horror, lust, Betrayal and of course redemption and victory. It is about Sex and death and Love and Life. When they made One night with the King the film makers Lost something in the epic tale of this powerful woman. Part of the problem is that I felt I was in an Indian Palace and Not a Persian one. Secondly the Diolouge was bad and sanitized and preachy. I know how to think and feel and I don't want to be preached at by a character in a movie. A modern American woman who does not look at all Jewish or Persian speaking with a modern accent using King James English. Too Bad the film makers could have reached a a huge audience if they had realized it cost just as much to make a great film as it does to make a bad one.

18 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Crouch family should stick to fleecing the masses out of their money (which they do very well). Movie makin ain't their bacon. Even as wannabee producers they have and will fail miserably.
Ooops, when I went to see it, I forgot to put my evangelical glasses. Film is great for people with preconceived notions of the glory of the story. When you view it with an open mind - it is a cartoonish presentation with live 'actors'. Acting - what acting? Production values? Yech.
So..save your time. Why spend money on popcorn and soda when you can send it directly to Paul and Jan (she needs a new hair piece!!!). Go see a real movie.

18 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This movie is amazing for so many reasons, the cast, the scenery, the story-line and that it parallels what we see happening in the world today. The historical truth about an ancient Persian queen is exactly the same battle happening in Israel today. It's not often that you see a movie that can relate directly with current world affairs and still maintain truth and purity. This movie achieves all this and more. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys history, wholesome entertainment, a great love story or compulsive movie goers. What's great about this movie is that it can appeal to a wide variety of age groups and provides a much needed heroine/role model for young people today. This movie will inspire you and leave you cheering at the end! A must see!!

76 out of 136 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I have to say I was disappointed with the film.
It was touted as 'an epic motion picture set in an imaginative world of adventure, intrigue and romance.' (quote from the 8X website)
It sounded good, but in my opinion, did not deliver. I found the project lacking in many areas.
1. The story often muddled and the characters seemed very one dimensional. The dialogue was often confusing.
2. The acting overall was poor. Way too many weak emotional moments that didn't ring true. Unfortunately this is true for the King and Esther as well as some of the supporting actors. The name actors helped to carry it, but did not have enough screen time to cover the other's weaknesses.
3. The costuming was often weak, especially with male government/ruling officials. Their outfits often looked like spray-painted plastic pieces.
4. Makeup stood out when it shouldn't. For example, scenes where Esther was asleep, her face was covered in frosted makeup that didn't seem appropriate.
5. Sound was OK, but there were many times when I, and others who saw it missed important dialogue because of strange wording and low volume.
As a professional actress, and a believer, I have to say that I get very disappointed when we Christians promote a film as a great accomplishment, and then follow up with a project at this level.
I really feel this movie should probably have gone direct to DVD, promoted directly to a Christian audience who is used to accepting 'below grade' material for the sake of watching something pointedly 'Christian.'
I had really hoped for more. Maybe next time.

15 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink