Watch King David For Free

Redundant and unnecessary.

Nice effects though.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

David is hands-down my favorite Biblical character (aside from JC himself, of Course). I never tire of reading and studying the events of his life -- the trials & perseverances, the agonies & ecstasies, the successes and failures (man, that sounds hokey, huh?).Well, 1985's "King David," starring Richard Gere in the titular role, essentially covers IT ALL. That's right, you'll see all the following events covered in the picture:-- Samuel's choosing of David as successor to King Saul -- Israel's battles with the Philistines -- The challenge of the hulk Goliath and David's victory with a sling shot -- David playing his harp to soothe Saul's torment -- Saul's increasing jealousy and hatred of David -- David & Jonathan's brotherly love -- David's wandering in the wilderness with his men, fleeing Saul -- David's stealing Saul's spear while he sleeps in a cave, sparing him -- Saul's suicide -- David dancing in his skivvies when the Ark is brought into Jerusalem -- Michal's love and, later, hatred of David (as he dances before the LORD) -- David secretly ogling hottie Bathsheba bathing from his palace roof and the ensuing adultery -- David's murder of Uriah (Bathsheba's husband) and Nathan's rebuke -- Amnon's rape of his half-sister Tamar -- Absalom's justified slaying of half-brother Amnon -- Absalom's stealing of the Israelite's hearts -- Absalom's death and David's grievingWHAT WORKS:-- The film is very worthwhile if you desire to see these numerous events depicted before your very eyes. -- The cast, sets, costumes, locations and filmmaking are all of the highest order for 1985. -- Edward Woodward is excellent as the jealous and bitter King Saul, even though he lacks Saul's heighth (as he was a whole head taller than any other Israelite). -- Most aspects of the David/Goliath challenge are great; for instance, the troops shown on two separate hills. -- Alice Krige is truly beautiful as Bathsheba. Along the same lines, the woman who plays Michal is very good and possesses a very unique beauty.WHAT DOESN'T WORK:-- Despite the numerous events covered in David's life, the film only runs 1 hour and 51 minutes before the closing credits. Let's face it, there's at least 3 hours of material here. Condensing it down to less than 2 hours prevents the viewer from being captivated by the myriad characters and events. The viewer is left struggling to connect with the people and their stories. -- Despite the numerous events flying by, the film has a bit of a lazy vibe. There's very little spectacle like "The Ten Commandments" or "Ben-Hur." -- David was a very passionate man -- a "man after God's own heart." Gere is fine for this role (the Bible explicitly states that David was a ruddy and handsome man) but he plays the character a bit overly righteous, pensive and noble, hence, David never fully comes alive to the viewer. Please notice I said "a bit" and "never FULLY comes alive." In other words, Gere is quite decent in the role. In fact, the failures may be the writers' fault. -- When the boy David takes on Goliath there's zero passion and righteous ferocity as is in the Biblical account (e.g. "Who is this uncircumcized Philistine who would defy the armies of the living God?!!"). Plus the film doesn't show the serious trash-talking that went back and forth between the two. The fight's just too low key.Although the gist of the story is accurate there are inaccuracies that some could nitpick, e.g. Goliath challenged David and the Israelites himself, he didn't speak through another man; David picked up stones before going out to fight the giant, not while fighting him; Absalom waited a long time before slaying Amnon, he didn't do it immediately; etc. Changes like these aren't that big of a deal and won't ruin your viewing experience unless you're completely [...] about it (sorry for my crudeness).One reviewer criticized the film for showing Bathsheba at fault for seducing David. Actually, they both share fault equally. Everyone in Jerusalem knew the king stayed home while the troops were out fighting, so Bathsheba was likely fully aware that the king could catch a real nice tantalizing glimpse of her while she was bathing. Besides, even though David was the king, she could have said 'no' when the proposition of adultery later presented itself. In other words, she was both into it and into David.FINAL ANALYSIS: I've seen "King David" 3 times now and enjoy it every time. It's a very worthwhile and well-done film account of David's life. Unfortunately the picture cuts off way more than it can chew in a mere 1 hour and 51 minutes, leaving the viewer detached from the characters and events, in particular those who know little about the biblical account.Don't listen to those who give this film an absurdly low rating. They're way off. It's good, it just lacks the oomph and detail to make it great.GRADE: B

"King David" is a entertaining Biblical Epic that stays pretty close to the source story of how a young Hebrew named David ascends to the throne as Israel's second King.I remember reading Rex Reed's review of the film and how much disdain he had for Richard Gere's performance. He said he looked like he was checking behind the camera to make sure no one stole his motorcycle. At the time I thought the raking over the coals was amusing and I had decided not to see the film. I'm sure many other readers of Rex Reed made the same decision as well.Well, on hindsight, Rex Reed and many other " movie reviewers" have done this movie a great disservice. I just saw this "King David" for the first time this year and I thought it was definitely one of the better Biblical Epics to come out of the Hollywood film industry.Fortunately with VHS and DVD, "King David" the movie, has the opportunity to find the audience it should have had twenty five years ago. This movie will find it's audience and as for the words of Rex Reed...

There has been widespread criticism of this film by Bruce Beresford, much has been said about its drawbacks and hardly any merits. I agree with most of them but I would like to concentrate on one very significant note that makes this movie a really distorted image of king David, undoubtedly, the most eminent king of Israel, a pearl of the Old Testament.SERIOUS SPOILER: Throughout the movie, the viewer gets an impression of David as someone who wants to see God face to face, someone who waits rather than trusts. It is the most fundamental mistake of this movie! What faith is the faith that requires seeing face to face? It's no longer faith but rationalism. David was a man of trust, the man of love to God, the man of penance primarily, yet, the man of great courage (the last aspect is not skipped in this movie but it is simplified, too). Beresford, in this movie, attempts to combine David's piety with his down to earth curiosity of God. In other words, it is no longer the biblical message that is the focus of the film but a "magical" search for God that requires to SEE. I laughed at the scene when Samuel (Denis Quilley) comes to Bethlehem to anoint the new king of Israel and holds two balls that are to shine when the right son of Jesse (Arthur Whybrow) appears before him. The director has skipped one of the key concepts of the Old Testament: the Bible ignores and even rejects any magic.Another drawback of the movie is the narrator. The words are not exactly from the Bible, they are only made to seem so. And sometimes, if they seem so, they are highly condensed, interpreted. It is most noticeable close before the end when the narrator says about the death of David and Bathsheba's first born son who was soon replaced by Solomon. It skips the most important aspect of David's sin: penance, so significant in this biblical moment. Terrible simplification!!! I also did not like the way that David - Goliath's fight is presented. Although it seems spectacular (crowds), the scene is barely accurate. The power of Goliath was his gigantic force rather than armor. It was a kind of "Phillistine Samson" rather than a short man whose only power are the sword and the shield. That really gives a wrong impression of this important event from David's life. The director forgot that David killed the giant in the name and with the Help of the Most High. Another simplification is the way Bathsheba (Alice Krige) is showed. There is no word in the Bible which says that she was persecuted by her husband. In this case, David would be her rescuer and God punished him for the right deed...? The way this plot is presented in the movie leaves much to reflect on what, in fact, Mr Beresford wanted to convey: David's seriously sinful deed or a controversial act for which God punishes people.However, it would be highly unjust to judge the whole movie as not worth attention. There are a few aspects that make it worth seeing. Firstly, most of the cast (with some exceptions) give fine performances. Richard Gere is quite accurate as David, Alice Krige is a beautiful Bathsheba, Edward Woodward perfectly presents Saul's fury combined with despair. And one more actor: Denis Quilley, who was known for a few biblical and historical epics, gives here a wonderful portrayal of the prophet Samuel. Really great! Secondly, the locations the movie was shot in are not identical with Jerusalem, but look very similar. It is, except for other places, the town of Matera (southern Italy) where almost twenty years later, Mel Gibson shot his PASSION. The landscape there gives an impression of authentic Jerusalem, especially in November. Thirdly, some moments of the movie are well made, for instance the death of David's son Absalom (Jean-Marc Barr) and the battle at Giboa. Finally, the music is very good. I liked the melody of the most famous psalm "The Lord is my Shepherd" - sublime piece that brings peace to the souls of 21 century-viewers as it did to the soul of the king Saul! To say it justly, "King David" does not have much to offer, it is, in no way, one of the top biblical epics, it distorts much from the life of the great king, but it may be entertaining as a movie. 5/10!

I admit I'm biased when it comes to Bible stories, especially really great Bible stories. So I was pretty skeptical when I picked up this movie, but I'd been wanting to see a good film version of the Life of David ever since I taught a class on I&II Samuel. I should have trusted my instincts and passed on this movie. The fact that they changed some details of the Biblical story isn't nearly as bad as the fact that they changed the entire theme of the story of David. In the movie, David has this obsession with wanting to see God face to face, and this plays itself in everything he does. He also has this theology based on emotions. Now this is a popular idea today (God deal with man through the heart and emotions only), but it just doesn't fit with David's story which is one of submission and trust. One of the problems with making a movie like this is that the story is much much to big to be told in a two hour film. I'd like to see a Lord of the Rings style telling of David's life. The narrator is horrible, and he sounds like he's reading scripture when he's not. The Goliath fight is aweful. Goliath doesn't even speak, but has his shield bearer (who doesn't bother bearing a shield) taunt the Israelites and David. David chunks about 6 rocks before he is actually able to kill the giant. Then he's really sad about it. He says to God in a weepy kind of voice "So be it" before cutting off Goliath's head. COME ON!!!! In the real story he says "You come against me with a sword and a spear and a javlain, but I come against you in the name of the Lord God of Hosts. This day I will cut off your head and give your flesh to the birds of the air nad the beasts of the field that the world may know that there is a God in Israel." I mean, who cuts that line out??? Another lousy thing was when David's first son by Bathsheba dies and the movie deals with it by a little narration scene. There's no fasting, no laying on his face for days, even the line "I will go to him, but he will not return to me" is cut and used at Absolem's death instead. All we get is the stupid narrator saying "David's first son died, but God gave him another one named Soloman." STUPID STUPID STUPID!!! More lousy stuff: The young boy who plays David as a kid looks like a fairy, and judging by the Bathsheba scene, baby oil was the most common substance for cleaning oneself in Ancient Israel.The acting is mediocre with the exception of the guy who plays Samuel who is wonderful, and the guy who plays Absolem who is terrible.The set and costumes are ridiculous for the most part (especially the wigs), but David actually looks like a king some of the time which is a refreshing change from Saul.Finally, I can't imagine what they were thinking when they slapped a PG-13 rating on this movie. There are two extended Nude scenes one of which is a lengthy full frontal shot of Bathsheba rubbing the aforementioned baby oil all over herself. This movie should be rated R, and if someone tackles this story as a film project in the future I hope that they make an accurate R rated version.