Prince Of Egypt Ost Rare
This is an of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the.'
This movie is illegal in.' OK.we need to know why. What about the film do the Malaysian authorities object to specifically? 01:42, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)PS Don't double-space bulleted lists.22:41, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC).
In many Islamic countries, movies are banned if they depict prophets. Passion of the Christ was the exception to that rule 06:21, 17 August 2005 (UTC)I recall hearing that PoE was going to be followed by other biblically-inspired movies if it was successful enough, which it wasn't. Does anyone have a reference for this? 9 July 2005 08:05 (UTC)Judaeo-Christian content seems to be an exception to Hollywood's tendency to cash in on things. Was controversial, but financially speaking it was hugely successful. However Hollywood has stuck by its principles and not let the lure of money inspire them to 'cash in' on religion. There was a film on Luther, but the major studios made little to no efforts at religious films since Passion.
They're either on principle refusing to cash in on the sacred or on principle they're avoiding making films on Judaeo-Christianity due to their own general disbelief. Either way it's a rare, if strange, show of integrity- 08:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC) Except there was; see Joseph: King of Dreams.- 15:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC). Contents.SappyI had watched the Ten Commandments with Charlton Heston and I thought this movie was crap. It took out many of the most important parts of the story and conveniently ended right before a whole lot of people burned for worshipping a Pagan golden calf. Absolute crap.- 04:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)Relevance? 11:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)none, also, the article is severly lagging, this is more of a fact sheet then a movie article.
And ya, i remmber them doing a scene about him getting the commandments and then blowing the crap out of the golden calf, didn't see that this time, weird.- 00:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)MusicalHas anyone heard if there was every any plans for a live musical of this film? If they can do it for the Lion King, why not this one? People would pay on Broadway to see it, I bet. 06:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Improper Racial describings- Excuse me? 'The artists subtly changed the characters' facial proportions to correctly give them a more Semitic appearance' Their is no such thing as a 'semitic appearance'.
Unless you want to stereotype Semitis as not having a standart 'facial proportions'.- 20:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Uh, yeah, there is such a thing as 'semitic appearance' - contrast this with the old hollywood depictions of Moses (and Jesus, and everyone else in the Bible) as a white European. And the article doesn't say they deviated from any 'standard' of proportion.
It just says they made them look Jewish rather than white. 23:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC) E.T. Head?I don't know if this is actually true (which I why I want to discuss it on the talk page) but in the chariot race in the beginning of the movie, when Moses and Ramses cause the destruction of the sphinx-like statue's nose, the falling debris looks incredibly like E.T., the eponymous star of. Both movies are projects by Stephen Spielberg. Does anyone else notice this and more importantly does anyone have any citations that indicate this is indeed true? - 20:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)MergingI'm merging in the Soundtrack section of the main article.
As for now, I added more information to the Soundtrack section, than there is in the soundtracks page, so I presume we can make that section the new information spot for the soundtrack. See; let me know if there can be another way.06:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)Fair use rationale for Image:Vlcsnap-6177109.jpg. Is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under but there is no as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with.Please go to and edit it to include a. Using one of the templates at is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template.
Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on. If you have any questions please ask them at the. Thank you. 03:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)This is an of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the.Recent EditHello!
While I am a new editor, I wonder about changing biblical 'story' to biblical 'myth'. Doesn't it violate? Thatguyflint 19:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Yes, you are correct and I reverted the edit.
'Story' fits in this case as 'Myth' (within the context of this article) strongly leads to a personal view or belief which is not allowed on Wikipedia. 04:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC) AnimationNo information on the actual animation process? The article goes from story to design to backgrounds to sound, skipping animation entirely. 17:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)which is displayed in the lead vastly covers the process of animation. This being a traditionally animated film, it would not deviate far from it I would assume. If you have any insight on the process that was special to this particular film, be. 17:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)I'm not asking for information on how the film was animated; there's no information on who animated the film and what particular techniques/technical challenges they encountered, as in the articles for.
As such, I don't understand how this is considered a 'good article'. Telling me to 'be bold' is fine and good (and if I get the time, I will), however, whichever editors consider themselves the main editors of this article would do themselves a service by covering their topic properly. 19:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)If you do not feel that this article meets the, 'be bold' and request a.
Editors do not articles and thus the primary responsibility of improvement belongs not to a 'main editor' as you call it, but everyone. 00:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)I never said anything about owning articles either. However, usually, with an article of this legnth, someone or some people has/have already done some level of lead work in research, finding sources, etc. It would be a lot easier for all involved for those people to simply flip to what they already have available and make the proper adjustments. That was my point.
However, after now looking at the reference list (which I should have done first) and seeing it's entirely made up of Googled web links, my point is very much invalid. 05:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC) 06:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC) Article improvementHello, I have worked extensively with articles that pertain to WikiProject films and got the to an 'A'-class article. I going to assist with the improvement of this article along with any other editors that would like to help. My goal is a good-article assessment.
22:12, 25 February 2009 (UTC)The article is now listed as a. 19:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)DreamWorks Animation is showing up as 'DreamWorks Animationin' 15:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC) Semi-Historical Epic?The headline for The Prince of Egypt calls it a semi-historical drama, but I was curious if we should revert the title to the more specific 'Biblical Epic'. The basis of this film afterall is almost entirely from Exodus, and the extent to which it can really be called a historical account is controversial to say the least, and I find semi-historical to be too vague. Biblical Epic places it in a clear context of both its genre and its source material, however historical it may be. — Preceding comment added by 02:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC).
Plot SummaryIn this animated retelling of the Book of Exodus, upon discovering his roots as a Jewish slave and upon promptings from God. Egyptian Prince Moses embarks on a quest to free his people from bondage. When his plea is denied by his brother Ramses, the new pharaoh, a series of horrific plagues strike Egypt. However, upon following Gods instructions, Moses finally leads the Israelite’s to freedom by parting the Red Sea and drowning the Egyptian army. God then gives Moses the Ten Commandments, a list of rules for his people to live by.Production Quality (3 points)The Prince of Egypt is still today the best animated christian film to date. Dreamworks surprised everyone back in the late 90’s with the idea of making a musical/biblical rendition of the story of Moses (The Prince of Egypt), in his early life. The production quality of this movie is superb especially considering the age.
Not only is it a well done Biblical epic it is also a wonderfully orchestrated musical. It is very rare to have not only a well done animated christian production but also one that manages to add an original soundtrack on top of it all. The music as mentioned already, is excellent one main reason for this is that it really adds to and tells the story very effectively. It’s not like other animated productions where there are mindless sing along sessions where the characters randomly burst out into shallow (not to mention really annoying) singing for a “montage” or a “funny moment”. This brings us to the other main point for why the music is top notch. The characters can actually sing!
Not to forget of course that the music is composed by Hans Zimmer and Stephen Schwartz, so you know you can’t get much better than that. Anyway to sum it up you won’t be able to find a much better quality production in an animated christian film than this one.Plot and Storyline Quality (2 points)The plot of The Prince of Egypt is overall excellent like the rest of the movie, they slightly altered and added to the original Bible story only slightly. Although we are not sure what actually occurred in the real story as far as moments with Ramses and Moses or the scenes with Egyptian Priest’s Hotep and Huy (which are not their real names by the way).
Prince Of Egypt Ost Rare Movie
Another aspect of the plot versus the events in the Bible, is that of Moses’s age when he confronted Pharaoh. As stated in Exodus 7, Moses was eighty years old as well as was Aaron when confronting Pharaoh. Which we are not clear of in the movie as far as how old Moses is, however, it is pretty obvious he is not eighty years old in said moments. This is not to even mention the total absence of Aaron alongside Moses in the movie. Compared to what the Bible says concerning that God sent Aaron alongside Moses to confront Pharaoh because Moses was worried about having to speak. Nevertheless this is not the case in the film, they basically combined Moses and Aaron into one character and the Aaron in the movie is for the most part absent from the film. In the end these are just nit picky complaints, however, just so it’s made known that it is not entirely accurate to what the Bible states.
For the most part though the plot is very well done and authentic in that they tried to stick to the true story for the most part. Nonetheless, we cannot overlook inaccuracies of the Bible that is why it has received a lower rating in this area.Acting Quality (3 points)The cast of The Prince of Egypt is also of course excellent. All the characters are very well cast and their quality of acting is superb. It certainly makes a massive difference in the quality of a film especially an animated film to have a capable cast. It would be very easy to say that The Prince of Egypt also steals the prize for the best acting quality for a Bible based animated film. There are really no complaints here at all for acting quality, characters do not put on an overbearing or glass half empty performance.ConclusionThis film is one of the best ideas Dreamworks has ever had, what better way to make a movie than one based off of a Bible story.
Even better still one that manages to pull of a wonderful musical (yes I’ve mentioned this a lot already:) that manages to add to the plot of the film. In conclusion this film is a must see for all ages and all demographics.Final Rating 8 out of 10 points.