David e Golias

I was hoping this would not be so disjointed and out of wack from the actual biblical narrative, which is far superior. The best parts of the actual story are missing entirely.

Spaghetti biblical study elevated somewhat in status by the appearance of Orson Welles playing King Saul. Ivo Payer is David, the man who would be king of the Israelites, but who must first defeat Asrod, King of the Philistines (Meniconi) who's managed to lure the hermit behemoth Goliath (Kronos) as his secret weapon. Beginning with David's journey to Jerusalem, where he quickly establishes himself as a shepherd (or radical, depending on your lean), freeing the slaves and showing compassion for the wicked, he is taken in by the Prophets and groomed as the next King. His inevitable battle to the death with Goliath is a disappointingly brief action sequence, with Goliath shown in the distance to distort the height difference which is obviously far less than desirable. The bloody battle that follows is everything a sword and sandal movie promises to be, again, albeit too brief.

Welles is essentially a peripheral character although unsurprisingly, his performance towers above those around him; Massimo Serato as ally turned conspirator Abner does a reasonable job and although not as buff as a Steve Reeves or Brad Harris, Ivo Payer isn't as wooden as one might expect of films of this ilk. Meniconi too isn't bad as the evil Asrod, although why he would bet the house on a 6 foot maybe 5 inch Neanderthal who can military press an ancient stone tablet beggars belief. But then it did happen according to the Old Testament. Goliath was probably much bigger than depicted here – cinematography tricks fail to enlarge Kronos to the necessary proportions.

Colourful sets, appropriate score and functional dialogue (dubbed) permits some standard of entertainment and unlike most biblical epics, "David & Goliath" is compact at about an hour and a half. If you're home alone over Easter or Christmas, don't have high expectations and could cop a low-key sermon (scantily clad dancing girls an unexpected bonus), "David & Goliath" might keep you mildly entertained.

This Italian made sand and sandal epic would probably be long forgotten were it not for the presence of Orson Welles as King Saul. Certainly the man who played David in David and Goliath, Ivo Payer, certainly did not enter the ranks of screen immortals.

David and Goliath took as many liberties with scripture as any good Cecil B. DeMille film, but without DeMille's sense of grandeur and spectacle. For instance in this film as a result of the battle where David defeats Goliath and the Philistines are routed, the Ark of the Covenant which the Philistines had captured is returned. Actually those are separate incidents that are not connected at all.

Another thing is that at least I've always interpreted David to be a rather callow youth when he was doing his shepherd thing before God sent Samuel looking for him. And he's still a callow youth when he's in battle with Goliath. The old Negro spiritual is called Little David Play On Your Harp, not without reason.

Ivo Payer is a rather muscular young man looking like he stepped from of those Italian muscle man epics so popular at the time. Of course the sight of all that bare chested beefcake sent many hearts fluttering in the audience. In that sense David and Goliath is right in the DeMille tradition.

The only reason this film is remembered if at all today is because of Orson Welles. Welles at the time was picking up work here and there to finance his own projects. Sometimes it would be something as good as Compulsion the year before, more often it was something like David and Goliath.

Still Welles is a consummate professional and he invests Saul with an air of tragedy about him. At the point we meet Saul, God has already decided he's not the man for the job as King of Israel. But Saul is not about to accept that verdict. If he can't beat David head on, he'll try and co-op David by bringing him into his household and matching him up with his daughter.

And of course there's Saul's son Jonathan. He's there, but none of the business about a gay relationship between David and Jonathan is in this film. Jonathan knows full well that his father has lost favor with the Lord and he's aware of his father's character weaknesses. He too, befriends David more out of a sense of survival than anything else.

English actor Hilton Edwards plays Samuel the Prophet and he comes across as a poor man's version of Finlay Currie. He's the only other English speaking player in the cast besides Orson Welles.

David and Goliath will not pass muster with either biblical scholars or with lovers of big screen spectacle. Still fans of Orson Welles will want to see this film to see how much a great talent can lift even a piece of mediocrity to a level of some respectability.

From a free adoptions of several biblical sources, Umberto Scarpelli, gives forms to this biblical story, which is then directed by Ferdinando Baldi. Among all the several versions this is my favorite. It relates a time in ancient times when the first king of the Isreal, Saul ( Orson Welles) having been anointed by the prophet Samuel (Hilton Edwards) is seen now in the last stage of his rule and once again Summuel has advised Saul that a new king has been chosen. The choice is a son of Jesse called David (Ivo Payer). Saul's army has been challenged by the Phillistines and their new champion called Goliath. played by Kronos. The story of David and Saul is easily told, but in this movie version the writers have added, love, inner family conflict, ambition, and royal jealousy. As such the film begins to drag towards it's finally. Despite the dueling arms, little is seen which can add to the over-all movie. Still it's color is great, so too the panorama, all in all it's a great film for the 60's. Recommended to those who have time to watch a long drawn out biblical story. ****

It is very bizarre to be too critic about this film. It is one of , maybe, too many films inspired by ancient history and mythology , cheesy in deep sense, using a simple and not bad recipe, responding to the taste of public of "50-"60 s. Orson Welles as a king Saul reduced at his presence, in fact. A seductive Ivo Payer, maybe too old to be a reasonable David and, obvious, not the most convincing but a acceptable for a love story. Edward Hilton in a role of Samuel reflecting the wisedome of the word of God . And, dance or Massio Srato as gardener of bad seeds of angry for Saul. Short, a film reflecting a trend, naive, no doubts but sweet.