Exodus (1960)

8/10

An epic about the founding of modern Israel

AlsExGal24 September 2023

The title really fits, because in the first half Jewish refugees (mostly Holocaust survivors) are trying to escape a British detention camp and they get blockaded in a harbor while their leaders try to convince the British to let their people go. It then follows the struggle in Palestine to establish a Jewish state. I especially liked the arc of Ari and how he goes from hardline "we can never trust anyone but ourselves" to eventually falling in love with a non-Jewish woman.

It's a great historical epic, although the subject matter is admittedly extremely controversial. Nevertheless, I really liked it, and I got really invested in the outcome of the characters. One criticism I see is that it drags on for too long, although I didn't think even its long running time was enough to tell all of the stories and do them justice. So perhaps this would have been a better mini-series than movie, as other Leon Uris books were, but then there would be no such thing as the mini-series until the 1970s.

One comical moment is when Paul Newman's character, Ari Ben Canaan, is listening to Peter Lawford, playing a British officer, talk about how he can spot a Jew a mile away. Ben Canaan asks Lawford to look in his eye for a cinder, Lawford's character obliges as he continues to go on about Jewish stereotypes. Of course, blonde blue-eyed Paul Newman is Jewish, as is his character.

There's great tragedy here too though, particularly at the end. There's also the fact that the refugees' own lives having been made cheap during the Holocaust has made others lives seem cheap now. This is especially true of Dov Landau (Sal Mineo) who witnessed unspeakable horrors during the Holocaust, and that experience has made him hard enough that he can blow up 83 people who are guests in a British hotel in Palestine and consider it a job well done.

I'd recommend this one, but if you have time to read the book that is also time very well spent.

17 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

"Exodus", the book and the movie

Galina_movie_fan12 December 2005

Adapted from one of the best books of the last century, Otto Premenger's "Exodus" (1960) had all the components of an exiting, deeply moving masterpiece. It was made by a very talented and celebrated director ("Laura" , "Anatomy of a Murder"); most scenes of the film were made in locations where the original events had occurred; one of the best ever American actors(Paul Newman) played the main character, Jewish hero, a fearless Freedom fighter, Ari Ben Canaan; Sal Meneo gave an absolutely compelling performance as Dov Landau, a young man, a boy really who had survived the horrors of Auschwitz, the only survivor of a big family from Warsaw. Ernst Gold won an Academy award for his truly magnificent musical score. Sadly, "Exodus" is not a masterpiece it is an overlong, heavy handed, and rather unimpressive movie that caused satirist Mort Sahl to say, "Otto, let my people go" as he watched the film's 220-minute preview. Ironically, with all this running time, the best, the most inspirational parts of the book did not make it to the film. Among them are historical events dealing with the origins of ghetto system, pogroms in Russia, the long and fascinating journey of two brothers from a small Russian town to Palestine by foot, the ideas of Theodor Herzl, the birth of kibbutzes in Palestine, and enormous labor of kibbutznicks to make the land fertile, to grow plants and trees where the desert, rocks, and swamps had been, as well as the tragedy of European Holocaust and dramatic story of United Nations voting for partition of Palestine in 1947 and the war of the infant state against its multiple and hostile neighbors for the right to exist and be an independent country. I watched the movie just before I left for my trip to Israel a few weeks ago and I took the book with me there. Reading the book while be able to see the places it describes with such passion and love, to see the land that is called "promised land" or "Holy land" WAS one of the most emotional and unforgettable experiences in my life, watching the movie was not. It is just an illustration to the fantastic book no more, no less. IMO, the book deserves the same treatment that Puso's "Godfather" had received it should've been adapted into several movies, not just one. Like in Godfather, Part II, the scenes of the past and present should've alternated, given the viewers deeper insight in the events and the passions and politics behind them. Or even better, perhaps "Exodus" should've been adapted into TV mini-series format where every important character would've had enough time for his/her story.

109 out of 155 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Generally good, but give me the book any day.

planktonrules28 May 2008

I liked this film, but didn't love it--mostly because the original novel by Leon Uris is so much better that I can't help but feel disappointed. In addition, having the film star so many "guest stars" made it seem a bit like an Irwin Allen picture instead of a serious film about the foundation of Israel in 1948. However, in its favor, the musical score is striking. And, even if the plot is diluted a bit and didn't need all the cameos, it still is immensely entertaining.

What I would really love to one day see is a mini-series based on the book--as there is just too much plot to shove into one film--even a long film like EXODUS. The writing and emotion was so exceptional in the book and I'd love to see it captured more completely. But next time, stop putting very American actors in the leads--Paul Newman, Eva Marie Saint, Lee J. Cobb and Sal Mineo were all fine actors but the film needed people in the leads--not movie stars.

34 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Exodus Succeeds In Its Mission

harvhil8 June 2007

The film version of Leon Uris' Exodus was intentionally scripted for an American audience unfamiliar with Holocaust and Jewish themes. In fact, the film harps on major character Kitty's discomfort just being around Jews. Exodus is a 1960's Hollywood version of the creation of the modern State of Israel "for dummies", and in this it succeeds. While not having any religious Jewish content whatsoever, the film discuss themes of Jewish identity after the Holocaust, the plight of Jewish refugees under the British, the internal struggle of the Haganah versus the militant Irgun, and major historical incidents in the War for Independence 1948. While inaccurate about the actual Exodus ship incident, the film was a milestone in American Jewish cinema and identity. To this day, the film's music remains a mainstay in Jewish American homes.

30 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Heavy-going modern epic, toned down from a passionate novel

Nazi_Fighter_David26 June 2005

Warning: Spoilers

"Exodus" centers on the successful escape, masterminded by the Palestinian underground leader, Ari Ben Canaan, of over 600 Jewish refugees from Cyprus to Palestine; the underground activities in Palestine; and the first Israeli-Arab conflicts following partition

Surrounding these and other events are many personal dramas, including Ari's romance with American nurse Kitty Fremont (Eva Marie Saint) and his friendship with a sympathetic Arab chieftain Taha (John Derek). It's a stirring and visually beautiful film, but it contains one of Newman's least exciting performances

Some contend that Newman's motivational Method conflicted with Preminger's authoritarian approach; others that he was miscast But Ari is the kind of dedicated, single-minded loner Newman is expert atexcept, of course, that the dedication is to a cause, not to himself

When Newman insults the well-meaning Cypriot, Mandria (Hugh Griffith), his friends tell severely that his action is wrong, affirming that Mandria is a real friend He replies: "When the showdown comes, we will always stand alone. Mandria will sell us out like all the others. We have no friends, except ourselves." Those lines are also in the novel, but they could almost have been written expressly for Newman, whose self-sufficient characters often speak in this manner

The real problem is that Newman never gives Ari warmth or humanity His initial impatience, hostility, arrogance and indifference to individual problems are understandable, since he is planning crucial events But even when he is supposed to be getting warmer, more understanding, aware that outsiders can be trusted (Kitty, a Christian, becomes deeply committed to the cause), his behavior remains almost exactly the same

He never comes to life until the last scene, a passionate funeral oration, and by then it's too late There's none of the charm or vitality that makes us interested in even the most vicious of Newman's antiheroes In the one instance where Newman is supposed to be funnyhis impersonation of a British officerhe is forced and uneasy

34 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

9/10

A very depressing discussion here

moosish-628-96595417 August 2015

1. This is a movie, folks. Yes, based on a novel, but it was just that - a novel. Uris didn't claim to be writing a history textbook. As with all memorable literature, he tweaked some facts and embroidered his landscape with memorable fictional characters (although yes, many were based on real-life people.) So it's not appropriate to criticize either the novel or the book for not getting every historical fact absolutely right.

2. This is a MOVIE, folks. Based on a novel, but it's still a movie. Which meant that the actors were cast for a variety of reasons, one of which was solid bank-ability at the box office. To those who complained that Eva Marie Saint is too old in this film, I'd like to remind them that she was only a few months older (in real life) than Paul Newman was. And having her a bit older than the character in the novel is fine, since she brings a different life perspective than someone in her 20s would have. Especially since she was playing a widow. just mho.

3. What has depressed me is that this IMDb discussion of a movie has brought out the Haters. I don't mean people who hated the movie; I mean people who hate Jews and the State of Israel. Apparently, no amount of art, or even actual history, will ever be enough for some people to stop hating, to get them to stop looking for every possible opportunity to malign any group of people they get something -- however perverse or destructive -- out of hating.

4. My personal opinion of this movie is that it's an excellent MOVIE. It entertains. It teaches us a few basic facts about the creation of Israel that most of us never learned in school. It is well-cast, well-acted, well-directed, and well-photographed. In addition, it has a great score throughout the film (not just the very memorable main theme.) I saw it at a movie theater when I was fairly young, and I've probably seen it on TV over a dozen times since then. I also read the novel (a long time ago), but if I've learned anything over the years, it's that movies and novels are different animals that can't fairly be compared page-for-page, so to speak. Heck - ever read "Gone With The Wind?" In the novel, Scarlett has one child with each of her husbands, but in the movie, she only has the one child, with Rhett. But no one complains about it because it's a damn good movie. And so is "Exodus." It's damn good movie.

128 out of 160 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Hard to View Today as it Was in 1960; Best Remembered Now for its Score

Aldanoli24 June 2007

Seeing "Exodus" early in the 21st century, one is robbed of the experience that moviegoers of the early 1960s would have had; it's impossible to see a movie about the birth of Israel now without the perspective of the Six-Day War of 1967, which changed the perception many non-Jews had of Israel. That, and the events that the Six-Day War led to, have eroded the moral assurance that many of the main characters of "Exodus" espouse about Israel and its founding, and would eventually lead to the moral quagmire found 45 years later in Steven Spielberg's "Munich." Today, "Munich" is much closer to the grayness of who is right or wrong in the modern-day Middle East than the black-and-white assumptions that drive the characters of "Exodus" in 1947 -- or its creators in 1960.

And it's likewise much harder to accept Paul Newman in the role of a Jewish freedom fighter; though he was already a big star in 1960 (which was no doubt the reason that he was chosen for the part), one cannot evaluate his performance here without recalling all the other high points of his career that were still ahead of him -- "The Hustler," "Cool Hand Luke," "Hombre," and of course his two big triumphs with Robert Redford, as Butch and Sundance and in "The Sting" -- not to mention a career that kept humming even into the 1990s. He's hardly remembered for this role at all today, and though even he isn't in every scene in a sweeping epic like this, it's hard to look at the movie without remembering all that would come later.

What stands out today more than Newman's performance, therefore, are the many secondary characters -- Sal Mineo as the tortured survivor of Auschwitz with secrets that lead him to the Irgun (and a performance that would earn him his second and last Oscar nomination); David Opatoshu as a Menachem Begin-like figure who believes violence is better than negotiation; and Jill Haworth, all of 15 at the time, and who would have a bevy of ingénue roles into the 1960s, but whose career would dribble out by the end of the next decade.

In particular, this was a great role for Opatoshu, who is probably best remembered today for his many guest shots on television (like Newman, most that came after this, in everything from "Twilight Zone" and "Mission:Impossible" to "Star Trek" and "Hawaii Five-O"). Though he is recognizable for those roles, it's worth remembering that he came out of Yiddish Theater and was a controlled, subtle performer who rarely got the kind of meaty role that he had here -- and one that no doubt was important to him.

So, while it's mainly remembered today for Ernest Gold's stirring theme music, "Exodus" is interesting as a window into a different time and a different way of thinking -- both about its subject matter and its main character . . . and the once and future star who played him.

67 out of 108 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

8/10

Some reasons for viewing Exodus

bella6265028 August 2005

I saw Exodus when it first came out in 1960. I lived in a New Jersey community with a large Jewish population and many of this population were Holocaust survivors. I also read the book in 1964 and although the movie couldn't include all of the events in text, it did give people an idea of the struggle to form a Jewish Homeland. I recommended it recently to a Palestinian young woman to give her some idea of this struggle by Israel to survive in a hostile environment. I also suggested that she read the book. In a world in which some people prefer ideas condensed, the movie at least gave some idea of the formation of a new country. Paul Newman was every Jewish girl's dream husband and every mother's son-in-law in my neighborhood, Sal Mineo was convincing in his anguish, the others did what they could. I would recommend it to people who aren't familiar with the events leading to today's difficulties in the Middle East. Perhaps Exodus should have been filmed like the Godfather movies. A movie depicting the past and the present lives of the characters could have helped. Hollywood wasn't in that mind frame in the 1950's and 1960's and that's too bad.

16 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Call Me Israel

wes-connors9 November 2008

Otto Preminger's presentation of Leon Uris' novel "Exodus" tried to evoke comparisons, in its trailer, to "Gone with the Wind" and "The Birth of a Nation". Those films overcome ideological flaws, and remain genuine, undeniable classics. Despite the starry cast and sweeping grandeur, "Exodus" fails to achieve its epic intentions. Mr. Preminger, coming off the superb "Anatomy of a Murder", gives it a long and dull direction. Paul Newman (as Ari Ben Canaan) and Eva Marie Saint (as Kitty Fremont) are quite unconvincing, in the leading roles. Still, there are some good characterizations, and nicely staged scenes.

The film offers two obvious, award-garnering career moves: Sal Mineo's masterful supporting performance, and Ernest Gold's beautiful musical score. Mr. Mineo (as Dov Landau) won a "Golden Globe" as "Best Supporting Actor"; and, arguably, he also deserved the year's "Academy Award". His subplot, played with pretty blonde newcomer Jill Haworth (as Karen Johansson), is far and away the most interesting story, thanks to Mineo's acting work. Mr. Gold's "Exodus" theme is also outstanding, selling well over a million copies of the Ferrante and Teicher version alone; it won not only an Oscar, but also a Grammy as 1960's "Song of the Year".

****** Exodus (12/15/60) Otto Preminger ~ Paul Newman, Eva Marie Saint, Sal Mineo

29 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

3/10

Popular in 1960 But Today Uninspired

gftbiloxi29 March 2005

Early in the film, while discussing the squabbling between Jews and Arabs over Palestine, an exasperated Eva Marie Saint sighs and asks "How is it all going to end?" How indeed! It is a question the world has asked for more than half a century, and to date there is no answer in sight.

Concerning the creation of the Jewish state of Israel, the 1958 Leon Uris novel EXODUS was among the great bestsellers of its era and remains widely read to this day. The 1960 film version was also widely admired at the time of its release--but it is seldom seen today. There is a reason for that. In spite of its reputation, the film is remarkably slapdash. The cinematography is poor, lacking arresting visuals and often so sloppy that the shadows of the boom mikes are visible here, there, and everywhere throughout the film. The sound mix is also quite poor, with post-production effects as much off the mark as they are on. But the great flaws here are the script and the cast.

Written for the screen by Dalton Trumbo, the script has a very artificial and very talky quality. This might be overlooked if Trumbo actually had anything to say in the process--but he does not, and a remarkably gifted cast struggles vainly against one artificial line after another. Paul Newman is horrifically miscast; Eva Marie Saint, Ralph Richardson, and Lee J. Cobb fare a bit better, but Jill Haworth is chiefly memorable for giving the single worst performance in the film. As for Sal Mineo's much lauded performance, today it seems extremely theatrical.

Even so, EXODUS would remain passable were it not for the incredibly naive brand of Zionism the film adopts. More than fifty years later after endless wars, waves of terrorism, and failed peace talks we all know that it was NEVER as simple as this movie would have us believe. When all is said and done, the most memorable thing about EXODUS is the Academy Award-winning score by Ernest Gold, which really is as good as every one says it is.

The film is presently available to the homemarket as a no-frills DVD. Final thought: it has moments of interest and on rare occasions even brilliance, but those moments are few and far between. Best left to those who remember it fondly from its 1960 debut.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

107 out of 195 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

8/10

The fighting heart of Israel

bkoganbing10 October 2005

Growing up in Brooklyn in the Fifties and Sixties, I can tell you that every Jewish household seem to have a copy of Herman Wouk's Marjorie Morningstar and Leon Uris's Exodus. The characters in Exodus among the people I grew up with became as known as family members. So when Otto Preminger made the film, he had a built in audience, almost in the same way that every Star Trek movie has.

But we're not talking about a mythical future. The novel is about Israel's founding, but the issues still remain and Exodus should be required viewing for all who wonder about the need for a Jewish state. Wouldn't hurt to read the book either.

Exodus got only one Oscar, but there was really no competition there. Ernest Gold's musical score is one of the great ones done for the cinema. I remember how much it was played back when I was a lad. It's a vigorous and uplifting melody and like so many other good film scores it carries the viewer along in what is a lengthy movie.

Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint are capable enough leads, but it is the supporting characters that really make this film. Two of my favorites are David Opatoshu as Akiva Ben Canaan, an Irgun leader and Gregory Ratoff as Lazavitch who was the rabble rouser on the ship Exodus. You will remember both of these people after viewing Exodus. Why the Academy overlooked either of them for nominations is beyond me. But that was a year rich in supporting performances.

Making this film must have been the highlight of the career of David Opatoshu. He was a leading actor in the Yiddish Theater and to be in this film must have been a dream come true. Seeing him in various roles, Opatoshu never gave a bad performance in his career.

Sal Mineo as Dov Landau was nominated for Best Supporting Actor,the young concentration camp survivor who joins the Irgun. Sal had some stiff competition that year. Other nominees were Chill Wills for The Alamo, Jack Kruschen for The Apartment, and Peter Falk for Murder, Inc. Groucho Marx made a public declaration that his vote was for Sal Mineo after an appalling campaign appeal was started for Chill Wills. But the winner was Peter Ustinov for Spartacus.

According to a new biography of Sal Mineo, he was very jealous of Ustinov's victory and would curse him out if his name was even casually brought up in conversation.

I'm convinced that Leon Uris in writing Exodus was influenced by the Diary of Anne Frank in creating the character of Karen played in the film by Jill Haworth. Funny also that the film version of the play came out the year before Exodus. It was as if Anne Frank had survived the camps and had come to the birthing of Israel. She's an innocent child who still retains her faith in people like Anne Frank did, making what happens to her all the more tragic. If you've read the book before seeing the film, Haworth's performance was all the more poignant.

Unfortunately Exodus is not history because the war is still being fought by the Jewish people against those who would wish and do evil upon them. Would that it were just history.

118 out of 184 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Overlong and big budgeted epic about the birth of state of Israel

ma-cortes4 February 2009

This historical film is based on real events and Leon Uris'novel. By the late 1945, millions of bewildered and homeless Jews people were on the move-across Europe and the Far East. They were looking for somewhere to live and for many of them that meant a new country. Jews demanded a land of their own. Jewish refugees were at a British camp on their way to Palestine. The Jews on board hoped to sail to Palestine in the first 'exodus ship'. Jewish refugees struggle ashore from island of Cyprus. But the ship (led by Jewish leader Paul Newman, helped by an American widow (Eva Marie Saint) will be intercepted. On many of the refugees, by a famine-strike, the conditions were appalling , overcrowded, lacking food and water. The British troops (commanded by Ralph Richardson and Peter Lawford) guard the shipload of Jews in the port, they were rounded up, to be sent to the camp. This is an exodus that succeeded. In Palestine coming so soon after the holocaust, the homeless come home, but these traumatic echoes of Auschwitz and Buchenwald inflamed Zionist feelings. 1946,1947 and early 1948 were a years in which Zionist terrorist was at its height and Independent Israel still seemed heartbreaks away. In 22 July 1946, ninety-one people died when the King David Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up by Zionists. When one of the ringleader (David Opatoshu) of the Zionist anarchist group is placed under arrest, to be taken under close guard to the camp , the movement plans the breakout. The subsequent setting is the strife-ridden area of Palestine between Jewish and Arabs fighting cruelly each other. The state of Israel was born in war and spent its youth struggling for survival. The nearly established United Nations did what it could to help, establishing camps for refugees and the supervision of Great Britain over Palestine . And later a voting that declared the independence of Israel under Ben Gurion (similar role played by Lee J Cobb).

This historical film well written by Dalton Trumbo was efficiently directed by Otto Preminger. Good performances from Paul Newman as an obstinate Israeli leader, Ralph Richardson as a commandant of British forces in Cyprus and Sal Mineo as a young terrorist , the latter won the Golden Globe for support actor. Furthermore , the sensitive and emotive soundtrack by Ernest Gold won Oscar 1960 for Original Dramatic Score . Colorful and evocative cinematography by Sam Leavitt, filmed in Israel and Cyprus with spectacular production design by Richard Day. Over budgeted, as cost more than five million dollars , an incredible amount of money at the time .This chronicle about the post-WWII partition of Palestine will appeal to historical events enthusiasts.

22 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

2/10

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

theognis-808219 October 2021

Slow, ponderous infomercial about the establishment of Israel. Jewish refugees are welcomed to Palestine by Moslem leader, John Derek. Eloquent rationales for torture and terrorism are offered by David Opatoshu. Lee J. Cobb, father of Paul Newman and Alexandra Stewart, boasts of his talent for recognizing "American types." Lovely Eva Marie Saint seeks to adopt a lovely Jewish girl from Denmark, Jill Haworth, who prefers to stay with "her people," rather than live in Beverly Hills or Scarsdale. Sal Mineo, fit as a fiddle after a tour in Auschwitz takes on a trio of British soldiers in a street fight. It begs the question: how did the nincompoop British Army manage to be on the winning side in World War II? Screenwriter Dalton Trumbo should have hired a front.

16 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

A Fascinating Subject; A Good (But Not Great) Film

duceditor-710-8327723 October 2017

When Leon Uris's novel came out the American public was excited by the story it contained -- one that reflected historical truths placed into an equally romantic and exciting story.

A handsome and daring male lead, a strong and beautiful woman whose ideas and ideals are constantly being challenged. A people struggling for survival against a myriad of enemies.

Add to that beautiful location shooting all done in the actual locations of Israel and Cyprus, a memorable score and big name stars, this film has much to offer.

But finding it today is difficult. (I had to search out a Blu Ray created for the Australian market -- but thankfully playable on a US player) One can only assume that the non-politically correct idea of seeing 'goodness' in the creation of a Jewish State and all that has followed it as the reason why.

No, this is not a "great" film. Its length gets in the way of that - - and such with much cut from the original novel. But "good" it is. Definitely worth seeing.

Well, if you can find it.

12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Most impressive thing about "Exodus" is Ernest Gold's robust score...

Doylenf29 September 2006

The years have dimmed my memory of EXODUS but I realized that I should have written a review for it long ago. What stayed with me, after seeing the film, was the gorgeous and uplifting "Theme from Exodus" by Ernest Gold.

I never read the Leon Uris novel, but understand that a lot of incidents had to be underplayed in the film because the huge novel required a long film of over three hours to do it justice. As it is, it's a bit overlong and full of rich, episodic incidents in the story of the creation of the Palestian war of liberation. It's a sprawling epic and does get a bit tedious at times but the performances all hold the interest.

Especially good are PAUL NEWMAN and EVA MARIE SAINT in the leads, with SAL MINEO giving what is arguably his best performance as a rebel with a cause, and numerous other international players lending their talents.

But the overall effect is somewhat blunted by too much exposition and a lethargy that seems to build during the middle of the story. However, no denying it's quite an achievement on an historical basis and that Ernest Gold score is still worth admiring.

21 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

10/10

A movie that excels all expectations- and offers a rare glimpse of history

moviecool7 January 2006

I know it's not the most talked about movie, but put it on your list- it should be in the top. This is a film that will certainly bring some sort of emotion to you- passion, hate, love, anger... While following the lives of a couple of post-Holocaust Jews, it manages to show every step of the way to the creation of the State of Israel.

The film goes from Cyprus to a boat to Israel, all while remembering historical events during the Holocaust, Israel, and much more. Unlike many modern films that are decisively pro or anti-Israel (sometimes to the extreme), this one displays its message eloquently but clearly, although it leaves some room for you to decide how to perceive it. Yet it can also be watched as a love story or a survival epic. It shows reason for the wrong and the right and has the ability to change your opinion. Ultimately, the movie leaves you thinking about all it has to say and what its characters had to say.

It has great cinematic quality too. Paul Newman and Lee J. Cobb are great as their parts, portraying real people in real situations. The cinematography is excellent, too, with shots that bring the emotion to you and put you in the mindset of each character. The epic score tops it all off- it is the key to this movie's wonder. It keeps everything flowing and depending on its variation can match the emotion of any scene. Finally, Otto Preminger's direction tops it off. The drama is raw and truthful, while on a grand scale that few other movies have been able to capture.

46 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

How DARE the Oscars have jipped this wonderful film?

bensajo5 January 2003

I can't see how this movie was not even NOMINATED for best picture. It is on par with all the other big epic pictures that have won it, like Ben Hur. This movie deserved it more than the typical mushy love story Apartment - what is it with the Academy Awards and mushy love stories? Why can't they understand that this movie was not just a diversion, but a historical non-biased account on the foundation of one of the most critical countries of the world?

23 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Good Story, Worth the Telling

gavin69422 August 2012

The theme is the founding of the state of Israel. The action begins on a ship filled with Jewish immigrants bound for Israel who are being off loaded on Cyprus. An Intelligence officer succeeds in getting them back on board their ship only to have the harbor blocked by the British with whom they must negotiate.

The foundation of Israel is quite a good story, both for its emotional and its historical value. They have done a fine job here presenting a relatively accurate version of events. Indeed, it is inherently political, and depending on how you view the Middle East, it may paint the way you watch this film. But viewing this in 2012 is not the same as viewing it in 1960, I think.

I would love to see another film along these lines, particularly focusing on Palestine in the 1930s. Even before the current Jewish-Arab problems, there was much turmoil among the British-occupied territory.

12 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

10/10

One of Otto Preminger's best films

theowinthrop8 November 2008

Warning: Spoilers

Otto Preminger has an odd track record among film directors. He liked to tackle big topics, and some of his films remain quite good: THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN ARM about drug addiction; ANATOMY OF A MURDER about the law and rape-murder trials; ADVISE AND CONSENT about the maneuvering of politicians in the selection of a controversial Secretary of State. Some of his films date badly, like THE MOON IS BLUE where the personality of the pert young woman, who mentioned she was a "virgin" was a big thing in 1953 but now the comedy seems quite lame. Also there are his awful later films like SKIDOO (Groucho Marx's swan song film) or HURRY SUNDOWN about racial antipathies in the "New South" of the 1960s.

EXODUS, based on a popular novel by Leon Uris, is one of Preminger's best films - dealing with the creation of the state of Israel, and the problems the Jewish immigrants and settlers faced against the British and Arabs. Actually Preminger's own Jewish background possibly made the film more personal than most of his films. In the 1940s, as a refugee come to the U.S. he frequently found himself playing Nazi villains in films like THEY GOT ME COVERED or THE PIED PIPER. It probably did not sit too well with him, although he would occasionally still do a Nazi in a movie after his directing took off (as the Commendant of the prison camp in Billy Wilder's STALAG 17).

The Preminger effort at directing was actually one of his weaknesses. When his films were great it was because of the subject matter, acting, and vigor of his directions (he ran a tight ship on his productions), but he never developed a style like Hitchcock or Welles or Ford or Hawks. In fact his success at the box office was in part due to his getting his movies in on time, and keeping to budgets (which shows his tight ship approach worked well). But none of his films consecutively show a developing approach to movie making like "the Lubitsch Touch".

Given a big theme, and a decent script, and a good cast Preminger could do well. He does very well here. The founding of Israel is still a remarkable story that is not concluded yet - especially as the survival of the state remains a major international problem to this day. One only has to read the newspapers to see how many Arabs want the state to end, or at least be controlled by international policies. But the Israelis are not pushovers - the film explains that. They won't go out of existence again for anyone.

During World War II the fate of Europe's Jews was basically ignored in the rest of the world, angering the survivors. One particularly galling aspect to it was that (due to concerns about oil) the British controlling Palestine refused to allow Jewish refugees in. The Arabs were willing to toy with collaborating with the Nazis (the activities of the Grand Mufti with Hitler is mentioned in the film). At the end of the war Jewish refugees began flooding into Palestine (or at least trying to). The British, now under a Labour Government under Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin, kept the refugees in "camps" in Cyprus.

The British were facing the end of their empire. India and Pakistan shared newspaper coverage in 1946-1948 with Israel as "trouble spots". The former were better handled by Attlee's Viceroy Lord Mountbatten, who knew how to hand over the power. But not Palestine. Too many interests in neighboring Arab states from Egypt to the Persian Gulf were involved. So the British acted quite ham-handed.

And the Jews reacted violently. One of the incidents of the film is the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1947, but there had been earlier ones (such as the assassination of Britain's High Commissioner to the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in 1944). Each time the Jews acted, the British reacted. In the end the Jews considered the Labour Party (normally the party most English Jews supported) anti-Semitic, labeling the camps that were set up "Bevingrad" after the British Foreign Secretary.

The script gets the time down flawlessly. Look at Peter Lawford's anti-Semitic officer (one of Lawford's best performances by the way), who sees Jews as either Bolsheviks or Pawn Brokers. Or Ralph Richardson's General Sutherland, a humane mane who resigns when he can't stand the job anymore. Look at John Derek's "good Arab" who sacrifices himself to save Paul Newman's Jewish settlement. Or the Nazis (Marius Goring) who are now offering their service to the Arabs. Note too the serious divisions among the Jews who favor diplomacy and law (Lee J. Cobb) as opposed to those who favor terrorism (David Opatashu). The film is excellent for presenting the Jewish version of the Palestinian/Israeli situation. Is it the full story? No, the full story can't be compressed that easily into one film or one book. But it is a good place to start.

30 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Simplistic And Grim Melodrama

Theo Robertson8 April 2005

I guess when EXODUS was adapted from the Uris novel ( I've not read the book so any criticisms are to do with the book being translated to screen ) the creation of the Jewish State Of Israel and events surrounding would have been fresh in everyone's mind . This leads to a fairly serious problem watching the movie in 2005 and that's factual events are skimmed over with little explanation . Or maybe the facts presented are done so in such a simplistic manner they are totally confusing to a present day audience with no knowledge of the present Israeli Arab conflicts For example the Haganah and Irgun are important to the plot . Do we have any satisfactory explanation to what they are ? There is a brief throwaway line about the differences between the two but it's hardly factual unless you believe the Haganah were a sort of Jewish Greenpeace .Likewise we're shown the bombing of The St David Hotel but it's skated over so slightly as to be deemed offensive . Did you know that many Jews died in the atrocity ? Did you know that after the bombing David Ben Guerion ( Look him up in a search engine - He was far more important than this movie makes out ) described the Irgun as " The enemy of the Jewish people " ? And the prison breakout at Acre seems to be totally Hollywoodized

Okay it's not a documentary , but this simplicity seems to interfere with character motivation where Ari Ben Canaan decides to switch from the Haganah to the Irgun because " We'll need all the men we can get to fight the Arabs " . This unconvincing on screen character motivation combined with the length of the movie gives the whole scenario a feel of pot boiler mini series rather than a historical document , so by the time we're introduced to Ari's best friend from childhood - An Arab of course - and an escaped Nazi war criminal I was expecting Elizabeth Taylor and Jane Seymour to put in an appearance somewhere

I hope I'm not contradicting myself here but I found the tone of the movie very grim and much of this is down to bad things happening to good people and vice versa . Innocent people die while terrorists on both sides survive beyond the final reel , but I know that in real life karma ( The mystical concept that people get what they truly deserve in life ) doesn't exist so maybe I shouldn't criticise too hard . What I do know is that you won't be doing too much laughing watching this movie

EXODUS isn't a total waste of time and has some positives . Even reviewers who have expressed a dislike for the movie have credited the good cast and of course the score . It's also interesting to note that while movies featuring the Irish troubles are nearly always totally Anglophobic ( THE DEVIL'S OWN being a good example ) the Brits here while not exactly being shown as heroes aren't exactly shown as being villains either and a character does praise the conduct of the British Army during the mandate period along with General Sutherland being shown in a very sympathetic light - You don't have to be Jewish to sympathise with the Jews

As for my own opinions of modern day Israelis I would say I respect and admire them more than I actually like them while EXODUS is a film that is very difficult to admire and respect though is not entirely unlikable

39 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

5/10

A snooze of an epic

Jeremy_Urquhart29 September 2021

Exodus? More like Exoduzzzzz 😴

This movie has an accomplished director in Otto Preminger, a good screenwriter in Dalton Trumbo, a solid cast that includes acting icons like Paul Newman, Eva Marie Saint, Lee J Cob, and Sal Mineo, a large budget, good visuals, and a nice musical score... so why is it so boring?

It's quite baffling, really. There's just too many scenes of people talking about the same sorts of things in rooms, punctuated by a few dialogue heavy scenes outdoors that are at least more visually exciting and like... one or two set pieces? In almost three and a half hours? It's hardly very generous, or considerate of its viewer's attention spans.

I thought the fairly subdued reception by modern viewers would be more due to the film's politics (it does take a firm side on an ongoing issue that has divided and still does divide people) but really, politics aside, its main problem might just be that it's dull.

Its technical competency and the fact that the cast does decent work with a boring screenplay keeps it from being awful, but it's really disappointing, ultimately.

9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

8/10

Honoring an Age-Old Promise

Uriah4312 April 2020

Immediately after World War 2 and the horrors of the holocaust the British government found itself in a difficult situation. On the one hand, it had promised the Jewish people the right to return to their ancient homeland in Palestine. The problem was that the Arab nations had no intention of allowing that to happen. That being said, this film essentially begins in Cypress with an American woman by the name of "Catherine 'Kitty' Fremont" (Eva Marie Saint) having lunch with the British commander in charge of detaining a large number of Jewish refugees there pending a determination as to whether to allow them to continue on to Palestine. During the course of their meeting "General Sutherland" (Ralph Richardson) learns that Ms. Fremont is a nurse and offers her a chance to check out the nearby field hospital. She eventually accepts and during that time meets a young girl named "Karen" (Jill Haworth) who captures her interest enough to ask the general whether she can adopt her. Unbeknownst to her, a radical leader of a Zionist movement named "Ari Ben Canaan" (Paul Newman) has come upon a plan to remove a large number of Jewish detainees from the camp and place them on a nearby ship to transport them to Palestine-and Karen is one of those refugees. Naturally, this creates a problem for both Catherine Fremont and General Sutherland which is only exacerbated when Ari Ben Canaan threatens to blow the ship up and kill everybody if the British government tries to board the ship while in harbor. Now rather than reveal any more and risk spoiling the film for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this was a very good film which captures the dilemma of both the British government and the plight of the Jewish refugees quite well. Although I didn't especially care for the rather abrupt ending, the rest of the film was extremely enjoyable with both Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint performing their parts particularly well and I have rated this movie accordingly.

17 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

"The only weapon we have to fight with is our willingness to die."

classicsoncall18 January 2019

Warning: Spoilers

This movie came out only a little over a decade after Israel became a recognized nation, and only a couple of years after the release of the Leon Uris novel of the same name. The history of the turbulent Middle East and Israel in particular, would be enough to inspire dozens of movies, no single one being expansive enough to effectively cover the entire gamut. Elements of that history are touched on in "Exodus", even some of the specifics of the Exodus voyage are historically inaccurate. The film's central emphasis that came across most forcefully for me had nothing to do with nationalism or ideology, but the idea, expressed by Ari Ben Canaan (Paul Newman) to Kitty Fremont (Eva Marie Saint), that the differences between people must be recognized and respected. Initially, Mrs. Fremont resisted the idea, but eventually came to that understanding after witnessing the strife between Jews, the Brits, and their Arab neighbors.

It was jarring however to see Paul Newman cast as a Jewish leader of a resistance movement, even if the stare down between him and Major Caldwell (Peter Lawford) was meant to convey that Jews can look like anybody at all. It was also jarring to see how much Eva Marie Saint had aged in a mere matter of six years since appearing in "On The Waterfront", although makeup might have had a hand in her appearance. Someone else mentioned it in their review of the picture, but the character of Karen Hansen (Jill Haworth) also reminded me in some ways of Anne Frank, in the manner of her obvious love of life and hope for the future. Her murder, along with that of Taha (John Derek), the Makhtur of Abu Yesha, dramatically brought home the senselessness of the violence that existed between warring neighbors and persists to the present day. If only, if only, if only..., men of reasonable mind and heart like Ari Ben Canaan and Taha could find a way to bridge the gulf that exists between people and cultures so diametrically opposed to one another.

6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

4/10

Lengthy Palestine Deliberation

Lejink4 March 2020

It's almost impossible, I find, not to bracket this movie along with Kubrick's "Spartacus". Both were big-budget epics (although of very different types), made in the same year and were massive commercial hits. They were made by two auteur-ish directors, dealt with the subject of freedom and were each well over three hours in length. Most significantly of course, in terms of Hollywood history, was probably that the screenplay for both was written by and for the first time in several years honestly credited to the formerly blacklisted writer Dalton Trumbo, indeed there's some dispute about who came up with the idea of so breaking the feared Blacklist first, Kirk Douglas or Otto Preminger.

What I can't do however is bracket them together in terms of cinematic entertainment. "Spartacus", which I rewatched recently, is one of my all-time favourite movies and its three hours running time just flew by whereas I struggled to stay interested all the way through "Exodus". The story itself is obviously of interest to modern historians and is quite obviously slanted in favour of the Jewish freedom fighters of the immediate post war period striving to create a homeland for their persecuted countrymen and women as they were promised a land of their own by the British government's important Balfour Declaration of 1917. To force the occupying British forces to finally sit up and take notice, a group of Jewish protestors commandeered an old boat, renamed it "Exodus" and in a daring move sprung several hundred detainees, got them into the boat and sailed for Palestine, there to claim their territorial heritage as some sort of reparation for the holocaust they as a race had suffered at the hands of the Nazis in World War 2.

After they force the British Government's hand by staging a hunger strike on board the boat and so win their permission to settle in Palestine, backed by an official United Nations vote, they next have to contend with the mobilised Arab forces and in particular the supporters of the Palestinians already in situ on the designated area of land. The film ends with this same band of Jewish Resistance going forward into battle against the opposing Arab forces ranged against them after daringly evacuating their children away to safety from the camp through the night.

The Jewish lobby in America reportedly got a massive boost from the success of this movie. It can't be coincidence that the film features prominently an American woman who goes over to the Jewish cause, after initially only wanting to rescue one of their number, a young teenage girl to whom she's taken a shine, falling in love with the movement's leader in the process.

However I found the two romances dreamed up for inclusion (the young girl herself falls for a youthful combatant) to be sentimental distractions from the main drama. Obviously these were inserted as sops to movie viewers' traditional expectations. I also found the action to be slow and lacking in dynamism. More action and less speechifying would certainly have piqued my interest more. That's not to say there aren't moving moments, particularly the death by hanging of the Arab leader sympathetic, up to a point, to the Jewish position, but otherwise the viewer has to soak up a lot of political cant earnestly and lengthily debated along the way. For the key scene of the Jewish political prisoners break-out, director Preminger stretches out the scene interminably by showing the transmission of what seems like countless secret messages and signs in the build-up to the attempt.

I didn't get much from the acting either. Paul Newman here lacks the conviction, not to say charisma of the most obvious comparison Douglas as the rebellion leader and Eva Marie Saint can't elevate her character above cipher status. Of the rest of the large cast, I'd only give pass marks to the reliable Ralph Richardson as the sympathetic British Army officer we meet at the detainment centre in Cyprus at the start of the feature.

I have enjoyed a number of Preminger films of late but not this one. There's little imagination in the cinematography and really he could and should have cut the word-count and by implication the viewing-time considerably even as I appreciate it was based on the weighty novel of the same name.

This was one Exodus I'm afraid which led me to a state of boredom.

10 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Slick Entertainment...

JasparLamarCrabb8 January 2002

It's difficult not be distracted by the sight of movie stars Paul Newman & Eva Marie Saint fighting to establish the state of Israel, but director Otto Preminger's film of the Leon Uris novel is a slick and well mounted epic. The photography is excellent and the supporting cast, including Peter Lawford, Ralph Richardson, Lee J. Cobb, and especially Sal Mineo is first rate. Be warned: it's VERY LONG!!

9 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

User Reviews

See also

Opinion

Details

Storyline

Did You Know?

Photo & Video

Related Items

User Lists

Recently Viewed