Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Straw man, June 19, 2006
Kent Weeks, rediscoverer of KV5, found three partial human remains in a pit in that tomb. He speculates that one of these (one in particular) is the remains of Amonherkhopshef (Amonherwenemef), firstborn son of Ramses II. Like a lot of people, Weeks saddles on to the mistaken claim that Ramses II "the Great" was the pharaoh of the Exodus. The rest of the video then treats both identifications as factual, then uses those straw men arguments to prove that the Exodus didn't happen. For example, the skull is that of a grown man, not a child, so despite the fact that no one will ever know the identity of the remains, the words in the narration are, "the Biblical tradition must be wrong." This is unforgivably shoddy, silly, and stupid. Even more grandiose are the video's claims to show that none of the details of the Exodus, from the identity and age of Moses, through the Plagues, the fountainhead of monotheism, the nature of the escape, all the way through the actual cause of death of the pharaoh, are false. Since 18th dynasty Hatshepsut's bas relief of her voyage to Punt names the port official who greeted her there, and it matches that of a Solomonic-era port official in charge at Ezion Geber, and since the Amarna archive of the 18th dynasty contains names right out of the Old Testament from the time of the early monarchy of the House of David, Akhenaten must have lived centuries after Moses, and could not have been the source of Moses' monotheism. And more obviously, the 19th dynasty was not the time of the Exodus. The video is well put together otherwise. Morgan Freeman's narration is pretty cool. I give the product a mere two stars because the script and the premise isn't worth a you know what. If this is what it takes to keep Kent Weeks excavating KV5 for the rest of his life, close the excavation right now.
|
|
|
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Pathetic! They call this science?, April 12, 2006
What a nightmare! About 99% of this movie is based on wild assumptions. About the only real and credible evidence that they have about the "skull" is that the somebody "died", and probably died in battle or possibly due to murder (gash in the skull). As the movie progresses, it seems obvious that these guys set out and were "bent" on butchering the Biblical account of the Exodus. They even butcher the account of the Red Sea crossing by "explaining" that the "RED" sea was mis-translated, and was really the "REED" sea, and they actually take us there in the movie; it's just an oversized SWAMP! The Bible states that the people of Israel crossed the sea on DRY ground (not a knee-deep swamp) with a "wall of water to their right and to their left"! Doesn't sound like a swamp to me. Supposedly, in the SWAMP, the people of Israel waited in ambush for Pharoah's army. When the army got close enough, Moses and his people jumped out from behind the "reeds" and slaughtered the army. What in the world are these people thinking? Pharoah's warriors were well-trained butchers, fully prepared for battle, mounted on horse-driven chariots! The people of Israel were loaded down with their household belongings, etc, NOT WEAPONS! Nor were they trained to fight; they wouldn't have even been able to hold off the army for even a minute, much less "slaughter" them. The whole thing doesn't even make sense! Based on the "evidence" they present, I get the idea that the "skull" was from a household servant perhaps. They don't even know if it was the right Pharoah or not. My opinion is that your money will be better spent on a thoughtful gift for your significant other.
|
|
|
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Good forensic analyses about a fake historical story !, May 27, 2006
This movie(can NOT be categorized as a documentary movie!) is based on an assumption that Moses killed Ramses II's son. Interestingly the archeologists found a skull of a murdered that is, more likely, closely related to that of RamesesII as indicated by x-ray analysis. The skull for that murdered person for unknown reason had been suppected to be for the son of Rameses II_the only clear reason for such claim was the location of the skull discovery! Based on the bible, the investigators/archealogists started to investigate wheather the son of Ramses(the discovered skull) had been killed by God or Moses..The narrators mentioned that, based on the bible, the older son of Ramses II had been killed by God and this explains why Rameses II left the jews leave Egypt!!!!!!! Then, the movie postulated a lot of additonal scenarios for how this person had been killed! The most acceptable one was that Moeses was in charge of killing the older RamsesII's son. Moreover, the movie makers assumed that there were two phoarohs survived the Exodus; the first one (erronously, based on the movie, was Ramses II) who brought Moses up and the second pharaoh,the murdered person(presumably is the son of Ramses II!). This was really so amayzing!!!! But, what are the proofs for such claims?!!!! Besides, the movie showed moses as if he were a follower of Akhenaten!!! Anyway, I found the forensic analyses were so good, but the whole story of the son of Ramses II was really a supersition!. Highly recommended for people interested in forensic medicine; Not for those interested in real aracheological findings!
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|