Talk:The Prince of Egypt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"This movie is illegal in Malaysia."
OK...we need to know why. What about the film do the Malaysian authorities object to specifically? Lee M 01:42, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- PS Don't double-space bulleted lists.
Meursault2004 22:41, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- In many Islamic countries, movies are banned if they depict prophets. Passion of the Christ was the exception to that rule CanadianCaesar 06:21, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
I recall hearing that PoE was going to be followed by other biblically-inspired movies if it was successful enough, which it wasn't. Does anyone have a reference for this? Wyvern 9 July 2005 08:05 (UTC)
-
- Judaeo-Christian content seems to be an exception to Hollywood's tendency to cash in on things. The Passion of the Christ was controversial, but financially speaking it was hugely successful. However Hollywood has stuck by its principles and not let the lure of money inspire them to "cash in" on religion. There was a film on Luther, but the major studios made little to no efforts at religious films since Passion. They're either on principle refusing to cash in on the sacred or on principle they're avoiding making films on Judaeo-Christianity due to their own general disbelief. Either way it's a rare, if strange, show of integrity--T. Anthony 08:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- Except there was; see Joseph: King of Dreams.--Codenamecuckoo 15:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Sappy
I had watched the Ten Commandments with Charlton Heston and I thought this movie was crap. It took out many of the most important parts of the story and conveniently ended right before a whole lot of people burned for worshipping a Pagan golden calf. Absolute crap.
--Ihmhi 04:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
none, also, the article is severly lagging, this is more of a fact sheet then a movie article... and ya, i remmber them doing a scene about him getting the commandments and then blowing the crap out of the golden calf, didn't see that this time, weird.--68.106.210.205 00:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Musical
Has anyone heard if there was every any plans for a live musical of this film? If they can do it for the Lion King, why not this one? People would pay on Broadway to see it, I bet. --Mezaco 06:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Improper Racial describings
- Excuse me? "The artists subtly changed the characters' facial proportions to correctly give them a more Semitic appearance" Their is no such thing as a 'semitic appearance'. Unless you want to stereotype Semitis as not having a standart 'facial proportions'.--Bob1969 20:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Uh, yeah, there is such a thing as "semitic appearance" - contrast this with the old hollywood depictions of Moses (and Jesus, and everyone else in the Bible) as a white European. And the article doesn't say they deviated from any "standard" of proportion. It just says they made them look Jewish rather than white.Rglong 23:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] E.T. head?
I don't know if this is actually true (which I why I want to discuss it on the talk page) but in the chariot race in the beginning of the movie, when Moses and Ramses cause the destruction of the sphinx-like statue's nose, the falling debris looks incredibly like E.T., the eponymous star of E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. Both movies are projects by Stephen Spielberg. Does anyone else notice this and more importantly does anyone have any citations that indicate this is indeed true? --Valley2city₪‽ 20:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merging
I'm merging The Prince of Egypt (soundtracks) in the Soundtrack section of the main article (The Prince of Egypt#Soundtrack). As for now, I added more information to the Soundtrack section, than there is in the soundtracks page, so I presume we can make that section the new information spot for the soundtrack. See [1]; let me know if there can be another way.
thedarkestclear Talk 06:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Vlcsnap-6177109.jpg
Image:Vlcsnap-6177109.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 03:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)