I Preferred the Book
Rabbi Mark Kaiserman's take on the History Channel's "The Bible" series.
I Preferred the Book
The Bible is inherently cinematic. it has the global story filled with dramatic tension, complicated personal lives, special effects, war, comedy, power, surprises, and much more. It is Game of Thrones with more violence and sex, but without Peter Dinklage.
So when The History Channel’s The Bible miniseries was announced, I was curious to see how a modern television version might put out a sweeping run of biblical stories. Along with millions of Americans, I watched the 10 hours of The Bible and I found those key elements – it was dramatic (the overbearing score reminded me of that), intense (the constant violence made sure I knew that), and passionate (all the shouting made sure I was aware they were playing IMPORTANT characters).
(...)
But while they attempted to make a family-friendly, marketable Bible for today, there were some areas of significant concern. And areas where I would have wished things were different.
TRUTH and ACCURACY
With a disclaimer at the beginning, the series plays a little fast and loose with the written Bible story. But who is to say what is accurate? Is the literal word? And even if it is, how does one represent conflicts and contradictions? It is a rewritten version for the purposes of condensed story telling. We do that when we tell any Bible story – leaving out sections, modifying for our audience. The teller tries to convey the “Truth” of the story without as much concern of the “truth”.
(...)
Sex and Violence
The Bible mini-series was made for the long-term market. It will be shown in Christian Sunday Schools across the country. Sex is a no-no in that setting. So Lot doesn’t sleep with his daughters. David’s cuts off the Philistines’ foreskins – but it is only alluded to those already in the know. Sex scenes are only hinted at, but never shown. In this way it is nothing like Game of Thrones.
But violence. Apparently violence is just fine anywhere. So this production amps up the violence. Every battle, stabbing, stoning, beating is emphasized. Extra conflicts and battles, including a gladiator fight, are introduced. One of the angels (perhaps intentionally the Asian one) does a double-bladed stabbing in fine action film formula. Just as I always imagined the angels. While not as gory as the Mel Gibson pseudo-horror flick The Passion of the Christ, it is plenty bloody.
Judaism
The Bible mini-series is about the Hebrews and the Israelites, but until the New Testament, it isn’t about the Jews. They may be Abraham’s or Moses’ people, but they are not a religious people. When Isaac is born there is no discussion of circumcision (too sexual anyway). When he is almost sacrificed, the animal doesn’t even have horns to become a shofar or to be caught in the thicket (like the text clearly says). When the Passover story is told, every single ritual aspect is omitted. But whenever a “religious” (i.e. bad) Jew is shown in the New Testament section, he is always wearing a tallit. Apparently, Jews wore their tallit gadol (the one over shoulders) all the time in Jesus’ time.
Clearly some thought was put into the prayers and Hebrew said in the series. It isn’t gibberish. But L’cha Dodi in the morning before reading scripture? While one wouldn’t count on the Judaism to be very accurate (Keeping the Faith takes place in modern times and they made tons of errors), I don’t think the High Priest walking among dead bodies was a good choice. But some things I liked. Intentional or not, the Last Supper is clearly NOT a seder as they are happily munching on bread and there is no matzah in sight.
(...)
Race
Rarely are Biblical characters portrayed as shorter, dark-skinned Middle Eastern types in American and British films. It is no different here. But they aren’t blond and blue eyed either. The beards are dark even the skin isn’t swarthy. Jesus, however, looks like a movie star at all times – even when bloody and beaten – especially around the average looks of the “Jews”.
But the racial issues is noteworthy because in contract to the “white” actors in all the leads, several roles were cast otherwise:
The Angels – Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel are White, Black, and Asian.
(...)
Satan – Much has been made how the actor playing Satan looked like Barack Obama. You be the judge from this picture. Let’s accept Downey and Burnett’s claim it is not true. But what is true is that the actor playing Satan is not dark skinned and was made more “black” for the role. So even if it isn’t anti-Obama, it is a bit racist.
A note on other casting. Saul should be very tall and handsome according to the text. David should be a red head. Saul wasn’t that good looking or charismatic. And in fact, Saul, David, and Jonathan in the series are all brunettes and all are 6’1”.
(...)
Read the book. Not the companion book, but the actual book.
Rabbi Mark Kaiserman is currently living in Southern California where he is the Interim Rabbi of Congregation B’nai Tzedek in Fountain Valley. This blog originally appeared on RaMaKBlog.
http://ravblog.ccarnet.org/2013/04/i-preferred-the-book/
= new reply since forum marked as read
We don't have cable or satellite, so I didn't see any of it, but I haven't read a single good thing about it.
This is a good and thoughtful review. I think I will skip this series, even when it does become available to me.
I would love to see something similar about at least parts of the bible. Perhaps it is just too controversial?
Silent, 1923. Apparently many of the sets were simply abandoned and remain buried somewhere out in the dunes. I live nearby; there's an on again/off again plan to go dig them up for preservation.
As far as the Bible mini-series - I watched it. Overall it came off as a soap opera treatment of the story. And the Rabbis were one dimensional, to my eye.
my front doorstep. I live on a hill several miles back behind them in Arroyo Grande. I've actually never gone on them. Ole Cecil was a showman and what he did was commercial to make money back in his day. However, I recently watched parts of the Charlton Heston version of his second "The Ten Commandments". The best parts, where there was real drama. were the scenes between Yul Brynner and Ann Baxter. The rest of it had some real unintentional comedic moments.
Remember when Yvonne DeCarlo comes running into camp announcing, "There's a man among the sheep!"
Oh, and there was so much more bad dialogue and acting too.
I didn't watch a whole lot of the new series, because what I did watch told me that it was not a good treatment. It's meant to appeal to a certain type of Bible reader. I have a neighbor like that, a church goer, who would probably have a fit of culture shock if thrown into a real life bible scenario with real people who resemble those Middle Eastern people we are at war with.
Shifting sands, warm dry areas even in fog season and large enough that you can get to a point where all you see is sand. A good choice by DeMille for his set.
I liked the early days of the History Channel when the focus was more on history.
showed were shows about war.
Definitely not for me.
I have seen some really good documentaries lately about religion, different faiths, history of religion. They had an opportunity to something truly educational and enlightening here, and from what I have read, they really missed the boat.
