Dethroning The Prince of Egypt

by Jacob Oslick

I initially held high hopes for Dreamworks’ The Prince of Egypt, an animated bio-epic about Moses. Before releasing the movie, Dreamworks solicited the blessing of a plethora of religious leaders, from the Christian Coalition to the President of Yeshiva University. Sadly, I found myself immaculately disappointed. Honestly this sounds egotistic, but I can’t fathom what these ecclesiastical personalities find worthwhile in this rag of a film. Specifically, the movie transforms Moses from a dynamic, flawed leader into an action hero. As such, it switches the focus of the Exodus story from the establishment of Israel as G-d’s holy nation, to a sibling rivalry (Moses and Pharaoh).

Actually, considering the politically correct climate among America’s studios, I found the alterations to Moses’ character surprising. For example, the Bible paints Moses as an eighty-year old man with a speech impediment when he returns to Egypt. He also lacks courage - demanding that G-d permit his brother Aaron to speak for him, and stalling at an inn on the way back to Egypt. Yet, in the movie, Moses remains young and virile, voiced eloquently by Val Kilmer (Val Kilmer?!). Courageously, he faces Pharaoh without the help of Aaron, and voices only minimal protest to the All-Mighty. The Bible also portrays Moses as a flawed hero. For example, when he kills an Egyptian whose beating a Hebrew slave, he does so only after looking to ensure that none are around to witness the crime. In the movie, he literally leaps over people and objects, to slay an Egyptian in broad sight of say, several thousand people. By correcting both his physical and spiritual defects, the movie castrates the essence of Moses, transforming him into a generic movie hero.

Although the movie disrespects the story’s strengths with respect to the elderly and handicapped, it p.c.’s towards women. In the Bible, Miriam, Moses’ sister, and Zipporah, his wife, play a minimal role. On the other hand, the movie inserts Miriam and Zipporah almost everywhere, including scenes that make little sense. Interestingly, the two roles they have in the Biblical story go unrecorded. For instance, the movie ignores a Biblical story about Zipporah saving Moses’ life. Similarly, the movie contains no reference to Miriam’s prophetic abilities.

This last topic leads me to perhaps my central problem with the movie, the relative absence of G-d and his mission for Israel. While Moses is not inconsequential to the Biblical story, the Bible places the emphasis on the Exodus, not the individual. Symbolically, Jews today portray this by limiting references to Moses in the Haggadah (a book read during the Passover meal) to two or less. Yet in the movie, the giving of the Torah consumes a grand total of maybe five seconds of screen time. Even G-d, played by, uh... Val Kilmer, seems removed from the movie. Aside from the burning bush, G-d comes into play maybe twice more — roughly a few seconds each time. This is most telling during the Ten Plagues. The movie musically portrays the Ten Plagues with Pharaoh looking out his window at Egypt’s destruction, and always seeing Moses’ as a constant, personal nemesis. Of course, the Bible clearly enunciates that the Plagues resulted not from brotherly aggrandizement, but to display G-d’s signs and wonders to Israel, and convince Pharaoh to free her. Even the title suggests this problem. Dreamworks titled this movie, “The Prince of Egypt.” As such, the title places Moses, and specifically, Moses’ Egyptian, non-Hebraic qualities at the film's center. No reference to the creation of a nation, from bondage to sovereignty in their own land, with a divine mission as a priestly people.

In fairness, The Prince of Egypt displays the most stunning animation I’ve ever seen. In particular, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds (often mistranslated Red Sea) left me breathless. And, despite the story’s problems, it remains a good tale. It just is not the story of Moses. Further, everywhere they deviate from the Biblical account they do so to the movie’s dramatic detriment. If you want to see a marginal, but visually spectacular movie, go see The Prince of Egypt. I personally recommend reading the book instead.MR

This article was published in the 20 January 1999 edition of The Michigan Review (Volume 17, Number 6).
For questions or comments, see the Contact Information page.