David, rey de Israel

If you ignore the context when it was made, the critics are easy to come. It is slice of a long serie of Italian and American movies inspired by mzthology and - or by Bible episodes. And, without be great, it is a decent film, result of admirable effort to reflect the essence of the conflict between Saul and David, giving , in not bad manner, convincing reflection of psychological tension. Maybe, Gianni Garko was not the best David , but it is not comfortable to be partner of the powerful Norman Wooland , very preocuped for give to his Saul the exact nuances defining him in well way.

Marcello Baldi, among whose better known works of historical fiction are "Mole Men against the Son of Hercules" and "Goliath and the Dragon", does a decent job directing this epic biblical tale of the early history of the Kingdom of Israel. In one of the first scenes, Saul (Norman Wooland) and Samuel (Carlos Casaravilla) set the tone of the film as Samuel tells Saul that he has already lost Israel through his disobedience to Jehovah and that a new king is already on the rise. Wooland and Casaravilla are the class of the acting talent here, and throughout most of the film, Wooland is forced to carry the dialog.

In that first scene, the seeds of Saul's paranoia and betrayal begin to sprout and Samuel, after a meaningful pause, says "you are already beginning to torment yourself." This really sets the tone of the entire story. The film chronicles the decline of Saul and the rise of David and Israel.

As with most biblical epics, this film would be a bit hard to watch for anybody who does not already appreciate the story. While the story is an intriguing and powerful one, the film relies fairly heavily on its audience's faith and knowledge and does not go out of its way to entertain.

A lot of the acting is mediocre - especially Gianni Garko's David - unfortunate because so many of his scenes are shared with the often manic performance of Wooland. Anthony Mayans and Luz Marques are fairly good as Jonathan and Abigail.

Although nicely shot, edited and directed, this version of Saul and David is just a little too scholastic and slow for me. Although I believe many of the stories of the old testament to be worth paying attention to, I find a straightforward presentation of these stories difficult to watch. On the other hand, Wooland's rather different and somewhat disturbing take on Saul might make this film worth watching for some.

I arrived at this film somewhere in the first reel. I was impressed with the theatrical accomplishments. But as the scene depicting the confrontation between David and Goliath, and particularly the accolades heaped upon David because of his victory, I could not help but notice that David (the hero) was blond and blue-eyed, while all of his countrymen were dark-haired and brown-eyed. Why would David be Aryan? I can only assume that the filmmakers were sending a message of anti-Semitism. The broadcast I watched did not acknowledge the source of this film. How offensive that the Trinity Broadcasting Network gives this film their "blessing".

This Italian produced film about the young life of David and his relation with King Saul is not precise to the Old Testament, but nevertheless shows very movingly how King Saul's reign and life got tarnished by his own deviance and popularity growing on David's side. Norman Wooland's performance of Saul seems pitiful comparing to the Bible account and future performances by Anthony Quayle and Edward Woodward. It was nice to see that the actors used Jehovah's name through out the picture and also Antonio Mayans in a beautiful performance as Jonathan. He seemed to be good for biblical films especially after portraying St. John in King of Kings two years earlier. Gianni Garko didn't do so bad as David since the Bible does say that David was red haired, comparing with Richard Gere,Keith Michell and Jeff Chandler's portrayal.

Much of the same comments I made in connection with Joseph AND HIS BRETHREN (1960; see above) apply here as well; in fact this is a Biblical peplum also found on the same 3-Disc 10 film collection I rented in time for Good Friday. Luckily, this is slightly superior in that one gets to see re-enacted events with which one is not much familiar (unless he is a staunch Bible reader or theologian). In fact, although the film opens with the perennial David and Goliath confrontation (which while swift is also remarkably bloody), it mostly concerns itself with the embittered and ever worsening relationship between renounced Israelite sovereign Saul and his champion warrior David who regularly makes mincemeat of legions of Philistines.

Saul is portrayed as a pitiful weakling by Norman Wooland (a surprising but not ineffective bit of casting) while blond-haired Gianni Garko is suitably imposing as the psalmist-harpist-warrior David of Bethlehem. As the story goes here, Saul’s persecution of David is so long drawn-out that the latter almost joins the Philistine ranks against his own people! While the handling of the material is insufficiently inspired to sustain one’s interest for two hours, as I said the main thrust of the narrative is fresh enough to distinguish itself from other cinematic versions of the Biblical tale I am familiar with: David AND BATHSHEBA (1951; with Gregory Peck as David), David AND GOLIATH (1960; another Italian costumer with Orson Welles as Saul) and KING David (1985; with Edward Woodward and Richard Gere as, respectively, Saul and David).