The Ten Commandments

  • Network: ABC
  • Series Premiere Date: Apr 10, 2006
User Score
2.6

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 29 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 29
  2. Negative: 21 out of 29

Where To Watch

Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. FredM
    Apr 9, 2007
    8
    This remake is better than the original on several fronts. It is a lot more realistic (in the original version, Moses is too "nice" to be able to achieve what he did). It also covers a lot more of the events described in the Bible, whereas the original concentrated too much on Moses' life as a prince which isn't covered much in the Bible. For these reasons, the remake is a lot This remake is better than the original on several fronts. It is a lot more realistic (in the original version, Moses is too "nice" to be able to achieve what he did). It also covers a lot more of the events described in the Bible, whereas the original concentrated too much on Moses' life as a prince which isn't covered much in the Bible. For these reasons, the remake is a lot more instructive although perhaps not more entertaining. Despite what the Washignton Post says, the special effects are also very good, especially the parting of the sea. Expand
  2. MauriceF
    Apr 10, 2006
    10
    It's pretty darned good TV-movie that holds its own against the 1956 classic. [It] is perilously close to Hollywood hokum, but manages to rise above it by featuring the ever-interesting Dougray Scott in the lead role of Moses.
  3. KSmith
    Apr 29, 2006
    10
    Hollywood likes glamour. That is what you get in the original "Ten Commandments." There was nothing glamourous about the Exodus. God was pretty clear and direct with his commands to the Israelites. When they did not obey him there were severe consequences. This prortrayal was much closer to what I saw in my mind as I read my bible. If people were to pull out their bibles and read them, Hollywood likes glamour. That is what you get in the original "Ten Commandments." There was nothing glamourous about the Exodus. God was pretty clear and direct with his commands to the Israelites. When they did not obey him there were severe consequences. This prortrayal was much closer to what I saw in my mind as I read my bible. If people were to pull out their bibles and read them, they would find this rendtion much closer to the truth. God is not some warm fuzzy character that some people like to protray, He is an all powerful God and he sees justice done as in the case of the Egyptians. Expand
  4. sandra
    Jun 20, 2006
    9
    i thought it was great
  5. HeathM
    Apr 21, 2006
    9
    Far more interesting than the 1956 version, where Moses ceases to be human after the burning bush incident and turns into a swept back hair cartoonish preacher. This version actually shows the bizarre and brutal nature of the Old Testament. We have women and children murdering wounded enemies on the battlefield and the mass killings after the golden calf as Moses purged those who Far more interesting than the 1956 version, where Moses ceases to be human after the burning bush incident and turns into a swept back hair cartoonish preacher. This version actually shows the bizarre and brutal nature of the Old Testament. We have women and children murdering wounded enemies on the battlefield and the mass killings after the golden calf as Moses purged those who disagreed with him. Unlike the 1956 version, where the murder of the firstborn of all Egypt is shown as the King of Egypt's own doing, this version lays it all on the feet of the Hebrews god as does the text. Moses fictional Egyptian adopted brother gets to make the statement after his firstborn is murdered by Moses god, that "your god is cruel." Indeed. And this version deserves great kudos for being willing to show the cruelty of the text and oddness of the people, and not turn it into some sort of macabe mixture of 1950's jingoistic American patriotic zealotry married to modern Christian fundamentalism as the 1956 version does. Certainly the acting was not always the best and wooden here and there, but geesh have you seen Heston's Moses? What's curious is how this version continues to follow some of the odd extrabiblical material in De Mille's version, such as the murder of the Hebrew children being done because of some odd Egyptian prophecy, and one wonders what the makers where thinking by including this. However, many questions come up from this version which are critical to our era to answer, such as were Moses conversations with his god nothing more than internal projections, and what is the place of people who claim to have heard the voice of their god in the modern world? Sept 11 was wrought by those who claimed to have contact and knowledge of their gods will, and this movie, in the final mass murder where even children are killed, showed where that viewpoint leads us. Overall this is thoughtful TV. Collapse
  6. EdaF
    May 29, 2006
    9
    So good to see a Moses who struggled with his responsibility, rather than the larger-than-life Heston version. Had to forward through the violent scenes with the kids, but found it more interesting and thought-provoking than the 1956 version. Scott's portrayal of Moses' struggles and evolution into a leader were fascinating.
Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 18 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 18
  2. Negative: 8 out of 18
  1. [It] is perilously close to Hollywood hokum, but manages to rise above it by featuring the ever-interesting Dougray Scott in the lead role of Moses.
  2. Entertainment Weekly
    Reviewed by: Gillian Flynn
    50
    It becomes a bit tedious, which is something this story never should be. [14 Apr 2006, p.71]
  3. 10
    This new version violates the primary commandment of epic filmmaking, biblical or otherwise: Thou shalt not bore.