'Exodus' Far from a Revelation

The third time was almost the charm for Sir Ridley Scott as he revisits the historical epic again in “Exodus: Gods and Kings.” After mixed reviews for both “Kingdom of Heaven” and “Robin Hood,” this biblically inspired epic is his best attempt yet to recreate the visual and thematic spectacle that was 2000’s Oscar-winning “Gladiator,” combining stunning visuals with excellent performances.

Like its source material, “Exodus” is the story of the prophet Moses. The film, however, presents the biblical tale side by side with the relationship between Moses (Christian Bale) and Egyptian pharaoh Ramesses the Great (Joel Edgerton). Moses and Ramesses are raised as brothers, although the two men are destined for very different futures. Ramesses, the heir to the throne, while Moses will only ever be a close advisor. The revelation that Moses is actually not Egyptian but rather Hebrew leads to his exile. “Exodus” then shifts focus to Moses, depicting his slow evolution from loyal Egyptian general to biblical prophet.

Scott uses his whopping $140 million budget well. An epic earns its name through grandness in both visual and narrative fields. In the former, “’Exodus” checks all the boxes. Everything from routine aerial shots of Memphis to the climactic parting of the Red Sea are presented on a scale that is truly worthy of gods and kings. Another scene that comes to mind includes a massive battle in the film’s opening act between the Egyptians and the Hittites as the camera alternates between one-on-one clashes and a sweeping survey of the entire battle.

On a narrative level, “Exodus” tells a series of intriguing stories, but none of them are very original. There’s the sibling rivalry storyline, the atheist-to-believer storyline, and of course, the story from the Book of Exodus. For the first 20 or so minutes, the film egregiously rips off “Gladiator,” depicting a family crisis in which the pharaoh makes it clear that he prefers the “adopted son” to his own true heir before passing away.

By COURTESY TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX

Luckily, a cast of superb actors saves the film from becoming a hackneyed mess, salvaging and even sometimes even injecting life into oft-used storylines. Most press coverage of the “Exodus” cast has surrounded its lack of Egyptian, African, or Jewish actors, but hopefully this controversy will not detract from the outstanding work that this cast has done. Bale plays Moses with requisite intensity, hitting his Batman-register occasionally during angry tirades. The real gem of the film, however, is Edgerton, whose rage, frustration, and insecurity as Ramesses is chilling. Playing a character raised on the belief that he was a god before being radically cut down to size, Edgerton makes Ramesses appear almost relatable despite his complete lack of redeemable qualities.

Riding on the shoulders of Bale and Edgerton, the brother storyline is by far the film’s most interesting. The dynamic between Moses and Ramesses is so tortured and tragic that one almost wishes the film centered on the two men. At its climax, “Exodus” chooses between its two identities, the tale of two warring brothers and the religious origin story, picking the latter. Moses and Ramesses come close to a pivotal confrontation, but Scott pulls us away from a possibly earth-shaking clash. It is far and away the biggest disappointment of the film and the defining difference between it and timeless epics like “Gladiator.”

“Exodus” is a film that is undeniably dazzling although somewhat lacking in the narrative department. Amidst the recent flood of biblical epics, Scott’s film certainly leaves its distinct mark. To call it a return to form would be an overstatement, however. Better luck next time.

—Crimson staff writer Steven S.K. Hao can be reached at stevenhao@college.harvard.edu.