The Ten Commandments
  • Network: ABC
  • Series Premiere Date: Apr 10, 2006
Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 18 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 18
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 18
  3. Negative: 8 out of 18
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Buy on

Critic Reviews

  1. Christian Science Monitor
    Reviewed by: Gloria Goodale
    75
    [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. The Hollywood Reporter
    Reviewed by: Barry Garron
    70
    Holds its own against the 1956 classic.
  3. Philadelphia Inquirer
    Reviewed by: Jonathan Storm
    70
    It's pretty darned good.
  5. People Weekly
    Reviewed by: Tom Gliatto
    63
    This new four-hour version... trims back the pageantry and tries for a degree of modern psychological realism. [17 Apr 2006, p.43]
    All this critic's reviews
  6. Los Angeles Times
    Reviewed by: Robert Lloyd
    60
    Despite such bloody activity, it's a long trudge through the desert to the Promised Land.
  7. 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]
    All this critic's reviews
  8. Detroit Free Press
    Reviewed by: Mike Duffy
    50
    The Old Testament just shouldn't be this dull.
  9. New York Post
    Reviewed by: Linda Stasi
    50
    Interesting take on the biblical story, but if you prefer your Moses as a nicer guy, may I suggest you skip tonight and tomorrow night's new epic and wait for the real Moses, Charlton Heston
  10. Newsday
    Reviewed by: Verne Gay
    50
    If Cecil B. DeMille's 1956 film was the Barnum & Bailey Big Tent version of the story of Exodus, this is the snippy little art house version - smarter (perhaps), a lot more accurate (perhaps) and indisputably duller.
  11. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    Reviewed by: Karen Carlin
    50
    Midway through night two, however, the action begins to drag.
  12. Chicago Tribune
    Reviewed by: Sid Smith
    30
    Straightforward and earnest in its storytelling, it is weakened by unsubtle acting and an emotional temperature at times so overwrought as to border on spoken opera.
  13. New York Daily News
    Reviewed by: David Hinckley
    25
    Thou shalt not watch.
  14. TV Guide Magazine
    Reviewed by: Matt Roush
    10
    This new version violates the primary commandment of epic filmmaking, biblical or otherwise: Thou shalt not bore.
  15. Boston Globe
    Reviewed by: Matthew Gilbert
    10
    Portrayed by actor Dougray Scott, Moses is so lacking in leader-like charisma and confidence that he seems ready to break into tears at every sand dune.
  16. Orlando Sentinel
    Reviewed by: Hal Boedeker
    10
    It's a bore, bore, bore.
  17. Variety
    Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    10
    The acting generally ranges from over the top to flat-out bad.
  18. Slate
    Reviewed by: Troy Patterson
    10
    An oddly tedious affair.
  19. Washington Post
    Reviewed by: Tom Shales
    0
    You might think that, considering the technical progress made in the past five decades, at least the special effects in the new version would be good. Oh you would be so wrong.

Awards & Rankings

95
#95 Best TV Season of 2006
78
#78 Most Discussed TV Season of 2006

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
2.6

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 29 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 29
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 29
  3. Negative: 21 out of 29
  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 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.… Full Review »
  2. Sam
    Jan 9, 2007
    0
    I appreciate the effort that the filmmakers wanted to depict the story of Moses and the exodus of Israel, and that the film helps viewers to I appreciate the effort that the filmmakers wanted to depict the story of Moses and the exodus of Israel, and that the film helps viewers to put themselves into Moses' shoes and gain understanding of the intense burden laid upon Moses' shoulders. As excited as I was to see this film, I was greatly disappointed in the storyline. (I'll leave out the videography, special effects, and artistic ability in this review.) What is most disappointing is the historical inaccuracy of this movie and how it is so far from the historical accounts from Biblical texts. One of the overarching principles from the Bible is that *God* led His people out of Egypt, and He promised that He would take them to a land that is flowing with milk and honey. Not only did He give this promise, but He led His people in a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. He never left them; He always was visible to the Israelites. The movie, however, depicts a God who remains silent during the entire wandering through the desert. This movie changed the essense and theme of the Biblical text and instead depicts God as a silient, cruel, disciplinary void. In addition, the depiction of Moses was just as wrong. Moses was known as a man of faith (why else would he be such a father-figure to Israel throughout the Old and New Testaments, even that Moses is known as a man of great faith). However, the movie depicts him as a pragmatic, insecure loner who despises the calling that God placed on his life. Ok, I'll allow some creative freedom for the filmmakers in the Exodus story... but when this is beyond creativity -- it is heresy.… Full Review »
  3. sandra
    Jun 20, 2006
    9
    i thought it was great
See all user reviews »