![]() Now, it was completely out of necessity that Muhammad couldn't be shown, for obvious reasons. blockbuster (though it was completely financed by Middle Eastern and North African countries, from what I gather), with a dissipated ethnic bias.īut the real key for me is the POV shot. So, it's refreshing to see what looks like a U.S. There is nothing backhandedly noble about the black slaves, there are no varying degrees of villainy based on skin tone, or anything like that. This isn't really anything special, it just makes it an average sword and sandal movie by structure, and a surprisingly unique story to see for a western viewer. The camera wooshes in and out of big battle scenes, and flurries around at the beginning and end of scenes as a pretty weak attempt to make you think it's saying something. Characters state their objectives and character traits in the same way that we're all familiar with regarding poor scripts. So I purchased it through legitimate vendors, watched it, and wanted to see what your thoughts were.įirst, it's not a great movie both the dialog and the filming style are exposition-heavy. This reminded me of The Message, which I remember hearing employed a POV for Muhammad on occasion. ![]() ![]() ![]() I'm working on a thing for Jesus movies, and noticed an interesting shot in De Mille's King of Kings when Jesus heals the blind girl, the first image we see of him is from her perspective, a gorgeous metaphor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2022
Categories |