One Night with the King (2006) User Reviews

Enjoyed it

[eileenjahna · 7/10 · 15 October 2006]

I enjoyed watching this movie but they took a lot of license with the biblical story. They especially changed time frames where they made months into weeks and days into hours. If you know your bible, you can really spot the differences.

I thought Tiffany Dupont who played Esther was charming. Luke Goss who played Xerxes was a bit overblown. The guy (James Callas) who played Haman was way over the top. John Rhys-Davies is always a joy to watch and he doesn't disappoint as Mordecai.

Even with that, I would rather see a movie like this than 90% of the stuff put in theaters these days. Would recommend seeing the movie and then go home and read the real story!

B movie at best, wait to rent on DVD or better when it hits your library

[newsletterinbox · 5/10 · 28 October 2006]

(Spoiler warning) I was rather disappointed in seeing the movie. A grand story was ripped to shreds to provide a vehicle for a theme that has been told a thousand times in a thousand mediocre movies. I had read a string of glowing reviews, but now that only makes me question the motives or judgment of those reviewers.

In sum, given the place of this movie's making, it becomes all too clear that this is a perhaps grand effort on the part of Bollywood (India's movie industry name) to make a film that might have some appeal outside of India. This is not to disrespect Bollywood. I have heard good things about their work ethic and success in India. But it is an industry devoted to and wholly reliant upon love stories with little or no significance. (I admit my low level of information about Bollywood, but seeing what has been done to this story, and connecting it to the place of its making, etc, I can draw only one conclusion.)

The saddest part is that they took one of the best stories in the bible, one where a strong woman character rises to save the entire Jewish race, and they reduced it to a maudlin love story best left for harlequin romances. It is a somewhat short story in the bible, so a film would have to add some elements but this effort goes to ridiculous lengths.

A better telling would be to approach some of the epics of decades ago, for example "the Ten Commandments". There, while many elements were added to make the epic length, the main story remains the heroic effort of Moses to bring the Jews out of Egypt.

The story is one of triumph of a people under domination. There is little about love in the story itself and I found the . The movie creates two love settings, or rather some kind of love triangle, that has no place in a telling of the story of Esther.

There is no character Jesse in the bible story. Haddasah does not have a boyfriend or love interest, and more importantly there is no plan for her to travel to Jerusalem. There is no expressed love between Haddasah/Esther and the King. In the story, the King chooses her for queen simply because "she pleased him". What that means is undetermined.

The rest of the story relates to how after a bit of low level intrigue, Esther is put in a position to be able to save the Jews. Unfortunately, again, here the movie goes to great lengths to create a storyline to put Esther in that position, but it relies on inserted and improbable events, when the bible story provides enough without the help of any average-skilled movie script writers.

That is, the movie is permeated with talk of war, with Greece no less, and that Greece's hated "democracy" and its concept of "all people being created equal" is a reason for killing the Jews since they are "Greece lovers". Holy Frijole, how timely! Boy, isn't it amazing how history repeats itself? The movie writers spend the entire movie alternating between invented love stories or invented references to war and hatred of foreigners. Not a bit of it is in the bible story. Bah, I could go on, but I am afraid I am going to simply sound redundant.

The acting, costumes, and camera work are very good. Sorry they got such short shrift in my review, but unfortunately the way the story was completely ruined in favor of some short-sighted effort to make pablum with broad appeal, it was hard to give credit where it was due.

Disappointed in One Night With The King

[roxie-20 · 6/10 · 20 October 2006]

Although the movie was entertaining, I was disappointed that so many of the true events were changed. The story of Queen Esther is exciting enough without the changes. The changes made were unnecessary.

I took my girls club to see the movie because we were working on our Esther Badge. After teaching them the true Bible version, I had to go over the false events from the movie with them.

This is one movie I will not buy when it comes out on DVD. Bible stories that do not stick to the true events I don't want. They confuse the younger children who mix up the real details with the ones the fictional movies throw in.

Good but not Great

[eofa1204 · 6/10 · 14 October 2006]

Having seen One Night, tonight, I can say that while it has many things going for it:gorgeous cinematography, lavish set and costume design and a troop of excellent actors where it falls flat is in the story department. The screenplay needed work before it was filmed as the relationship between Esther and Xerxes was incredibly jerky at times and the narration distracting at times. It also took some liberties not only with the Book of Esther itself but also with the historical record on Xerxes I reasons for war with the Greek city states. Acting throughout the film was in general very good with the standouts being John Rhys-Davies and Tommy "Tiny" Lister, though they woefully underused Peter O'Toole. The religious aspects which were injected into story(originally there being no mention of God at all in the Book of Esther)are in general handled evenhandedly with dignity and restraint highlighting the fact that this is story of courage, dignity and faith. All in all a step in the right direction for Christian films. **1/2 out of ****

Too much Harlequin to little history

[pmmlis · 4/10 · 6 November 2006]

I went to see this film in hopes that it might be worth seeing. It was to the extent that it had a few good actors and ornate costumes. The problem was that there was so much focus on making it a romance. There is way to much of "Xerxes" bare (or scantily covered chest) and much too little of dramatic story, which is the main strength of the story of Haddasah (Esther). Most of the acting was mediocre and some big name stars got very little to work with. Portraying Greeks and the Jewish people of the time as "prodemocracy" is very much of a stretch. The story was muddled as was much of the history. There was very thin plotting and so many characters were introduced that one would have a hard time keeping track of them, or what purpose they served to the story.

This was a very decent film and enjoyable

[rusoviet · 6/10 · 29 October 2014]

some commentators reviews led me to expect a real mess – hardly so. I share many viewers of what has transpired for 'faith based' entertainment – shoddy acting and writing. Usually very heavy handed with an altar call – not here. The script could have used a little tightening and it was a shame that O'Toole was barely in the movie but the rest of the cast gave a good performance led by John Rhys-Davies – in some scenes he reminded me of Sean Connery. There is some toying with the scripture but the essence of the film is pretty faithful to scripture.

Worth a view and a good tool for presenting scripture.

An exceptionally bad movie: Like a bad film school project!

[gross-12 · 1/10 · 31 December 2006]

I saw this when it was aired on TBN, and I'm glad I did not waste my money on a ticket. This is a 'B' movie trying to be more, but failing miserably. Maybe it was better in the theater, but I sincerely doubt it.

Although this movie had promise, it appears that the filmmakers did not have sufficient grasp of the mechanics of film-making to produce an acceptable result. The dialog is stodgy and excessively verbose, and is not uniform. The acting is weak, and the characters were not well cast, especially the two lead roles of Esther and Xerxes. This is Esther remade as a harlequin romance, except there is no chemistry between Tiffany Dupont, who seems like an adolescent rather than a woman of presence, and Luke Goss, who seems especially unfit for the role of a Persian king. I could not believe in their romance. The score is nice, but mixed too loudly and therefore is distracting. John Noble almost saved the film, but was not given enough screen time. Although pretty, Tiffany Dupont lacks the confidence to win a beauty contest.

The pace of the scenes alternates from a spastic and confused flurry of flashbacks in the beginning to grandiose and overdone and pretentious pomp that was not true to history. There are many unresolved dramatic subplots that do not enhance the storyline. In fact the main casualty of all this excess is the plot, which bears no resemblance to the biblical book of Esther. Frankly, it was hard for me to determine what the filmmakers were trying to accomplish. Of what benefit was the portrayal of Haman as trying to choke Queen Esther, when the bible tells the opposite story? I have not read the Tommy Tinney book, but this movie gave me no desire to explore it further. The idea that Xerxes has to physically stop a sword from hitting Esther is preposterous in light of the biblical account. It could never have happened.

As a bible scholar I do not appreciate the departures from the plot from the bible story. Even worse is the propagandistic implication that the Greeks and the Jews were aligned in their love of democracy, which has nothing to do with the historical events. The dramatic scenes did not work, and the narration was excessive and detracted from the opportunity to tell the story. Cutaways were often poorly done and did not match the geometry of the scene. In fact, the picture has a remarkably flat or two-dimensional appearance for a picture that was shot on location in India. I don't think there was any clear concept of the space that the filmmakers were trying to portray.

Frankly, I'm both disappointed and dismayed by the hype surrounding this movie that did not correspond with the truth about the movie. Are we American Christians so shallow that we desire neither a movie that is true to the bible nor true to history? It might have been excusable if the drama worked, or if the cinematography was believable. But the cameo by Peter O'Toole seems to have been included only to enable the filmmakers to misrepresent the film by using his name in such a way as to imply that he had a lead role, which left a bad taste in my mouth. As a high school or a college film school project this would have been OK, but it did not measure up to the standards of Cecil B. DeMille, despite the promotional statements to that effect. This film was a resounding disappointment.

What a satisfying movie

[lukewolf4 · 9/10 · 13 October 2006]

At first I thought it was going to be a disaster. I was not impressed with Tiffany Dupont early on. She was more of a 21st century character than a woman of 2500 years ago. She seemed silly and frivolous, and her dialog was ludicrous -- but only in the first 10 minutes or so. She definitely matured and grew gracefully into the role of Queen Esther as the movie progressed -- and fortunately her dialog improved as well.

I was very drawn into scenes that featured other actors from the beginning however. Each scene with Luke Goss was mesmerizing. He is a very charismatic actor and was perfectly cast as King Xerxes. I confess that I fell in love with this character and this actor. Another favorite was Tommy "Tiny" Lister, who stole scene after scene. There were some very funny, touching, and powerful scenes built around this mighty actor. What a wonderful performance. My next personal favorite was James Callis. He probably turned in the most stunning performance of all, and I truly think he deserves a best supporting Oscar for this captivating role. That won't happen of course. No way that secular Hollywood will endorse this movie or praise this movie in any way -- even though it's deserved. So far, at least 75% of the reviews that I've read from the "professional" critics dish this movie. I think their reviews are being filtered though their bias and intolerance.

I'm a Christian, and I'm not a supporter or fan of Gen8x or TBN -- but they finally got a movie right. Really right. And I hope it's a huge success for them.

I loved this movie. It has everything...a beautiful love story, humor, intrigue, great acting, noble characters, dastardly villains. Plus the locale, costumes, and music are magnificent. I'll go see it again...and again. I'm also going to buy the DVD as soon as it's released. I'll be thinking about this movie for some time to come. Doralynn

A vote for the King...

[ml_cann · 11 October 2006]

What a great movie .... well done, good acting, and it has a message for the young and older people. A refreshing turn to see a film that has meaning and life. Not only for those in the olden days, as well as for all of us today...Thank you to those who made this film come to life!!! With the violence and bad language in todays movies this film is a cut above those films that leave a bad taste in your mouth. It is great to see well known actors who are apart of this movie. Seasoned and well known for their excellence. The costumes where also beautiful and the scenery was also very well done. I hope many will go and see this special film and enjoy it as much as we did. Families can see it together.

finally! quality entertainment!

[windypoplar · 7/10 · 3 July 2007]

As far as i know they have only been two previous attempts to bring the biblical story of Esther to the screen. "Ester and the King" with Joan Collins (!) and the TNT bible film "Esther" with F. Murray Abraham. This one is by far the best I've seen. It manages to be historical without seeming dull, faithful, without being blasphemous and sensual and moving,without being lascivious or silly.

Big time credit to the director, Michael Sajbel, he does a fabulous job. His shot are epic and evocative and he really gets his story across. Tiffany DuPont is a complete unknown to me, but after a while, I fully accepted her as Hadassah, she is quite appealing. Luke Goss is powerful and believable as Xerxes. John Rhys-Davies does the best work in the film as Mordecai, He is one underrated actor.

The look of the film is really beautiful, the score is excellent and whether or not your familiar with Ester's story, you'll enjoy this. gives some motivation for Haman's actions and I thought that worked really well. A special mention for "Tiny" Lister too, who play Hegai, he steals every scene he's in.

All in all this was a really good picture. I especially loved the use of the necklace that Hadassah wears, I won't reveal its importance here, but it was a wonderful plot device. Highly recommended.

Great story ruined by poor screenplay and some bad casting choices

[marianette-1 · 1/10 · 3 November 2006]

The story of Esther has great potential, but this film limps along with mediocre acting (especially from Luke Goss as Xerxes) and a sub-par screenplay. Most actors employ bad British dialects. The dialogue can't decide if it's from the King James Bible (using the word "thou") or modern America (using the word "okay.") I know the story well, and I was often confused by pointless scenes about a Greek battle subplot. I know the Greek war is historical, but it isn't in Scripture and it doesn't serve the story. I didn't buy the love story.

On a positive note, John Rhys-Davies, Omar Sharif, and Peter O'Toole (on screen for about five seconds) are very good. Lovely Tiffany Dupont displays charm and fun as Esther, although the performance is uneven.

I'm a Christian, and I'm disappointed in most films that deal with faith. Let's hope "The Nativity" is better.

Orphan girl grows up in a land of enemies, finds her faith and saves her people

[juda-2 · 9/10 · 28 September 2006]

I have seen the film and it delivers as much as I had hoped. The scenery is authentic ancient Persia, filmed in India and made with a fantastic cast of actors.

Newcomer Tiffany Dupont is so believable, and James Callis' Haman is easy to hate. John Ryhs-Davies brings chills in his portrayal of Mordechai, and it is nice to see O'Toole and Shariff in the same film again - and in the dessert no less.

See the film, take your kids, enjoy it. It's the story of Purim, and while we all know the outcome, it is powerful to watch.

It opens in theaters on October 13.

Not Bad but Uninspired

[MovieGuyFunTime · 6/10 · 10 June 2021]

What seems like what should be a great story is dragged down by one-dimensional characters, pithy dialog and the shameful under-use (and deceptive top-billing) of cinematic greats, Peter O' Toole and Omar Sharif.

Just re-watch The Ten Commandments or Ben Hur if you want a great 'Biblical era' film.

Embarrassingly bad movie

[DebraDownSth · 1/10 · 18 February 2007]

The only good thing about this movie was Esther's clothes. While she is lovely and even James Callis (Haman)appears more attractive here than in his other roles, look for screen caps and save your time. I rented this movie because I love Omar Sharif, Peter O'Toole,and John Rhys-Davies so expected a DECENT movie.

Instead it was utterly awful, terrible lines, wooden and over acting abounded. The simplest thing... prismatic projections from her necklace... which could have simply been done realistically, was so stupid we actually laughed every time it was shown. Without adequate lighting it spread images all over the house. Later it not only spread a multitude of images but spun. Silliest of all, when they were kissing in the tent and it no longer even being HELD in the light, it still decorated the entire tent.

It is not worth the 2 hours of your life you will spend on it. In fact, not worth the 2 minutes you spend putting it in your DVD player.

Wonderful movie

[missynbobo · 16 October 2006]

I saw this movie earlier today. I have to say that I loved it. I think it was beautifully done. The costumes were beautiful. The actors well chosen and the scenery was sensational. The movie had me sitting on the edge of my seat. It was very suspenseful. It didn't hurt that Omar Sharif, Peter O'Toole, John Noble and John Rhys-Davies were in the movie. Some of my favorite actors. The chemistry between Tiffani Dupont (Esther) and Luke Goss (King Xerxes) was so believable. It was hard not to fall for Luke Goss. He was superb as King Xerxes. James Callis was very easy to dislike as Hamen. He was amazing at playing the villain. This movie was very clean and one most families could watch together which is very rare in this day and age. I highly recommend this movie whether you are a Christian or not. I think all Christians should show their support for movies like this one. It was awesome to see one of my favorite chapters of the Bible come to life on the big screen.

It was a good movie, but to tell you the truth...

[sarah-imsweet · 7/10 · 15 October 2006]

It was a good movie, but to tell the truth...I was expecting more to the movie, as a person who read the story.I know that they had a low budget and managed well on how to direct the movie, but there were parts in the story that were poorly made and parts of the story were 'twisted' and cut off. I was rather disappointed. But I'm admired by the great sceneries. It was excellent.My advice is to watch the movie and give your comment.

p.s.For those who haven't read the story, you'll get pretty lost. Try to watch again or/and read the story in the Bible to understand it.It really is a beautiful story.

should have been better

[littlekim-1 · 4/10 · 9 November 2006]

The sad thing about this movie is that the cast is SO great that you expect to have a great movie. But the plot is sketchy and disjointed, as are the transitions between scenes. The biggest problem as I see it is that with such a LARGE cast it does not really become clear until the movie is half over who is who. Jonothan Rhys-Davies is awesome as always, and there was not nearly enough Peter O'Toole for this fan. John Noble did a great job, and James Callis was terrific, wicked and relentless. Despite this, the movie had plot weaknesses, was confusing, pacing was too slow at times, the language was often flowery, and Luke Goss as Xerxes was just awful, his king dithering and weak. See it on cable, not really worth the money of a ticket. What a pity.

It's fascinating to see the Bible come to life

[fullaware · 7/10 · 15 October 2006]

Years ago I read the whole Bible through; and when I finished the Old Testament book of Esther I said, 'That should be a movie'. Well 6 years later I want my royalties. It is fascinating to see Bible characters come to life. I forget that people didn't really speak, "Verily, thus and saith", but had real conversations, like you and I, complete with silliness, emotion and sarcasm.

Take the time to read the 10 chapters of the book of Esther before seeing this picture! If you don't own a Bible then find one on-line and read it first (biblegateway.com); because it will make what you see come that much more to life.

I loved the part where Haman was forced to parade Mordecai, his mortal enemy, through the streets. I never picked up on the love story prior to seeing this in film form though. That's the magical part of the Bible and it's stories - it's as simple as the dumbest person, and as complex as the smartest genius simultaneously.

This picture is very good; I think it does wonderful justice to both the Jewish people and Christian believers alike. Among the Faithful or not; check it out regardless.

The tale had potential, but it was not realized.

[randall2 · 3/10 · 23 November 2006]

This story had all the elements that should make a movie attractive... action, intrigue, romance, a little suspense... but it was wasted on this film. The production was uneven, hopping from one seemingly unrelated scene to another, many of them making our leading lady appear at best adolescent and at worst delusional. The music was not well chosen for the action, and the directing was obvious (thunder crashes as Esther delivers what was supposed to be a dramatic line). The acting was mostly disappointing, with fine performances by John Rhys-Davies, Omar Sharif and a few others, but pretty amateur efforts from the rest of the cast. In all, the only thing I really enjoyed were the period costumes.

Amazing movie with current affairs

[revived3515 · 10/10 · 7 October 2006]

This movie is amazing for so many reasons, the cast, the scenery, the story-line and that it parallels what we see happening in the world today. The historical truth about an ancient Persian queen is exactly the same battle happening in Israel today. It's not often that you see a movie that can relate directly with current world affairs and still maintain truth and purity. This movie achieves all this and more. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys history, wholesome entertainment, a great love story or compulsive movie goers. What's great about this movie is that it can appeal to a wide variety of age groups and provides a much needed heroine/role model for young people today. This movie will inspire you and leave you cheering at the end! A must see!!

On the verge of being a classic

[missmissa · 6/10 · 16 October 2006]

On the whole, this was an excellent film. It features great performances, gorgeous costumes, and lovely visuals. And I strongly support the liberties they took with the story, primarily making Xerxes younger, and, in effect, producing an actual love story. They could have shortened a few scenes, mostly between Xerxes and his council, and trimmed down the subplots, namely Admantha's plotting, considerably.

One of the larger problems is the score. The cues sometimes don't match the mood of the scene, or the music just sounds like cheesy bible-movie music. They should have spent a little more money on someone who's career highlights go beyond scoring the Mighty Ducks movies.

The biggest problem, by far, is the climax. They build up to this one moment and then, nothing happens. I won't say anything more for fear of spoiling the film, but know that while the end is certainly interesting, it could have been exciting as well, had it ended in the previous scene.

A Night Of Disappointment

[radonrec-1 · 1/10 · 24 October 2006]

When I saw that somebody made a film about the story of Hesther I was excited. Great some filmmaker has the nerve to make a Biblical story. The Bible is a book I love. Gods word or not Gods word it contains the History of the Jewish People and the Fantastic story of Jesus and his followers. The Bible is a book of deep spiritual conviction. That spiritual conviction comes about because of disaster, horror, lust, Betrayal and of course redemption and victory. It is about Sex and death and Love and Life. When they made One night with the King the film makers Lost something in the epic tale of this powerful woman. Part of the problem is that I felt I was in an Indian Palace and Not a Persian one. Secondly the Diolouge was bad and sanitized and preachy. I know how to think and feel and I don't want to be preached at by a character in a movie. A modern American woman who does not look at all Jewish or Persian speaking with a modern accent using King James English. Too Bad the film makers could have reached a a huge audience if they had realized it cost just as much to make a great film as it does to make a bad one.

Great movie for young and old alike.

[chiprohlke · 10/10 · 12 October 2006]

Great scenery and costumes in an all time classic story of a(Persian/Iranian) tyrant wanting to kill all the Jews (!) and a courageous woman who stands in the gap to save them. Highly recommend taking the wife and kids. First of hopefully many family friendly films by Gener8xion which is run by the son of TBN founders Paul & Jan Crouch. with actors like Peter O'Toole & Omar Shariff you can't really go wrong and add to that the incredible location in India and a great plot and this movie might actually compete with such greats as Braveheart, Troy, Alexander and other historical dramas. Time will tell...

Good Effort...but could have been great!

[daz-56 · 6/10 · 15 October 2006]

To paraphrase a recent quote..."Dear Lord, why must your most ardent followers unleash such poor (non-great) movies in your name? As one who longs to see biblical or Christian movies released that will make the world sit up and take notice...like Mel's Passion of the Christ!

I know they have a low budget, and I applaud their efforts..it was a very good effort...with mixed results.

First the good: (in no order) 1. Most the main characters were well cast and solid. 2. Some good sets and scenery. 3. Some good sweeping external camera shots going for a Lord of the Rings look. 4. Some shining moments scatted here and there, some very well done. 5. The story...some additions and liberties taken work, some didn't.

The NOT so good: what kept it FROM being great! 1. Editing – poorly done, even amateurish at times, especially during the 1st 1/4 of the movie...jumping all over the place. Probably confusing for those who don't know the story of Esther. Was somewhat for me, and I did know the story! 2. Directing & Cinematography - some poor choices of camera shots. 3. Acting and accents inconsistent and varied. 4. Lighting – another mixed bag, sometimes very good, sometimes very poor.

Obviously very good/great Editing, Directing, Cinematography, Lighting, and Acting are critical elements needed to help make a movie truly GREAT! Sometimes they hit, but more often then not they missed...which was very disappointing for me.

Again it was a great effort, but I can only imagine what it could have been...GREAT and world impacting...like the classic Ten Commandments and Ben Hur were in their day!

6/10

Nice looking, but not especially well done

[omphalos02 · 4/10 · 15 October 2006]

This film does have a wonderful story to tell, and the location shots (it was filmed in India to imitate ancient Persia) are beautiful. That's the good news. The bad news is that the actual script for the story is weak and much of the dialog is stilted. Some of the acting is truly sub-par, although the girl who plays Hadassa/Esther really makes the most of some very bad situations script-wise. I felt that the direction was heavy handed in much of the film, but some gorgeous recreations and CG backdrops almost make up for this. Also,the fact that Peter O'Toole is advertised as a "star" of this film is very misleading. He appears in maybe five minutes of footage at the beginning, and nothing more. Overall, I thought the film had good intentions, but not enough time and effort put into a convincing script.