Solomon and Sheba (1959) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
47 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Exquisitely mounted and Brynner and Lollobridgida make it watchable, but overlong, bloated and stodgy
TheLittleSongbird7 June 2011
I do like epics and I wanted to see it for Yul Brynner, George Sanders, the master of suavity, smarmy menace and charisma and the fact that apparently this was the film where Tyrone Power died on set. However, despite some obvious good things, Solomon and Sheba just didn't do anything for me, and I feel really apologetic for saying that because it was a film I genuinely wanted to like.

I will start with the good things. The film is exquisitely mounted, with photography that is ravishing, sets and scope that are well and truly lush and costumes that are beautifully tailored and elegant. The music also does a fine job with enhancing the mood, and the climax is great and the only scene of the film that I would call riveting. And there are two good performances, The King and I's Yul Brynner who is very charismatic and sexy, and I Pagliacci's Gina Lollobridgida, who is alluring and to say she is smoking hot is an understatement in itself.

Unfortunately I cannot say the same for the rest of the actors, whose performances range from just okay to lousy. Yes, this is including the normally good Sanders, this is a role he should have been perfect for but mainly because the character is written in such a clichéd and uninterested fashion, all he becomes is seemingly a sad caricature of his former self.

Solomon and Sheba feels much too long for me too especially in the battle sequences which are too long-winded for their own good. I wouldn't have minded this so much if the pace and script were any decent and the story at least interesting, but to me the film doesn't succeed in any of those areas. I am not going to go into the numerous inaccuracies there are in the story as I would be here all day, but that is the least of its problems. The story is just so dull and didn't engage me in any way, and this is further disadvantaged by really stodgy pacing, awkward direction and a horrendously stilted script.

In all honesty I wasn't taken with the belly dance scene either. It wasn't like Salome, which had Dance of the Seven Veils, which apart from Hayworth was that film's highlight, but not only was the dancing here rather unexciting but I felt it wasn't done with any passion and only had the sensuality of Lollobridgida going for it.

All in all, there are moments but they aren't enough to save Solomon and Sheba from leaving me cold. 5/10 Bethany Cox
18 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not worth dying over
blanche-223 November 2009
Yul Brynner and Gina Lollabridgida are "Solomon and Sheba" in this 1959 Biblical epic directed by King Vidor. Also starring are George Sanders, Marisa Pavan and Finlay Currie.

The main problem with "Solomon and Sheba" is that a) it's bad; and b) no one infuses any energy into it, understandably. When Tyrone Power died during the swordfight with George Sanders, the producers decided to cash in the insurance check and start over. A mistake. It's hard to imagine what these actors went through, standing in a freezing cold Madrid studio, watching the 44-year-old star, who had a pregnant wife, die suddenly, and having production shut down amidst tremendous publicity. On top of which, Brynner asked for rewrites, and believe me, they weren't for the better.

Lloyds of London stipulated, on payment of the insurance, that Power could not appear in any part of the film. Obviously the producers weren't about to shoot those battles scenes again, so Power IS in the longshots.

Tyrone Power was a co-producer of this movie, and it was part of his deal with Arthur Hornblower, who wanted him for Witness for the Prosecution and this. Power knew that audiences were used to seeing him in this type of film, and he had given up on Hollywood and committed himself to theater work. This was his one film a year where he could make big bucks and then spend the rest of his time doing plays.

One thing about Power that no one can ever take away from him - he could make the world's worst dialogue sound absolutely believable. Brynner, alas, though very dignified in this role, didn't have that gift. Power had to develop it fast working for Zanuck. I've seen some of the footage of Power in this role - he was much more energetic and intense than Brynner. Having done Shakespeare and recorded poetry, he had a real feel for this language as well. It's not Brynner's fault - I'm sure no one wanted to do the movie once Power died. Brynner couldn't have known how it would have felt to be in that atmosphere ahead of time.

There are spurts here and there - one of the battle scenes is very good, and Gina is gorgeous (Power referred to her as "Lolly" in his letters). She's just not really into it. The audiences who saw it in the theater undoubtedly weren't either.
17 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A fanciful extrapolation of a very brief mention of Sheba in the bible
Deusvolt3 July 2006
I saw this on its original release as a child. My mother, a great movie buff, was greatly excoriated by other members of the family for taking me along when she went shopping in downtown Manila and decided to see it. The reason? It was classified as either for adults only or more likely as "Objectionable in part for all" by the Legion of Decency. Why? There was this exotic belly dance by Gina Lollobrigida. Then there was this bathing scene which although did not show much skin had her rising out of the pool while her serving maids obstructed the view with a large cloth. As she wrapped the cloth around her shapely body, she said in a very sexy voice and tone: "Dry me." I narrated this scene to my poor friends who couldn't afford to go to a first run movie but they didn't get excited. I saw a re-run of the movie on a religious channel recently and I didn't see the belly dance scene.

This is the only other movie where I saw Yul Brynner with hair. He also had hair in The Sound and the Fury.

But now let's get serious. There is no mention in the bible of the Queen of Sheba as a temptress and spy for the Pharoah. All it says is that she was an admirer of Solomon who brought him lots of valuable gifts when she visited him to learn from his wisdom. If there should be a re-make of this film, it is suggested that Sheba be played by a black actress as we now know that Sheba was in what is now modern Ethiopia and even in those days, the inhabitants of that area were black. Also, Sheba was not the name of a queen but of the country that the "Kandake" (a title from which the name Candace is derived) ruled. Other than her title, therefore, we do not know the name of the Candace of Sheba.
34 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A very entertaining movie
mallaverack17 July 2018
As a real fan of 'La Lolla' (meaning I believe she is a fine actor as well as a drop dead gorgeous looking woman) I recall the anticipation in originally viewing this movie. Unfortunately the film is too long - surely it could have been cut by 30 mins or more. Battle scenes in particular were way too lengthy and somewhat mundane - the all too obvious fake horses and soldiers 'forever' falling into the great ravine prompted much laughter at the time! In addition, the acting of George Sanders and Marisa Pavan was below standard, indeed Sanders was completely miscast and fairly woeful for the most part. It does not concern me greatly that the story in the film did not even closely follow the biblical narrative nor that the accents were a hotch-potch nor (as one critic here points out) that the soldiers' shields would have been of a different design! The central concern is that the plot provides a good yarn, the cinematography is excellent, the musical score is appropriately utilised and the two leading characters are played well by Yul and Gina. It was a box-office success, so despite its faults, the movie had lots of admirers. And apart from the obvious sex-appeal of La Lolla, the fact that her portrayal was suitably conniving, intelligent and sexually alluring played a large part in the film's overall appeal.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The bits the Bible missed
tomsview23 August 2017
When I first saw "Solomon and Sheba" as an 11-year old in 1959, I knew that every time Gina Lollobrigida's Sheba entered the scene, the action would slow down. Now, six decades later, I think she is about the only reason to watch it.

Set in Israel back in the BC, peace-loving Solomon (Yul Brynner) inherits the kingdom from his father King David (Finlay Currie). However Israel is surrounded by enemies; mainly Egypt, but also his brother Adonijah (George Sanders), who feels he should have inherited the throne.

There were a couple of surprises early in the movie: Yul Brynner with hair and George Sanders as a warrior. More at home in formal wear, George Sanders, the master of sophisticated wit, was getting a bit old for this type of thing, but he wasn't a good fit anyway; it was almost as silly as dressing him up as a cowboy. In the battle that opens the movie, he handles his sword as though he was tossing a light summer salad.

As the story progresses, Gina Lollobrigida's Queen of Sheba is in an alliance with the Pharaoh of Egypt and heads to Israel to use her ample charms to seduce Solomon into a false sense of security. Sheba hits the ground dancing, and in a scene of frenetic pagan ritual, she wears a bra that almost seems like two wiry hands clasping her breasts from behind.

Along with Sophia Loren and Claudia Cardinale, 'La Lollo' was one of that fabulous trio of Italian actresses that heated up the screen in the 50's and 60's. Like the others, she had what was usually described as a full figure - pretty much the accepted shape for females before the arrival of personal trainers.

The interiors of the film were shot on dull, chunky looking sets. However the film lifts when the story moves outdoors and gets some sand. Eventually the big battle arrives and it's not too bad as these things go. The director King Vidor could conduct a good battle (The Big Parade, War and Peace). Here he mixes dust and chariots well. In the climactic battle, Pharaoh's army falls for it again; instead of the Red Sea closing over them, this time they are blinded by the polished shields of Solomon's men and topple over a cliff - not a bad effect for that CGI-less era.

These days I think "Solomon and Sheba" might just be too heavy going for a modern audience - La Lollo's bra notwithstanding. Anyway Ridley Scott seems to be remaking all those old sword and sandals numbers so you could just wait until he gets around to this one.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Epic Movie about Wisdom and Desire
marcin_kukuczka23 July 2006
King Vidor, one of the most famous figures in movie history, the director of Tolstoy's classic on screen (WAR AND PEACE), was not known for making biblical epics. Nobody associates him with this genre that much as we do Cecil B DeMille or D.W.Griffith, for instance. Yet, his last film, SOLOMON AND SHEBA, has a straight reference to the Bible. Nevertheless, the movie can hardly be seen as a biblical epic due to one important factor, its content.

Solomon...what can we say about him from the Bible?...a famous third king of Israel (after Saul and David), a man known for exceptional wisdom, a builder of the splendid first temple of Jerusalem... there is indeed much about him in the Old Testament. But Sheba? All we know is that she, as a queen of a distant land (today's Yemen), paid a visit to Jerusalem in order to see the splendor of the city and of the entire kingdom as well as to admire the wisdom of its king. However, what we find in the movie deals primarily with Solomon-Sheba relations: first a conspiracy, evil intentions, then weakness, desire, treason, finally sacrificial love and mercy. And now we would have to ask ourselves "is it a historical movie or a fairy tale with some historically accurate background?"

I think that in order to understand the director's intentions, we have to look deeper at the cinema of that time and King Vidor himself. SOLOMON AND SHEBA with its title refers to a 1951 Henry King's movie, "David and Bathsheba." Making films at that time was much like this: the producers picked up some aspect from history or the Bible and created a movie out of this containing lavish costumes, great cast, campy spectacle but barely any historical accuracy - all for entertainment. And this is clearly noticeable in SOLOMON AND SHEBA. Besides, there is one more factor that helps get the idea of this film...the content of SOLOMON AND SHEBA was partly inspired by a long ago forgotten movie, one of the most gigantic spectacles of all time, still presumed lost, THE QUEEN OF SHEBA (1921) with Betty Blythe and Fritz Leiber. A love affair of the wise Israeli king and an exotic lustful queen was something particularly entertaining for 20th century viewers. Therefore, we cannot treat Vidor's film as a biblical epic, it's only INSPIRED by the Bible. However, while many people concentrate on the film's weak points: inaccuracy, unnatural battle scenes, etc, I rather feel compelled to focus on some of its strong points.

It is, indeed, a lavish spectacle. There are many scenes that reveal the spirit of grandeur. Here, it seems necessary to mention the two consecutive moments: Solomon enters the temple of luxury devoted to the only God (he says his famous prayer) and the next moment in the Land of Sheba where its queen is surrounded by the luxurious sets, a dedicated servant and a parrot. This contrast has its roots in one major factor Israel differed from other kingdoms and nations: the Israeli king was a servant of God while other rulers were masters of their own. That was the genius and righteousness of the Israel of that time! Another moment worth seeing is the Israel-Egypt battle and the shields shining in the sun. Quite an interesting idea...

The performances are worth consideration. Yul Brynner is different than in his other films (primarily due to hair on his head) but does a nice job as Solomon. He expresses the pride, power, wisdom but also desire that he is driven by. The best scene played by Yul in this movie is, I think, when Solomon is tempted to take part at Ragon celebration. Although virtuous Abishaq (Marisa Pavan) tries to discourage him from joining the orgy, he is not able to listen to her. Consider his face and the whole performance... masterpiece! Gina Lollobrigida plays well but she holds one disadvantage. Most people (particularly men) focus on her sex appeal forgetting that she has one primary task as an actress: to act and feel the role. The similar problem is, nowadays, with Monica Bellucci (also Italian). Men cannot be objective in the evaluation of her performance because the sex appeal steps in and makes them blind to possible shortcomings in acting. I liked Gina Lollobrigida in the role not only because of her beauty but also because of her good acting, sometimes exposed to difficulties! The moment Solomon is making love to Sheba in a cave at the pagan celebration dedicated to god Ragon is quite freely treated for the 1950s... The supporting cast also give memorable performances including George Sanders as Adonija and Harry Andrews as Baltor, the queen's second.

I also liked the whole atmosphere. Although there are historical inaccuracies in the reconstruction of Jerusalem, the film has a charm and historical mood. It is definitely not the perfect one but I could not evaluate this as a movie without any entertainment. If it weren't for the ridiculous ending (Sheba miraculously healed and speaking with God Jehova???), the film would be equal to such epics as DEMETRIUS AND THE GLADIATORS (1954), SAMSON AND DELILAH (1948) and THE CRUSADES (1935). It's not that great but, in its inaccuracy, it definitely cannot be compared to Bruce Beresford's movie (1985) since we do not expect the biblical story from SOLOMON AND SHEBA that much as we do from a movie entirely described as a biopic of king David.

Not a bad film and worth seeing particularly for epic movie fans. Moreover, it is one of the rare films that shows one down to earth fact: wisdom does not mean that desire is conquered... 6/10
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Expensively mounted Biblical production with all star-cast and spectacularly filmed in Spain
ma-cortes5 June 2011
Breathtaking story set in Biblical times with emphasis in lavish costumes and crowds . Justly before his death in ancient Israel King David (Finlay Currie) has a vision from God saying him that his younger son Solomon (Yul Brynner) should succeed him as king . His other son Adonijah (George Sanders) is mean and promises to achieve the kingdom by whatever way . King David names his younger son, Solomon his heir , facing his older son Adonijah. King Solomon acts with wisdom and benevolent and his government is seen as a threat to more tyrannical monarchs in the region . Meanwhile the Egyptian Pharoah agrees to give up a Red Sea port to the Queen of Sheba (Gina Lollobrigida) if she can encounter a manner to overthrow Solomon . Sheba, Pharoah, Adonijah, the leaders of the Twelve Tribes and his own God make life dangerous for Solomon . Meantime the Queen of Sheba arrives in Jerusalem, supposedly for a friendly meeting , Solomon slowly falls in love with her. In fact, the Queen is in covenant with the Pharaoh of Egypt (David Farrar) and her aim is to destroy the twelve tribes of Israel and he utilizes the ambitious Prince Adonijah in her schemes .

An overblown all-star treatment of the stories in the Old Testament dealing with David , Salomon , Sheba and Adonijah . Lavish spectacle about Solomon and his lover Sheba based on hokey historical events. Brynner and Lollobrigida play a sultriest couple , including some sexy scenes very erotic for the 50s . Tyrone Power died during the shooting in Spain and some shots still show him , he was replaced by Brynner who remade his early scenes .There's so much visual padding full of armours , weapons, carriages , feathers and crowd scenes . Director Vidor gives this film the feel of a Cecil B. De Mille spectacle , but there is little human touch to any of the deeds. Very good photography in super Technirama 70 by the classic cameraman Freddie Young filmed in Madrid, Valdespartera, Zaragoza, Aragón, Spain . Evocative and impressive musical score by Mario Nascimbene . King Vidor's last movie that is recently restored to 139 minutes . Vidor realized an excellent career plenty of classics as ¨Bird of paradise , Champ , Our daily bread , The citadel , Duel in the sun ; also directed another super-production as ¨War and Peace¨ . Rating : 6 , passable and acceptable.
20 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Hilarious to See Blue Eyed Israelites with English Accents
nafps10 March 2022
Also Englishmen with awful brown face makeup playing Sheba's soldiers. This would have been even more obvious on a huge movie screen than your TV.

Siberian Russian Yul Brynner is more believable as Solomon, and his accent helps, plus his playing an Egyptian before in Ten Commandments. But why did they give him a brown toupee?

Lollabridgada as Sheba is attractive, but an Italian can't pass for the Ethiopian or Yemeni Sheba. And Sheba was her people, not her name.

The story is slow. Except for the surprisingly raunchy orgy scenes. So that's why they hired Gina....

I'm pretty sure the devout woudn't be recommending this film for Sunday school.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Saved by Brynner
gleywong16 March 2004
Previous reviewers did not like this film, but it kept my attention to the end. Compared to other great biblical spectacles, this one has some true moments, due mainly to the strong cast and the director's restraint. This was King Vidor's final film. Remember, he made "The Great Parade,""The Crowd" and other early silent hits. What I liked about this film was Brynner's dignity and kingliness. For someone born a gypsy, Brynner had an innate aristocracy and gravitas; in any scene, he holds your attention and roots the action. And he could deliver the lines elegantly. Could you imagine Tyrone Power in this role? It would be a bit of fluff by comparison (remember him as the feckless husband in "Witness for the Prosecution"?), or perhaps, one might say, Power would have been an equal to George Sanders'surface play of the role.

Another thing going for the film is the consistent delivery of lines by all the actors. Most of the other players were English (Harry Andrews, David Farrar) or Italian (Lollobrigida, Pavan), or foreign, and that gave the dialogue a certain musicality. If all actors had been been "amurican," the tone of the dialogue would have been flatter and much less interesting to listen to. Probably the weakest actor was Lollobrigida, with her masklike visage. She delivered her lines credibly, but there was really no frisson between her and Brynner, (certainly not as there was between Brynner and Deborah Kerr), so that the love scenes came across as a tad dull.

As for the combat and action scenes, Vidor's background in silents shows in the way he holds back with the soundtrack, even as horses, chariots and warriors are running headlong over a cliff. The final sword fight between the brothers was certainly no 10-minute "Prisoner of Zenda", but it was not the fighting itself that was important, but the confrontation between the brothers themselves, reliving the Caine and Abel tragedy. The director is presenting the story as a parable of a failed brotherhood (regardless of how it jives or not with the Biblical text or historical accuracy) that bows before allegiance to a single God and social covenants, so the action is on a straight and simple level that some viewers may find too simple. This sense of the parable guides the actors' delivery of their lines, all with a distinctly measured rhythm that some may consider artificial, and others elevating, as if it were verse.

One can compare Vidor's approach in this film with the many other Biblical spectacles before and after (such as "David and Bathsheba," "Ben Hur," even "Spartacus"), and this movie comes out very "clean" in the battle scenes and refusal to focus on the blood and gore of battle. Vidor's pacing in the dialogue (not quite Shakespearean, but close to it) is consistent with the overall sense of restraint that he excercised.

The clarity of the film's message is reinforced by the costumes, which are openly differentiated as to Egyptian or Israelite,making it easy to distinguish the sides in the battle scenes.

Of five *****, three and a half, it's still worth watching as the swansong of one of Hollywood's great directors.
27 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A few lines in the Bible....
dbdumonteil4 April 2005
Warning: Spoilers
...and presto! a screenplay! I do not exaggerate :there are five or six lines given over to Sheba in the Bible .She came to visit Solomon and suggested riddles to him.Then she came back singing the king's praises .These riddles allow double entendre, mind you.So why not a love story between Solomon and Sheba? In 1959,King Vidor had nothing to prove.He had made at least a dozen of classics:"the big parade" "the crowd " and "hallelujah" are Early.""Our daily bread" and "duel in the sun" are Middle ."Fountainhead" and "Ruby Gentry" are Late."Solomon and Sheba" belongs to the latter phase of Vidor's brilliant career.It has not to be taken seriously but it's much fun to watch it,even if it sometimes becomes ridiculous (all the "religious pagan" scenes ,Lollobrigida praying her idol or the infamous orgy that does not equal the one which the Jews enjoy when Mosis is talking with God in "the ten commandments" ).Lollobrigida ,in spite of her Italian accent, is a superb queen .George Sanders is a delightful villain.Brynner is wearing a wig,but it does not prevent him to be fair, as the obligatory "whose-baby-is-it?" scene shows.

SPOILER:Sheba's resurrection is weird.I'm not a specialist,but it seems to me that this concept is Christian.There's not such a thing in the Old testament.

Never mind.If you enjoy epics,you'll enjoy "Solomon and Sheba".
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A Biblical Stew of a Film
bkoganbing6 August 2006
Solomon and Sheba has come down in Hollywood lore not for the quality of the film, but for the fact that Tyrone Power died while making it. I was in the 5th grade and well remember the huge news for days when that tragedy happened. I didn't know who Tyrone Power was then, but I learned and learned to appreciate the body of his work.

I often wonder if Ty had a sense about this film and what a dud it proved. He was the unnamed producer of this as well. Maybe he just didn't want to face the critics. Good thing Power actually went out with Witness for the Prosecution although you can see him in long shots if you look close.

What we have here is a biblical stew that probably would baffle the great Solomon himself. Several incidents described in the Bible that the Bible treats separately are woven together into one plot with a few additions tossed in by Hollywood.

The actual story about the Queen of Sheba is that she went on a trade mission to the Kingdom of Israel, chatted Solomon up a bit, came back with a lot of trade goods and that was that. The story of a romance between her and Solomon is of legend. The ancient kingdom of Sheba is about where Yemen is now and her people purportedly moved to the African continent which is how Ethiopia was founded.

The Queen never witnessed Solomon's famous case involving the two women with separate claims for a baby, nor was she involved with the building of the First Temple. Nor was she around for the destruction of same. For that matter neither was Solomon.

And she was not involved in the dispute over the succession when Solomon's brother Adonijah put in a counterclaim. That is the heart of this film. Adonijah upon hearing the news that King David is dying declares himself king. Of course David rallies temporarily and says that God came to him and said Solomon should succeed him. When David hears about what Adonijah did, he says that's what got God all bent out of shape, Adonijah being greedy. After that Adonijah gets to plotting.

Things seem to come full circle in that Ty Power collapsed on the set while dueling with George Sanders as Adonijah. Sanders and Power were rivals in many films, most particularly in Lloyds of London which was Power's breakthrough role. If Sanders is not quite the jaded sophisticate he was in Samson and Delilah, he's still Sanders the biblical cad.

When Power died Yul Brynner was brought in to play Solomon and given a wig so that existing footage of Power in long shot could be salvaged. Brynner invests the dialog with the proper dignity, but I think he probably regretted doing the pinch hitting.

Gina Lollobrigida is the Queen of Sheba and she is alluring as a biblical temptress in the Cecil B. DeMille tradition. She seems not to have any real conviction and my guess is she was shocked at Power's sudden demise and having to do it all over again. Marisa Pavan as Abishag may give the best performance in the film.

The real story with Adonijah is not as elaborate as this film. He disputed with Solomon for the succession and gathered around a group of some of King David's court as supporters. Solomon pardoned them once and then Adonijah asked for Abishag in marriage. Abishag in the Bible and here was an adopted daughter of King David in his old age. When Solomon hears that, he decides Adonijah is getting greedy again and has him killed. The Bible mentions someone named Berniah who was going around basically doing contract hits on Adonijah's supporters.

What we have in the film is a spectacular climax involving a miracle that I searched for and couldn't find. It came from the fertile imagination of director King Vidor who ended a long and distinguished career on a sour note. It was a question of Vidor trying to out do Cecil B. DeMille in biblical spectacle.

He didn't make it.
42 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
HinoSenshi's Review of An Excellent Time-Waster.....With A Little Sex Thrown In!
xjadx_hinosenshi4 July 2008
Holy Cow! I watched "Solomon and Sheba" the other day on TCM, and I totally LOVED it! It is very Biblically inaccurate (there was NOTHING between Solomon and the queen of Sheba, just a conversation!), but a lot of fun!

Yul Brynner is one of my favorite actors to watch on screen; he is sexy, charismatic, over the top, and has that whacked out ambiguous accent. His ability to believably play just about any nationality and role is very evident in his role as the Hebrew king in this film; even though he seems a little out of place. I wonder why they chose him to replace Tyrone Power? Is it just me, or did he never smile in this or any other movie? Sexy!!!!!

Gina Lollobrigia is waaaaaaaaaay hot in this movie! As the erotically inclined, temptress queen, she heats up the screen and blows everyone else out of the water! She and Brynner look very good together, and their love scenes are some of the HOTTEST I've seen in a 50's movie (especially the incredible steamy one at the pagan orgy-WOW!)! Gina has Vulcan eyebrows! I've never seen her in anything else, but I hope I can! She's as va-va-voom as Sophia Loren!

Other than these two hot actors, everybody else in the movie SUCKS. George Sanders is like a dull imitation of a villain-yawn! I got bored with the overlong battle scenes, most of which had no Historical basis at all! Errrrrggh!

Overall, I give "Solomon and Sheba" an 8 out of 10, it should be a 6 but the sexiness and eroticism of the love story brings it up to an 8. If you like pointless epics with some sexuality thrown in, then I definitely recommend this movie to you. It is a great way to waste a boring afternoon alone!
34 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
It is said that Solomon is wise. But no matter how wise he may be, he is still human, with a human weakness.
hitchcockthelegend23 August 2015
Solomon and Sheba is directed by King Vidor and collectively written by Anthony Veiller, Paul Dudley, George Bruce and Crane Wilbur. It stars Yul Brynner, Gina Lollobrigida, Marisa Pavan, George Sanders, David Farrar, Harry Andrews, John Crawford and Laurence Naismith. Music is by Mario Nascimbene and cinematography by Fred A. Young.

A fictionalised screenplay cribs from parts of the Bible, where the story here follows the relationship between Solomon of Israel and the Queen of Sheba, a problem because initially Sheba is in league with Israel's enemy, Egypt. All that and Solomon has to deal with his nefarious brother, Adonijah, who is a little miffed that Solomon has inherited the crown of Israel.

Famously it was the production that saw the sad death of the leading man, Tyrone Power, while Vidor was so disillusioned about the whole film he quit making feature length films. It's a very mixed bag, very much showing the good and bad sides of the big historical epics that dominated Hollywood back in the day. In part it's a grandiose melodrama, in others it's cheap looking and given to campy histrionics (the orgy operatics sequences are just awful), while the screenplay jostles with itself as to being biblical blarney or potent pontifications.

Costuming and colour photography smooths the eyes, but then the optical nerves are shredded by set design so poor a child making paper mache boulders could have done better. The cast are also in and out, Brynner is fine as Solomon (broody, brainy but troubled), as is the lovely Lollobrigida as Sheba (stoic, smart and sexy), but the support slots barely convince. Sanders is badly miscast as Solomon's warrior brother Adonijah (he was 53 at the time), 10 years earlier in Samson and Delilah his villain turn worked, but not here.

Sword fighting choreography is poor, as are the miracle effects work, but conversely the big battle that crowns the story is smart in writing and in execution, where not even the model work can dim the thrill of it all. Released in the same year as "Ben-Hur" obviously does it no favours by comparison! But then so many other big swords and shields epics would also struggle as well. Vidor's movie is just above average in the genre pantheon, but the faults are irritable and hardly render it as a must see film for genre enthusiasts. 6/10
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Solomon was wise. Hollywood is otherwise.
mark.waltz28 August 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Directions to two hours and 20 minutes, this biblical epic had a lot of problems getting released but still managed to come out with a profit. Perhaps the prophets weight of the Biblical times were looking over them and ask God to give King Vidor a break for his last film. It's an entertaining but overstuffed example of how certain producers and writers effort's to climb onto the certain bandwagons of hit genres of the time didn't always come together. The 1950's were overloaded with these sword-and-sandal widescreen extravaganzas, and if people could spare a couple of extra hours than the usual 90 minutes, they take them in just for the spectacle and an occasional unintentional laugh.

Obviously, the big battle scene towards the end was inspired by "The Ten Commandments", and the scene of charging chariots taken by surprise with a clever battle technique is quite a shocking moments. The story surrounds Solomon's efforts to hold on to his throne when neighboring countries to conquer him because of the country's belief in one God and Solomon's alleged wisdom which they are obviously envious of. This brings on the Queen of Sheba, played by the ravishing Gina Lollobrigida who delivers a sensational performance even if she isn't physically accurate historically.

When we first see the very tough Lollobrigida, she is charging past the Israeli Army led by George Sanders (as Solomon's much older brother) and ferociously whips his face until he collapses in shock. She's not one to be taken advantage of because she is a woman, and as we learn, Sheba has always had a queen, not a king. Sanders believes that by being King David's eldest surviving son, he will be the heir, but King David (Finlay Currie) has other ideas.

That's where Solomon comes in as king, played by Yul Brynner who replaced Tyrone Power. On the surface, Brenner is perfect, but I had a hard time accepting him as an Israeli king after seeing him as the Egyptian pharaoh in "The Ten Commandments" and the King of Siam in "The King and I". Tyrone Power certainly would have been a bit more reflective, but Brynnur, even in his quieter moments, is far too big as a performer to play a man who was presumably humble yet morally strong. With a dark wig and beard, Brynner does manage to look a bit different, but that voice betrays who he is with all that extra hair. Yet, you can't take your eyes off of him because he is such a fascinating personality.

While this is big in scope and huge of heart, containing many of the great stories that the Bible tells us about one of the wisest rulers ever on the face of our Earth, it seems far too forced to be completely successful. The story of the two women fighting over a child is a classic moment as is the attempted stoning of Sheba. Marisa Pavan has a nice supporting role as a woman in Solomon's Court who is obviously in love with him and pays for that love by praying for his wisdom to return when his temptations with Sheba becomes too much. That leads to a sequence of idol worship for Sheba and her people that is completely over-the-top. Utilizing ideas that were done in different ways and other epics made before this also shows a lack of creativity to make it stand out on its own.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
"The soldier and the poet"
Steffi_P30 May 2010
In cinema, we have always lost as well as gained. In the post war era we got a load of upcoming sprouts with new ideas. Changing social mores gave greater latitude in the kind of stories we could tell. And yet the older generation, for whom movie making was purer, unpretentious and above all visually orientated, were still alive and, once in a while, kicking.

Now, Solomon and Sheba is a dead-looking production if ever I saw one. Even though it was released the same year as Ben-Hur, one of the most successful ancient world epics ever made, you can still see the format is getting a little tired. This isn't so much Sunday school story come-to-life as cheap and somewhat half-hearted excuse for a bit of bare flesh and erotic dancing of the kind that they really went in for in the 50s. For a production of this kind, it is woefully low budget. The sets look like you could punch holes in them, and the costumes look like they were cut up from old curtains (net curtains in Gina Lolobrigida's case).

The screenplay too is utter trash. Complete changes in character and drive are crammed into single scenes. The dialogue is not bad as such, it is merely bland and unmemorable. And then there are the actors. Yul Brynner, standing in for Tyrone Power (who was dead at the time) giving a reasonably understated performance, but doing little more than sitting around looking thoughtful. Screen brother George Sanders simply looks worse the wear for age, and it appears likely he simply couldn't be bothered any more, especially for something like this. Finlay Currie, now something of a fixture in the biblical flick, makes a brief and fairly run-of-the-mill appearance. The rest of the cast are so dull they are not even worth a mention.

But does any of this really matter? Well, of course yes it does to some extent. We expect a little quality control even in a picture like this. But when you're watching a colourful adaptation of some millennia-old mythology, it's acceptable for realism and dramatic intensity to play second fiddle to the power of the images. And this is where our afore-mentioned old-school approach comes in.

This was the final feature film of veteran director King Vidor. Vidor had been handed one crummy project after another for the past decade or so, and yet unlike Sanders he never lost his professional interest – in spite of a rather troubling experience on this particular production. Solomon and Sheba is packed with the kind of visual splendour that Vidor had been crafting since the early 20s. In the battle sequences he works round the small number of extras by focusing on dynamic snippets of action, often having fighters surge towards the camera for that added impact on the audience. In Brynner and Lolobrigida's boat scene the eerie willow fronds add a layer of atmosphere that makes up for any deficit in the acting. All of this is enhanced by the sublimely moody cinematography of Freddie Young – the only other outstanding name in the production crew. Best of all Vidor does this without resorting to any fancy camera tricks.

Is Vidor's compelling imagery enough to save Solomon and Sheba? Not quite. Nothing could really turn back the tide of paltriness that washes over every other aspect of the picture. But Vidor's efforts at least make it easy on the eye. With that in mind, you can quite happily enjoy this as pretty no-brainer entertainment, just as you can the pictures of Cecil B. DeMille (although Vidor is far more surreal and spiritual then the earthy DeMille). If you keep your eyes peeled for things like that jolly conga line snaking its way through the surprisingly risqué pagan rite, or a soldier getting a round shield pinned to his face like a bronze-age emoticon, you might even find a few laughs in this ostensibly serious feature.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Silly 50s biblical drama.
fedor814 January 2007
Mostly uninvolving biblical mumbo-jumbo that drags on for well over two hours. The only thing that saves this film from God's wreath (and there is only one God, remember) is the unintentionally funny dialog, and a good battle scene which comes far too late in the movie. For most of the two hours until the action scenes there is too much talking; the dialog is so inept that the movie just begs to be spoofed by MST3K.

George Sanders is absolutely awful; one of the most animated, overly-theatrical performances I've ever seen. Brynner isn't much better; his stiff, wooden acting, combined with the horrendous fortune-cookie wisdom utterings make for a rather boring and silly Solomon. It seems that every time Brynner opens his mouth something oh-so wise and ridiculously high-and-mighty comes out. To an extent it's not Sanders's and Brynner's fault, because of the crappy, comical dialog and the typically biblical one-dimensional characterization, but they made little effort otherwise. Brynner's accent even reminds a bit of Schwarzenegger's; this is not a plus. Only Lollobrigida manages to avoid embarrassing herself, by playing the role with more conviction and in an appropriate way which befits a role in such a silly film. To describe these biblical characters as one-dimensional would be too give them undeserved credit; the characterization is half-dimensional.
21 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Nice movie of King Solomon's love affair
Petey-1029 May 2012
King David of Israel dies.Before he dies he announces Solomon would be his successor.His older brother Adonijah had already declared himself the new king, and therefore becomes his brother's biggest enemy.Egyptian Pharaoh has given a mission to Queen of Sheba to destroy Solomon.She uses her own sexuality to seduce him and introduces Sheban pagan worship into Jerusalem.But she finds it hard to resist Solomon's charm and falls in love with him.Solomon and Sheba (1959) is the last picture directed by King Vidor.The actors do fairly good job, with Yul Brynner and Gina Lollobrigida taking the lead.And Gina does look pretty hot! Tyrone Power would have been the original male star, but he died of a heart attack during the filming.George Sanders plays Solomon's brother Adonijah.Marisa Pavan plays Abishag, probably my favorite character in the movie.David Farrar plays Pharaoh.Finlay Currie portrays David.The movie has gotten a lot of bad criticism.However, it is not near as bad as has been said.That is my opinion, anyway.The love affair between Solomon and Sheba is portrayed very nicely.There's the orgy scene that works.Not showing as much, obviously, as would be shown if the movie was made today.The movie also portrays the Judgment of Solomon, which I actually played one time at school.So it's very nice to watch it in a movie.If you're a fan of biblical movies, you should take a look at this.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
For a night out....this was a pretty good show for its time
Richie-67-48585222 June 2011
1959...you want to go out to dinner and a show. You have your friends or perhaps you and your hunny bunny to go with. You may eat at home or go out...but all that is leading toward going to see this movie at that time. It was well worth a night out. Entertaining, good story, good length, has action, love, repentance, war, betrayal...In other words, all the human emotions that go along with mankind. The actors respect their roles and give all they have...The director understood some of the basics and gave the movie a good foundation. We cannot judge this movie by todays standards, so don't even try. It must stand on its own and in its own world. BTW, it would have done better if the starring role was more God centered and less everything else....Popcorn, some junior mints, red vines and this movie will keep you out of trouble for a couple of hours and give you pleasant thoughts to boot......enjoy
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Hear "God" Speak......Watch the Pagan Orgy......See the "Temple" Destroyed...or Not
LeonLouisRicci7 December 2016
Two Outstanding Set-Pieces, the "Orgy" Ritual and the Final Battle Highlight this Slow, Talky, sometimes Dull Display of Hebrews, Egyptians, and for Spice the "Queen of Sheba" around a Thousand Years B.C.

Taken from a few Snippets in the "Old Testament" it tells the Extra-Biblical Story of Solomon (Yul Brynner) and the Queen of Sheba (Gina Lollobrigida). "Sheba" (as she is called here) is sent by Pharaoh to Spy and Seduce Solomon into Revealing His Secrets.

Speaking of Revealing. Sheba is Shown in an Array of Alluring Apparel to the Delight of Solomon and 1950's Audiences. There is much Prancing and Dancing.

The Movie is Typical Cornball for the Genre that was about to End its Cycle a Year Later with "Ben-Hur" (1959) and although that Film Swept the Oscars the "Biblical Epic" and the Cheap Sword and Sandal Imitators were Designed for the Dustbin of Hollywood History after a Ten Year Run.

This one is Worth a Watch with Low Expectations and for Eye-Candy Enthusiasts.

Note...Tyrone Power died of a heart-attack during filming and was replaced by Brenner. The production does have a faded glow residue.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Standard Aiming to Poor
ragosaal21 October 2006
"Solomon and Sheba" was the kind of film that you just had to go and see back in the late 50's when I was a kid: a biblical epic spectacular with well known performers, unusual costumes, lots of extras and battle sequences. So I went to see it; but I remember that back then "Solomon and Sheba" didn't impress me at all, which was a strange thing since I had enjoyed a lot "The Ten Commandments", "Quo Vadis", "Helen of Troy" and others. The point is that when you are a kid you disregard things in pictures that adults don't (bad acting, for instance) and you are easier to please with warriors in their armors, battles, sword duels and action, so if your'e not impressed then something is wrong with a product of this genre.

This film, though it has some of such features, is definitely standard and average. Yul Brynner's wooden performance as the Hebrew king doesn't even light when he has voluptuous and half naked Gina Lollobrigida dancing around him provocatively. She is better and renders an acceptable acting. George Sanders doesn't look interested in what he is doing, and Marisa Pavan (Pier Angeli's twin sister) doesn't add at all as a sort of Brynner's conscience.

The final sword duel between Brynner and Sanders is just for the plot and lacks interest and intensity (it had to filmed, that's all).

Not a good farewell for director King Vidor, Solomon and Sheba will probably be remembered as Ty Power's last unfinished picture.
16 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Hollywood's account of wise King Solomon's reign in Israel, including his folly
Wuchakk12 September 2021
In the 10th Century BC, elderly King David's reign is ending and there's a dispute between siblings Adonijah (George Sanders) and Solomon (Yul Brynner) about who will take over the kingdom. Once this is settled, the Queen of Sheba (Gina Lollobrigida) visits Israel for dubious reasons and Solomon becomes entranced.

"Solomon and Sheba" (1959) is a biblical epic covering the first eleven chapters of 1 Kings with bits & pieces of other scriptural characters/stories thrown in, plus the fabrication that Solomon had an affair with the Queen of Sheba. In truth, the Queen visited Israel because she heard of Solomon's great wisdom and wanted to test it for herself, plus witness the splendor of the renowned kingdom. While the movie shows Solomon's harem of hundreds of wives & concubines, the scriptwriters decided to make the Queen of Sheba a microcosm of these women for dramatic purposes. So it's true that Solomon's foreign wives led him astray into idolatry and disfavor with the LORD, it just wasn't the Queen of Sheba who did it.

Nevertheless, I thought there were enough historical truths to roll with the film and appreciate it despite its fabrications and bloated talky-ness. For instance, Adonijah really did seek to usurp the throne, but the way the story evolves in the movie is false. Yet I liked the inclusion of several real-life characters beyond those already mentioned, like Bathsheba, Abishag, Joab, Nathan, Zadok and Pharaoh.

Meanwhile Brynner is stately as the protagonist and Gina is ravishing, not to mention the costumes, sets, action pieces and score are all well done. Speaking of the score, power rock/metal bands of the 70s-90s were obviously influenced by parts of it (e.g. Rainbow, Savatage, Manowar, Crimson Glory, Bathory, Jag Panzer and so on). Rock 'n' roll bands of the late 50s-early 60s certainly weren't playing this kind of dramatic stuff with their pop ditties!

Interesting trivia: Tyrone Power originally played Solomon and two-thirds of the film was shot with him when he suddenly died after the sword duel with George Sanders (Adonijah), which is when Brynner was brought in for the starring role and the movie was completed in ten more weeks. Director King Vidor preferred Power because he depicted Solomon's conflicted spirit better whereas he believed Yul played him with too much self-assurance. While the troubled film turned out to be a box office success, it would be Vidor's final feature film.

It's worth checking out if the topic and actors interest you, but it's not as compelling as "Samson and Delilah" (1949), "The Ten Commandments" (1956) and "Ben-Hur" (1959). Still, it's not far off; you just have to be willing to swing with the alterations to history.

The movie runs 2 hours, 21 minutes, and was shot entirely in Spain.

GRADE: B-
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
" You worship only one God, we have many to choose from "
thinker169126 August 2009
Back in the early history of Hollywood, during the 1950's, movie producers and gifted directors were often constricted and restricted in their efforts to produce memorable films. Take this one for instance. The film is called " Solomon (Yul Brynner) and Sheba (Gina Lollobrigida) " Some say they succeeded, others, especially modern critics used to a more tolerant set of guidelines, snicker at their censored efforts. The story is of the Bibical encounter between the wisest of all kings and the sultry queen from Sheba. Although many facts are distorted, the magnificence within the movie are surprisingly spectacular. Indeed, while viewing the gorgeous setting, elegant costumes and splendid scenery a plethora of questions arise. Things like, Solomon having a hundred wives, yet pursues Sheba like a lion after a kill. The Queen is given permission to have a pagan ritual to her God, however modern audiences view their exotic gyrating dance with yawing amusement. Still the cast of this film did a great job. George Sanders, David Farrar, John Crawford and Finlay Currie as David give this film it's legitimacy. Together they establish this colorful film as a movie original. ***
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Kind Vidor's last movie is worth a look.
raskimono16 March 2004
A heavy budget, a star that died with 75% of the movie completed. Recipe for disaster right, not in this case as Yul Brynner, the "great bald one" as he was known , except with hair here makes a convincing Solomon and Vidor scores in his direction. This movie sets itself up from the beginning as the story of two brothers and a case for redemption for that is what this movie is about. Solomon as everyone, Christian or not knows was wise as the common adage states. He inherited the Kingdom of Israel from his father as chosen by God to replace his older brother, the warrior played by the great supporting and sometimes leading man George Sanders in one his nefarious performances. Solomon prays for wisdom which God grants him and Israel prospers. Neighbors become jealous and scared as a redeemed Sanders courtesy of Brynner builds Israel's army to a sizable number. They also fear their teachings of equality to all men and their notion of One God. Sheba is sent or chooses to tempt Solomon with riveting consequences. The problem with these movies in our modern eyes is that the writers have them talk in the way texts and related scriblings depicted dialogue back then which is as poetry with innuendoes and rhyme. This today is often seen as camp, such the case of recent Swords and Sandals like Gladiator avoiding these dialogue. The movie also bears a certain resemblance to De Mille's classic Samson and Delilah which kickstarted the whole genre. That said, a "Shield of light" action sequence is worth a look to see how it was staged and shot. Gina Lollobrigida is absolutely stunningly photographed and the performance is quite good. All in the one, one of the master's last can be your first intro into his ouevre.
32 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I will suspend reality for Yul Brynner
Lipstik22 July 2015
I don't like Yul Brynner with hair. I prefer the man clean shaven, but he's still drop dead sexy in this movie. Goodnight! That man drives me mad.

Yes, this is a "silly" biblical movie. Suspend reality for a moment and you will find that this movie is not so bad. It kept my attention span which is hard to do. I wish someone else had played the Sheban Queen instead of Lollobrigida. I found her too unbelievable.

The supporting cast bored me. Especially the girl who played Abishag and the dude who played Pharaoh. Looked like he was wearing an Egyptian Halloween costume he purchased at Walmart. Once you see Yul Brynner play a pharaoh, none other can pull it off.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Pretty Gina, pretty scenery, pretty bad
Loring27 October 2003
Right this moment I am watching this movie on TV here in Tokyo. Beautiful scenery, beautiful sets of biblical proportions, beautiful costumes, beautiful color, beautiful Gina. Great climactic scene when God destroys the Sheban idol and a lot more with de Millean thunderbolts at the moment when Yul and Gina are about to consummate their love. Yul does a halfway decent job of delivering his lines, though he sounds a lot like Yul delivering his lines as Ramses or Taras Bulba. George Sanders sounds like George Sanders playing George Sanders. Given the limited range of acting she is asked to display in this role, Gina does a good job, though by the time the movie ends, she is completely converted into a demure remorseful lass and looks likes she might be playing in a biography of Mother Teresa. I guess thunderbolts will do that to you, but it is almost breathtaking how quickly she jettisons her own beliefs for her new religion. The supporting players are mostly awful, lacking credible emotion and timing. The usual big battle scenes, what passed for lascivious dances in 1959, and an orchestra blasting out plenty of trumpet calls behind a huge chorus singing lots of "Ah's", but none of it quite of topnotch Hollywood quality. The final swordfight between Brynner and Sanders is at the laughingly low skill level of a junior high school play. The film is one big piece of eye candy but not much more.
40 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed