Customer Reviews

Story of David [VHS]

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This 1976 TV telling of the biblical epic life of King David is in 2 parts. It starts out lukewarm in the first part, but redeems itself in the second half, making for some very interesting viewing, especially for those of us who love the Bible stories in film. The acting ranges from good to excellent, it has a atmospheric score by Laurence Rosenthal, some nice touches from the art department, and for the most part, even though it sometimes condenses/changes some of the situations, remains fairly faithful to Scripture, and many of the psalms are read or sung.

Part 1 is about the young David, and his relationship with King Saul, and ends at Saul's death, with David being named king. Part 2 starts with the mature David, and ends with his son Solomon being anointed as king. One would think that this epic story could never be boring, but Part 1 has sections that are tedious at best, and drag what would have been a 5 star TV film down to 4 stars, despite the cast, which has Timothy Bottoms as the young David, Anthony Quayle wonderful as King Saul, and Norman Rodway effective as a hyper Joab, leaping about like a small mountain goat.

Part 2 has Keith Michell as the mature King David, in a performance that has flashes of brilliance and is always highly entertaining, and Brian Blessed shines in several scenes as Abner. Jane Seymour is a gorgeous Bathsheba, and she shares palpable chemistry with Michell. Also good is Susan Hampshire as a very blond Michal. There is an abundance of blue eyes in this film, but then most of the actors seem to be British. Directed by David Lowell Rich and Alex Segal, and written by Ernest Kinoy (the 2nd half particularly well written), this is well worth watching, but you may need some fortitude to get through Part 1. Highly recommended for further viewing of this story is the TV Bible Collection "David" starring Nathaniel Parker, Leonard Nimoy, and Jonathan Pryce.

This was a made for television movie from the 1970's. It is the story of Saul as well as David, as their lives were so intertwined. The story is split into two different parts, each is as long as a full-length movie so we split it up over two nights. This telling of the story is more accurate to the Bible than the others I have seen, and maybe that is due to the long length, where they were not under pressure to cut so much out. The thing that may confuse you, is the fact that they have two different actors playing David. But in keeping with scriptural accuracy, David is shown with red hair, and many bible scholars agree that the reference to his appearance being "ruddy" is translated from the original test as "red" or red haired.

The story begins with David as a humble shepherd who becomes harp player to King Saul who is very emotionally strained after the prophet Samuel chastises him for failing to follow God's instructions in a battle. Samuel advises Saul that God will anoint another in his place to become King in his place. Saul's is full of jealous rage as David becomes hero to his people, and becomes anointed, so Saul and attempts to take Davids life. Naturally we have the scene of the battle of David and Goliath. The movie is very effective at showing the conflict that David has in his own reverence to Saul as Gods first anointed King over the people. He will not kill Saul, despite Saul's constant attempts on his own life, as he feels it will offend God. The story continues afters Saul's death in battle and on into David's assuming the throne. It includes the story of Bathseba, and the scenes with her bath and subsequent lovemaking with David were shown on television, but are sill too strong for the kids so prepare to send them out of the room for a bit. We continue through David's life, the treason of one of his sons, and his eventual; passing the crown to his son Solomon late in life.

The acting is solid, the scrip dynamic and never slow. Features a good musical score, good costumes and art direction, nice sets and outdoor scenery locations. Very enjoyable, this is my favorite of all the movies about the life of David the shepherd, warrior, father and king.

I just finished watching the movie this evening. I really like the movie. It is one of the more Biblically accurate movies I've seen on the life of David. The movie covers the period of Saul's rejection by God to Absolom's rebellion. However, it skips lots of things in the middle.

The acting is at the same time wonderful and lacking. They do a great job in acting, yet they always seemed a bit reserved when it came to emotion. Events that would seem to be full of emotion were acted with a bit of monotone.

Yet, this is a good movie. Set in Israel and hearing the blessed Name, YHWH, in a movie is such a treat! There are definitely anachronisms such as the battlements and 3 story houses displayed. They didn't exist at the same time. And you wonder why they leave certain things out that would appear to have made the scene more powerful.

But all these critiques are trifles. It is still a great movie and I recommend it to anyone. The pace is good (considering the movie was made in the 70s) and it kept my attention. Some parts were absolutely brilliant. Parents, you'll enjoy this movie with your kids because there is little violence overall. Some suggestive places in dealing with Bathsheeba, but nothing that forces you to explain anything!

If you want more action, I'd recommend Turner Network's David. It's also very good and has a bit richer/deeper acting.

Fine acting, but disappointed in the movie time allotted to the sin of David, committing adultery with Bathsheba. The second part of the movie does not flow from the first part, nor is the story line as well done, in faithfulness to scripture.

Not one to show the Bible Class.

This is the most accurate story of David movies you can possibly see. I admittingly have not seen EVERY single movie/film that has ever been produced about the life of David, but ive seen all major ones released in theaters and available at Blockbuster Videos etc.

This one is the longest in length of time as well and still is full of accurate details taken from the bible. There is some small inconsistencies but nothing to really get upset or offended about. You can tell it was done with the utmost respect for the scriptures and accuracy was a priority.

Definitly one to add to your collection of biblical story films..

Besides taking liberties with the scriptures at times, the acting is sub par. Quite a low buck production with the skimpy cast who give the film a seventies flavor. Not recommended.

Again, I enjoyed this movie of David. I appreciated that they used Yaweh,as God's name...instead of always "The Lord"- which is a title not a personal name. It was nice to see David depicted as a "ruddy" character, as described in the Bible. I would have liked to have seen Samuel go to Jessy and one by one be told,"this is not the one"...then lastly anoint David as recorded in the scriptures. Of course, we do not know how willing Bathsheba was in the act of adultery with David, however, I appreciated the depiction of Uriah as a good man. The Bible lists Bathsheba as "the wife of Uriah the Hittite" in the genealogy thus God honored Uriah in his death.Once again, it is Hollywood,so one cannot expect accuracy. Yet, it is a shame, as the Biblical accounts need no embellishment-all things were recorded by inspiration and were to serve as lessons for us.

This movie begins with Sol. Though the movie was long it gave a chance to understand the character of David. The characters actions of David, and those around him were presented according to biblical history. This movie gave just enough time to present those around David, to see an intent as would be discribed by catholic literature. There was a change of acuiring the prophet for Sol, which I think could have been introduced as it was written. But you cant help focusing on what David went through as he plotted, planed, and humbled himself with the calling God gave him. This movie brought David to the viewer and meaning for the other people in his life. This movie is long because it gave substance to the people around David. Well produced movie for that. Directed well as the people around David were accurately protrayed with there intentions from bibical history.

This is a wonderful movie. The best part is the use of the Sacred Name Yahweh. When I started the video, the first word is Yahweh, and then from that point on it was a winner to me and my family. I hope that there will be others that I can view with my family that have the most important Name that any of us will ever know in it. Thank you Ylisha

One of my favorite parts of this movie was their interpretation of Saul's madness. I've never seen it presented so realistically. It also makes sense that the atmosphere was much more casual in Saul's household than we usually see in movies. The newly 'royal' family sat down to dinner at a table where everyone had his or her place. That makes sense, because in the Bible David was missing and I always wondered why Saul would have noticed or cared. David had a spot at that long, family-style table. Of course Saul would have noticed he was gone.

I was also able to better understand the relationship between Saul and David, and why David had some of the emotions he had about Saul. Most people would have hated him under the circumstances, but David would have remembered back when Saul was suffering and was grateful to David for the calming and healing effects of his music. He would have honored him as Yahweh's anointed. He also would have respected him because he was the father of his good friend, Jonathan, and his first wife, Micah.

Micah was shown first as a playful 14-year-old girl, a relationship beautifully presented, even the part years later when David insists on bringing Micah back, more as a possession at that time, the daughter of Saul, rather than because of love. Love had long since ended for both of them since he had other wives and her father had given her to another man to whom she had been happily married for years. That part was off just a little from the Biblical version, because just as her husband followed as she was taken away from him, the Bible says he followed a long way before the soldiers forcibly made him go back. In this version he barely started to follow, and not with anything like the amount of passion the Bible says he exhibited.

One excellent scene showed David dancing in the processing leading the Ark of the Covenant to the City of David and Micah's insulting comments to him about behavior she thought was unbecoming to him. That was well done, including his reaction. It was believable.

This movie was filmed in Israel. Last year I was fortunate enough to be able to spend several weeks in Israel. I visited or at least saw many of the places where the events in David's life took place. I was amazed at just how real the backgrounds were compared to the actual sites in Israel. It looked as it should have looked according to what I've learned from archeology articles, books, and videos about those areas.

This movie beautifully handled the problem of what the City of David really looked like. I've been particularly interested in a study of the archeology of the City of David. It was so hard for me to picture daily life in the area that has been excavated so far, particularly in the stepped houses next to the Kidron Valley and what would eventually be the Temple area, where David's palace would have been. There is much debate about whether it has been found or not. There are fascinating questions still waiting to be answered as more excavations are completed.

It's also not easy to picture just how sophisticated or unsophisticated interaction was at the time those events occurred. In the movie they handled it well, with a sense of humor. People peered down from upper areas or balconies, talking or yelling to each other from distances, as they (we) naturally would have done, walking and running up and down those various steps, tossing things like swords, food, etc., to one another from upper balconies. There was pottery sitting around in various places on the walls and the pots, oil lamps, and other household items look just like those I've seen from archeological excavations. The people, animals, and soldiers, with armor that looked like it just came from the pages of archeological textbooks, and all sorts of food. All of it looked real. I noticed that the insides and outsides of houses looked very much like the ones that have been excavated, as did the furnishings. The clothing too looked very much like what I've seen in museums and books. I think it was well researched. Obviously it isn't perfect, because there is so much that we really don't know, but I think they did an excellent job. It's obvious that they worked hard to achieve authenticity.

I enjoyed the fact that the movie shows rocks everywhere, on pathways, on the hills, everywhere, just as it is today. Rocks are everywhere! They didn't 'clean up' the area to make it more "Hollywood". They left it as it was. I liked that.

This movie takes us to the battle between David and Goliath. Last year I got to see that area very briefly. It looks as presented in this movie.

The important part of David's life when he hid from Saul was well represented. I saw the area of En Gedi, which was shown in this movie just as I would have imagined it after having seen the place where it happened.

I have a much better understanding of Samuel and the events relating to him. When I visited certain areas of Israel, I tried unsuccessfully to visualize Samuel and his interactions with Saul and David. I couldn't really wrap my mind around it in a way that helped me understand the events that happened there, but seeing this interpretation helped put it together for me.

A "horned altar" has been found in Beersheva. The original is now housed in a museum, but a copy was there in the place where the real one was found. It looked just as shown in the movie. A person seeking refuge would hold on to the horns of the altar in hopes of being spared, and which was authentically portrayed here in this movie.

The harp music and singing of David was lovely. I've always had a struggle picturing David singing and playing his harp. I just couldn't start to understand how those words were put to music. This did help. It was well done.

This is an old movie. One would have trouble identifying some of the actors in it. Jane Seymour, for example, doesn't look anything at all like she does today. Also, technology has greatly improved since this movie was made, meaning everything has almost an 'antique' look about it. It for the most part added rather than distracted for me. Sure, I would rather it had been clear rather than a little fuzzy as it was at times, but it almost gave the feeling that we had gone back in time. It was a little bit on the order of watching an Italian movie with subtitles, that kind of a feel. We're used to having things so modernized and scrubbed clean that everything is about bright colors, sunny days, and a more up-to-date version of the clothing. What we had in this movie may have been closer to the real thing.

All-in-all, I really enjoyed this interpretation. It helps me relate events to locations I've read about in the Scriptures. Most people watching it will gain a better understanding of the life of David, from a shepherd boy to king. You can always compare it with the actual scriptures and see how you think it compares to the original story.