AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

cinephile-27690 I love "The Bible" and how it goes through the first 22 chapters of Genesis. I even appreciate that the director made it even though he wasn't religious and that he was faithful to the material. My issue is that the movie runs a little slow. It takes about 15 minutes for God to create the Earth and Abraham's section drags for instance. John Huston as Noah is probably my favorite performance, it takes up exactly 1/4 of the movie. It is a lot longer than it needs to be but it's absolutely worth your time. The cast also includes George C. Scott, Peter O'Toole, Richard Harris, etc. Fun Fact: It's the first G rated movie to have nudity(Adam and Eve). The only other one is Planet of the Apes.(And I own both of them!) It's longer than it needs to be but it's worth your time.

JohnHowardReid The chief problem in filming the Bible for large-scale commercial release, is resolving the conflict between Christianity and commerce. On the one hand, there has to be more than an inkling of spectacle and sensationalism to draw in the paying customers. On the other, there has to be an acceptable level of traditional reverence to forestall the censor. This has resulted in your standard religious epic — of which The Bible is a representative example — in which scenes of movement and destruction, teeming with thousands of costumed extras, jostle with episodes of interminable boredom in which the bad characters are berated and "good" morals are indefatigably promoted. This traditional, reverential approach to the Bible by the churches — both Christian and Jewish — imposed upon Hollywood's traditional preoccupation with sex and scandal, results in films that are unsatisfying, both as Biblical interpretations and as entertainments.Underlying this problem is the failure by both Hollywood and the churches to understand what the Bible really is. If we look below its surface layer of viciousness, cruelty and intrigue — the aspects always so well played-up by Hollywood — we find the Bible is not primarily a blueprint for well-ordered moral and ethical behavior, but it is principally a record of God's dealings with Man in the past (and a dismal record of Man's failures to respond to God's repeated invitations at that!) and an indication of how God intends to deal with Man now and in the future. Admittedly, most churchmen are ever ready to point to the Bible's dire warnings of future punishments, but they see the present only in terms of the Bible's moral and ethical teachings — Thou shalt not do this and thou shalt not do that!The relationship between God and man, expressed in the Bible is actually one of intimacy and vitality. This is the experience and the ideal relationship we should all be seeking to-day. This in fact is what the bible is all about. Yet this film sees its characters as quaint and even ludicrous, its relationships outmoded and its events as dusty and dead as antiquity. As far as fidelity to the text is concerned, both in letter and especially in spirit, this film fails utterly.In fact, this movie could justly be described as ridiculously blasphemous and sacrilegious. It's clothed in unintentionally risible dialogue — with Huston himself sanctimoniously quoting Genesis. In fact, thanks to its laughable off-screen commentary, in addition to its pretentious photography and special effects, it becomes hard to say a good word about "The Bible: In the Beginning". True, Richard Harris does half-nobly by the thankless part of Cain. Unfortunately, his efforts to make Cain a sympathetic character (Cain tills hard at the unyielding soil, whilst Abel lazes around, blowing his pipes of Pan. It's no sweat for Abel to offer God the first of his flocks, he did no work at all to produce them), are rather at odds with your traditional Sunday School interpretations. In any event, the part is not all that large. Cain has only a few lines of dialogue — including the famous "Am I my brother's keeper?" which Harris delivers in a striking fashion. A couple of other times, however, Huston has him acting in outrageous pantomime: uplifting his fist to heaven, rolling his eyes...In fact, rolling my eyes, is precisely my over all reaction to this disappointing monstrosity of a movie!

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) "The Bible: In the Beginning..." is an Academy-Award (for its score) nominated, American movie from 50 years ago. It was written by Christopher Fry and directed by John Huston, already a 2-time Academy Award winner at this point. The title basically says already what this is exactly about. It is a collection of contents from the bible that do not have anything to do with each other. So it is basically several movies in one. This is maybe a good thing from the perspective that this is a truly long film and you do not have to watch it all at once without anything getting lost. IMDb lists several runtimes, but I did not see the version of 3.5 house (luckily), but the one with 174 minutes.I personally somewhat enjoyed the first two sequences with Adam & Eve and Noah, played by Huston himself. He sure has the looks for the part and it's no rarity that he acts in his films too. He is also an Oscar nominee for performing. Unfortunately, everything afterward (Abraham, Isaac) was not of particular interest to me, maybe because I wasn't even vaguely familiar with the story in contrast to the first under 90 minutes. Had the film ended around 1.5 hours, I probably would have been more generous with my rating, but this way it was really dragging at times and occasionally a tedious watch. Also the acting could not really convince me, even if the script wasn't bad and had quite a few fairly smart moments.If you have a religious background or are just interested in religiously themed films, this one is worth checking out. Unfortunately, neither of the two applies to me and still I liked half of the film at least to some extent. However, as a whole, I felt this was too long (wouldn't even want to imagine a version that is still almost another hour longer) and I lost interest in the character at some point I have to admit. That's why I would not recommend it to general audiences. Admittedly, it's not worse than "The Passion of the Christ".

Jean Boneau Christian movies always gets massive down-votes by people who are biased from the beginning. So never mind the low IMDb score... it's always like that.This movie is one of the most visually perfect I have ever seen (MUST be seen in 1080p HD), and it stays close the book, something which is really not easy especially for the beginning.The pace is slow and contemplative, but I think that's how the Bible should be told. Great movie!Many of the actors are as good as they are famous, which doesn't hurt! I highly recommend it, but maybe not for young children as I believe it is not the audience intended for this film, or only if your kids have no troubles staying quiet for three hours !