THE latest attempt by DreamWorks to put Disney's gas at a peep is The Prince of Egypt, or The Ten Commandments Remade Without The Sexy Bits.
Magnificently designed, it combines traditional and computer-generated animation sometimes to breathtaking effect. The illustrated Bible, comic book approach has its drawbacks, and there are some ill-judged funny Egyptian priests with a ghastly,
would-be hilarious song to sing to Moses, Playing with the Big Boys now. Not that it is unique. All Stephen Schwartz's
sub-Lloyd Webber ballads are frightful. The inept script lacks dramatic impetus, and the all-star cast lend distinctly subfusc voices. But there are highlights, notably a hair-raising chariot race between Moses and Rameses, and an inspired sequence when a temple frieze of the slaughter of the firstborn comes to life.
Why Exodus was thought a suitable subject for a
90-minute cartoon feature must be between Steven Spielberg and his maker, or possibly between him and his DreamWorks partner, Disney renegade Jeffrey Katzenberg.
It doesn't extend the frontiers of the animated film, as has been claimed. At most it could prove a useful teaching aid in today's bookless schools because it provides numerous socially relevant discussion topics. Moses and Rameses, for instance, are clearly very close - ''Chuff chums ever since we were boys,'' in the words of the old song. Single parenthood, the responsibilities of parents who adopt children of a different colour or religious persuasion, being gay, slavery - the subjects for classroom debate are endless.
While not quite Chariots of Dire, it is a close-run thing, and for all the animators' revolutionary achievements, and for all the efforts of directors Brenda Chapman, Steve Hickner, and Simon Wells, the film's ability to astonish is nowhere near that of the old Cecil B de Mille films. For obvious reasons, the Golden Calf and what those randy Israelites got up to while Moses was on the mountain do not feature, which makes for a perfunctory happy ending.
n The Prince of Egypt (U) opens on general release tomorrow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article