3 of 3

3. A single act of disobedience of Saul's part caused the threat to the Jewish people, and another act of disobedience on Esther's part saved them. What's the difference between these two acts? What does it reveal about true authority
4. Esther is described as one of the Bible's more "secular" books with little religious value because it barely makes any reference to God. Do you agree with this? Is God absent from the story of Esther? What does it say about God's role in our culture today—our art, our circumstances, our daily living?

One Night with the King is appropriately rated PG for violence, some sensuality, and thematic elements. We see the bloody aftermath of a battle from a distance, and a character is stabbed off-screen. The death of Esther's parents in a flashback is so abstract, some might wonder what's going on. Esther and Xerxes kiss on their wedding night—romantic, but chaste. The thematic elements probably refer to talk of assassination, execution, and genocide. None of the content is graphic by any means, but kids are likely to be bored by this talky and complex history lesson.

Photos © Copyright Gener8xion Entertainment/Fox Faith

© Russ Breimeier 2006, subject to licensing agreement with Christianity Today International. All rights reserved. Click for reprint information.

One Night With the King brings the story of Esther to life on a scale that will remind viewers of big screen biblical classics like The Ten Commandments. But does director Michael O. Sajbel's film do justice to this beloved Old Testament story?

Is Stephan Blinn's screenplay faithful to Scripture—or to the Tommy Tenney novel of the same title, which varies from the Bible story on some significant points?

Is Tiffany Dupont up to the challenge of portraying this complex character?

Christian film critics are coming to different conclusions.

The story of Esther could certainly be made into a great film someday, says Steven D. Greydanus (Decent Films). "One Night with the King is not that film. In a number of ways, it's not even that story."

Greydanus says the film has "a distinctly made-for-TV vibe," and while he's impressed with some of the casting, that's about all. He says the script is "home-video hackneyed rather than silver-screen sophisticated," and compares the romantic scenes between Xerxes and Esther to "a smitten schoolboy mooning over the head cheerleader."

Finally, he notes that, while the novel "takes significant liberties with the biblical story," the film departs from the Bible story even further.

Cliff Vaughn (Ethics Daily) says, "Three factors make One Night unsatisfying: the loosey-goosey script, some spotty acting and an ill-conceived musical score."

Matt Page (BibleFilms blog) observes, "It's a far better effort than anyone who watched [the filmmakers'] previous effort (The Omega Code) would have expected. This is one of the most visually impressive epics in years. … Ultimately though, even the most impressive visuals in the world cannot compensate for poor acting. … Sadly, the acting side of things is let down, badly, by poor performances by Luke Goss and Tommy 'Tiny' Lister as Xerxes and Hagai respectively." He also faults the script, and concludes that the movie is "a mixed affair."

Steven Isaac (Plugged In) seems as impressed with what the movie doesn't do than what it does. He says it "soars far more often than it stumbles. While actors' accents are all over the map and the story feels too dense to follow in spots, the action and intrigue is undeniably exciting and compelling—without ever resorting to gratuitous gore, violence, foul language or sexual situations."

"One Night With the King is worth seeing just for the palace, effects, music score, and acting," says Lisa Rice (Crosswalk), "but the true takeaway is the story."

But she could have done without so much attention on the plight of the young eunuchs, whose involvement in the story "competes with the inspirational lessons. … "

And Elliott Ryan (CBN) says, "While the film does not follow the biblical narrative completely faithfully, the film does a great job of communicating the heart and message of the historical account."

Mainstream critics aren't very impressed. Josh Bell (Las Vegas Weekly) asks, "Dear Lord, why must Your most ardent followers unleash such bad movies in Your name? Surely, as our Creator, You wish for us to have better entertainment than the cut-rate fare that passes for faith-based film?" But Joe Leydon (Variety) says it's "a surprisingly satisfying attempt to revive the Old Hollywood tradition of lavishly appointed Biblical epics aimed at mainstream audiences."

from Film Forum, 11/30/06
Sister Rose Pacatte F.S.P. (Eye on Entertainment) calls it "overly costumed, unevenly acted and ideologically flawed."

first page |  3 of 3