D[1]. The Prince of Egypt paper

1. Project: Rent and watch the video The Prince of Egypt (DreamWorks). Evaluate the movie from a biblical perspective. What was good about the movie? What was bad about the movie? Come up with a list of discrepancies between the movie and the biblical account. Lastly, discuss the power of media and its impact upon biblical interpretation.

What was good about the movie?

The movie was well done. The scenes were beautiful and realistic. I suppose with cartoons, cost is not a much of a factor in comparison to being in the Holy Land or a similar set with hundreds of staff and extras. With a cartoon, artist can draw the proper setting. This could explain how well it presented the scenery and in particular the “magic” of the magicians and the miracles done by Moses. Another good aspect of the movie was the fact that it was in cartoon form and was attractive to the children, youth and even some adults. We all still long for Saturday morning cartoons and cereal.

It was very noticeable that the skin tone of the characters was more realistic. The sun tan Nubian color added a realistic touch. I say realistic because the Egyptians were descendants of Noah through Ham and beside, the region does not lend itself nor is it kind to fair skin. Lastly, there was humor in the movie. The relationship between Moses and Ramses was very likeable and humorous, as Zipporah characterized them as “Palace Brats.”

What was bad about the movie?

With the good comes some bad. I suppose the true failing of the movie is that it was not a true depiction of the biblical account. No matter how well it looks, it still is not a true biblical account. We sometimes will excuse a “lie” if it is done well. This could affect ones concept of God and the characters involved. As the movie came on, it did qualify itself by saying that the story was true “in essence”. “In essence” is not enough when it comes the “The Holy Writ.”

Come up with a list of discrepancies between the movie and the biblical account.

Now this is where the real work begins. There were far more than I have room to list here so I will just list the key one that are most obvious, generally in the order in which they occurred. There will be some minor repetition, but I do mean minor. The discrepancies are as follows:

1. Baby should have been found in the river not in the Palace. The scripture makes it clear that the basket was seen and Miriam hid among the bulrush.
2. Relationship between Moses and Ramses is not mentioned in the Scripture. This was obviously conjecture o the part of the writers and was added to make the storyline more entertaining. Without this area, the movie would have had essentially no humor or contrast in relationship, setting up the release of Israel from Egypt.
3. Moses being appointed by Ramses to the position of Royal Chief Architect. No such mention in Scripture, nor is it plausible based on scriptural information.
4. The accidental meeting of Moses and his sister Miriam and brother Aaron at the well. This is not mentioned in Scripture. Moses did meet his brother on his way back to Egypt after being called by God at the “Burning Bush.”
5. The scene of how Moses learned of his ancestry. This is not mentioned in Scripture of how he determined that he was a Hebrew. It does make for a good story line though.
6. How Moses killed the Egyptians was out of sequence with the biblical account. Actually Moses killed the Egyptians out the full view as opposed to how it was presented. Moses killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand thinking no one saw him. He was confronted with the information when he attempted to break up a fight with two Hebrews and the one in the wrong said to Moses, “Will you kill me like you did the Egyptian?” Moses then took flight after knowing he had been discovered.
7. Moses never met Zipporah before meeting her at the well in Median. The Scripture does not speak of Moses meeting Zipporah daughter of the Priest of Median before the encounter at the well.
8. At the “Burning Bush”: Moses looked the same age even though 40 years had passed. Moses also spoke clearly and not with any difficulty. Aaron was not mentioned as being Moses spokesperson. No mention of Moses using the miracles to convince the Elders of Israel. These are very clear accounts that were altered, ignored or just plain left out.
9. Where were Moses’ children? What became of the “Ambush of Moses by God at the Inn? Where was the “bad attitude of Zipporah about circumcising the boys?” No scene showed Moses children. It is likely that Zipporah did not accompany Moses to Egypt but returned home after the encounter at the Inn. At any rate, she certainly was not the mild mannered cooperative wife portrayed I the movie. Let us not forget, she is a “Sistah”
10. No indication that Moses and Ramses knew each other. The Scripture tells us that God told Moses that those who sought you are now dead.
11. No mention of “no straw for making bricks”. Instead Ramses says that their workload would be doubled.
12. Aaron was uncooperative. This certainly was not a true depiction of  Moses and Aaron. God had already prepared Aaron to meet with Moses and become his spokesperson before Pharaoh.
13. Moses made no attempt to convince the Elders as God had told him. There was no scene that showed how Moses initially gained the Elders support to go to Pharaoh.
14. Plagues did not happen in Goshen. Only the first three miracles were duplicated by the magicians. The movie did not portray these important facts.
15. The first born of Egypt dies. When this occurs, Israel left immediately, that is why they were dressed and ready while they ate the Passover Meal.

Lastly, discuss the power of media and its impact upon biblical interpretation.

The media, without a doubt has a profound effect on biblical interpretation. There are more hours invested in watching television and movies than spent in meditation over the Holy Word of God. As a direct result of this pattern of public participation in the “Silver Screen: biblical interpretation wanes and waxes. I can remember clearly how I was impacted by my viewing of Moses with Charleston Hester. I knew the depictions were incorrect but was happy to see some biblical movies instead of the “other stuff” The recently released “Passion of Christ” had a major effect on biblical interpretation. This movie was one of the exceptions when it came to depicting the biblical account. We must also keep in mind that for the most part, those that are producing, directing, financing and acting in these biblical movies are far from being “born again Christians”. Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this movie. It was a positive experience.