Esther and the King (1960) User Reviews

Palace Intrigue

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 16 May 2013]

I've always thought that the story of Esther And The King in the Bible is a fascinating account of palace intrigue. Maybe one of the earliest ones we have though the Old Testament gives a nice account of all the power plays in the Saul, David and Solomon monarchies of Israel as well.

Joan Collins in her salad days plays Esther who has a relative in high places, that being Mordecai one of the Persian King Ahaseurus's chief councilors. His rival is Haman who is one serpentine rival, a reckless intriguer, but he's also Persian so he has that advantage with the king who is played with proper noble bearing by Richard Egan. All that Denis O'Dea as Mordecai has going for him is the sound advice he gives. But it illustrates a line that George Peppard spoke in the war film Tobruk about Jews always being guests in someone else's country.

Haman is played by Italian actor Sergio Fantoni who American fans probably best know as the sympathetic Italian lieutenant in Von Ryan's Express. This guy loves intrigue for its own sake, for the rush it gives him. Eventually that's what does him in.

The reason that Egan has to take a new wife is that the old wife Queen Vashti was doing a lot of catting around while he was at war. She's played by Daniele Rocca and it's a shame that lady didn't become better known. She was quite the looker.

Esther And The King gets the usual revisions DeMille style for biblical epics. I saw it over 50 years ago in the theater and it holds up very well. And it's a chance to see Joan Collins play a virgin.

Overlong , impressive , but mediocre Biblical epic by the classic filmmaker Raoul Walsh

[ma-cortes · 5/10 · 21 October 2017]

¨The power , the pageantry , the sweep of one of the greatest love adventures of all¨ . Biblical costumer with the hunk Richard Egan as the great Persian king , statesmanlike as well as conqueror ruler , and the gorgeous Joan Collins as Judean maid , the young Jewish girl , Hadassah , goes on to become the Biblical Esther , the Queen of Persia , who saves the Jewish nation from annihilation at the hands of its archenemy , Haman . As the stiff king wants to her in place of the murdered queen , Daniella Roca . The movie is partially true to the Biblical account of a Jewish woman who , at the risk of her own life, stands up to the King and a man named Haman , Sergio Fantoni , who was almost successful in convincing the king to wipe out all of the Jews in the land . In the Bible, one of the best lines is spoken by Mordecai , played by Denis O'Dea , Esther's uncle , who tries to assuage Esther's fear by saying, "Who knows, perhaps you have been chosen for such a time as this" . It was written : ¨Gather together all the fair young virgins unto the palace and let the maiden which pleased the king be queen¨ . In the end , Haman constructed a gallows from which to hang Mordecai whom he insisted was subversive , but things go awry .

This is the classical and biblical story of Esther , a book in the Old Testament and King Artexerxis , a powerful Babylonian king . This is breathtaking movie in every sense : filmmaker used spectacular palaces , luxurious gowns , stirring dances full of beauties , and lots of extras . Writing and direction , however are average . ¨Esther and the king¨ is in the greatest Cecil B DeMille tradition , the best in mass audience , displaying great production design and lavishly made . There is romance , battles and intrigue as is common with many Old Testament accounts . Epic , rambling events and spectacle are regularly blended in this flick realized in Peplum style , if raggedly and tortuously scripted story of Esther and the King . Wooden acting by Richard Egan and marvelous Joan Collins , though this vehicle first was announced for Hedy Lamarr in 1953 . Here Esther is portrayed as one who is not only fun-loving but brave and wise and Artexerxes is portrayed as a man who carefully measures his decisions and falls deeply in love with Esther . It boasts superior secondary cast plenty of known American/Italian actors . As support cast is pretty well , such as Dennis O'Dea , Rick Battaglia , Gabrielle Tinti , Rosalba Neri , Folco Lulli , Renato Baldini and Sergio Fantoni as Haman who was hanged on his own gallows . There is another version about these deeds titled ¨One night with the king¨ (2006) by Michael O. Sajbel with Tiffany Dupont as Hadassah / Esther , Luke Goss as King Xerxes , John Noble as Prince Admantha , Omar Sharif as Prince Memucan , John Rhys-Davies as Mordecai and James Callis a Haman, the Agagite

This long epic Italian/USA co-production shot in Cinemascope and color by De Luxe well photographed by Mario Bava . Evocative and moving musical score by Angel Francesco Lavagnino . The motion picture financed by Galatea Production and realised by Twenty Century Fox Corporation was professional but middlingly directed by Raoul Walsh . Raoul was an expert on action , thriller , Film Noir , Western genres . He made several adventure/epic movies as ¨Blackbeard pirate¨, ¨Sea Devils¨, ¨Captain Horacio Hornblower¨, ¨The world in his arms¨ and this ¨Esther and the king¨ and at the same time collaborated , but uncredited , in ¨Helen of Troy¨ by Robert Wise .

Bargain-Basement Epic

[JamesHitchcock · 5/10 · 22 February 2006]

I saw this film shortly after seeing "Spartacus", which probably meant that it was not seen to its best advantage. Although both films date from the same year, and although both fall within the same tradition of the historic/Biblical epic, they are very different in terms of quality. Whereas "Spartacus" is perhaps the greatest epic ever made, "Esther and the King" is very much from the bargain-basement end of the market.

Like a number of other bargain-basement epics ("Samson and Delilah", "Salome" and "Solomon and Sheba" all come to mind), "Esther" is an odd mixture of godliness and sexiness. Films of this nature generally preached a vaguely Christian message (in this case that religious toleration is preferable to sectarian genocide) but in order to get that message across the producers seemed to find it necessary to show as much female flesh as the censors of the day would permit, with nubile slave-girls and scantily-dressed dancers much in evidence. The Bible tells us that Queen Vashti incurred the displeasure of her husband King Ahasuerus because she refused his command to appear in the palace "to shew the people and the princes her beauty". In this film, however, Vashti is guilty of quite the opposite offence, namely that of showing the people and the princes more of her beauty than she ought to by doing a striptease down to her panties in the royal hall.

There is, moreover, a good deal of male flesh on view as well as female. The main qualification for the male lead in this type of epic was a pair of muscular legs that would look good in a short kilt or tunic. (Acting ability was very much a secondary consideration). This convention is adhered to here; although the ancient Persians, unlike the Greeks, Romans or Egyptians, preferred to wear trousers, Richard Egan as Ahasuerus still dresses Roman-style, as do Sergio Fantoni as the main villain Haman and Richard Battaglia as the secondary hero Simon. (Simon is an invented character not found in the Biblical account, Esther's sweetheart before she is chosen as the King's second wife).

The one person who is exempt from the need to strip down to the bare essentials is, surprisingly enough, Joan Collins, strikingly attractive in this film but covered up throughout. I say "surprisingly" because since "The Bitch" and "Dynasty" the popular perception is that she was a one-trick pony, an actress who specialised in playing sultry villainesses and little else. There was, however, more to her than that. Although she did play a villainess in her earlier epic "Land of the Pharaohs", she was a versatile actress during her time as a Hollywood star and was quite as much at home playing virtuous heroines. (In "Sea Wife" she even played a nun). Here she plays Esther as an innocent girl-next-door suddenly, and unexpectedly, raised to royal status, and is probably the best actor on display.

As with many epics, liberties are taken with history. Much of the plot turns upon a coming war between the Persians and the Greeks under "that young Macedonian upstart Alexander". The Biblical Ahasuerus is normally identified by historians with the Persian King Xerxes I, who reigned from 485 to 465 BC, well before the time of Alexander (356-323 BC). When war comes in the film, the Persians defeat the Greeks, whereas Alexander was in fact victorious in his war against Persia. In order to strengthen the religious tone of the film, a contrast is made between the monotheistic Jews and supposedly polytheistic Persians; in reality the state religion of Persia at this time was Zoroastrianism, a religion which only recognised one god, Ahura Mazda.

The film's main weakness, however, is not its departures from both the Biblical version of the story or from historical fact, something that could be forgiven if the resulting film was artistically satisfying. The main problem is that I found it impossible to believe in either the characters or the story. With the exception of Denis O'Dea as Esther's wise old uncle Mordecai, all the male stars are either wooden or hammy, and with the exception of Collins herself the female ones are just twentieth-century glamour girls transported back in time, with no real function other than to look decorative. The dialogue often sounds stilted, sometimes deliberately so, and this has the effect of distancing the film even further from reality. It may be a fantasy of the ancient world rather than an attempt to recreate that world accurately, but even a fantasy needs to be populated by characters who bear some resemblance to flesh-and-blood human beings. Apart from Collins and O'Dea, that resemblance is all too often lacking. 5/10

Another underappreciated work

[heliopause · 13 April 2004]

Like other Italian works of this era, underappreciated and cynically criticized for what it is not, this is a work of art, beautifully woven together in music, mood, and cinematography leaving the viewer in the end fulfilled in the desire to escape from the modern world into a place inaccessible, and, yes, surrealistic.

The music, written by the Italian master Francesco Lavagnino, one of the great movie music composers of the 20th century, commands the mood of each scene and spans the range of moods in the work, from the march of soldiers to the Queen in the flower garden to her love scene with the King to the mystic mood in the ruins where Simon hides. It is a fine piece of composition.

The words in the script are, in some scenes, not meant to be ordinary conversation, but rather noble thoughts, royal council, and human aspirations, and thus are written and delivered as such. When mental burdens weigh heavily on the King, he is told by his friend Mordecai that "... by lifting the burdens of others one can lift one's own burden ... " Such thoughts are actually quite profound, that in some cases depressed moods arise from self-centered thinking and self-victimization, and that by helping others in a selfless way one can relieve one's own burdens. In the garden, Mordecai councils Esther that " .. the King is attracted to her sense of justice and loyalty, the same qualities that bind her still to Simon, her previous love, and that may turn the King against her in jealousy..."

The cinematography in the scene of the death of Simon, where the camera rises above Simon and the queen to the Star of David, which then appears on the wall of the next scene, is very well done. In another scene, the King is asked whom he had chosen to be his queen, and as he replies "A girl named Esther", the camera pans past the concerned face of Haman to reveal the quite different satisfied expression of Mordecai.

There is much to appreciate in the music, words, and visual presentation of this work. Of course this is not meant to be a documentary, a faithful retelling of an ancient story. Criticism should be directed at how it fails in its own intent as a melancholic, romantic, and introspective fantasy, rather than based on the viewer's expectations. If my understanding of its intent is near the mark, then my conclusion is that this work, like the Raoul Walsh epic The Big Trail made 30 years earlier, succeeds very well.

"The goddess of nature was especially generous to you."

[utgard14 · 5/10 · 13 August 2014]

Middling Italian/American sword & sandal flick based on the biblical story of Esther. Jewish Esther (Joan Collins) marries Persian King Ahaseurus (Richard Egan) to help her people and falls in love with him. Collins playing a 'good girl' is amusing. Look out for sexy Daniela Rocca's dance scene. Have mercy! Definitely the movie's highlight. All of the men in the movie are forgettable. Overlong and dull, it should appeal mostly to those into biblical movies or Italian sword & sandal movies from the '60s. Mario Bava is cinematographer and co-director on this. The other director is the great Raoul Walsh, who also produced and co-wrote it. Pretty blah stuff.

A work where the whole is greater than the parts

[bbhlthph · 7/10 · 18 February 2008]

I have long found it difficult to remember any of the distinctive features of this particular film which was released in 1960 towards the end of a decade that featured numerous similar biblical epics. Checking a dozen of these at random one probable reason for this quickly became clear - Esther and the King had the lowest weighted rating among IMDb users. However it has been featured as a home video on several DVD's whilst many of its contemporaries from the same period have never seen a DVD release (except perhaps in the form of Asiatic copies), and this made me feel it might be worth watching again. On doing so, my first reaction was a better appreciation of how good an actress Joan Collins used to be. Sibling loyalty in playing many almost unplayable parts from her sisters rather trashy novels was probably very commendable, but must have lost her many fans from those who did not remember how well she could also play other types of part. But I also quickly became aware of the many deficiencies in this film. The dialogue was very artificial, and the architecture and costumes seemed more improbable than usual. Its historical period, a few centuries before the Christian era, was one where there were beautiful fabrics but few fashion designers, and no images from the period which I have seen in museums had prepared me for costumes which all so effectively emphasised the female bust - or for such a variety of western style coiffures. Similarly the male costumes were more reminiscent of a cross between colourful academic robes and casually decorative dressing gowns. No doubt there are experts who can tell us what we could expect from the architecture of the period, particularly that to be met with in Royal palaces, but somehow the palace in this film was too reminiscent of Hollywood style homes. The lighting in the copy I saw (which may not have done justice to the original film) seemed quite inadequate. Both still art and cinematography frequently make very effective use of spot lighting, the shaft of sunlight or the single candle close under the chin, to provide both mood and atmosphere for a scene, but when this is repeated continuously throughout a full length film, with everything else frequently disappearing into a gloomy background it can become very monotonous to watch. This was one of the early films in which Mario Bava learned his trade, his later ones show his ultimate mastery of graphic imaging to better advantage. I do not concur with the criticisms that early scenes were slow with insufficient action - these scenes provided essential character development whilst action scenes generally provide very little except a touch of the spice that should always be used with great restraint. But the action when it finally took place was largely at night, and groups of armed men with their swords flashing and clashing, barely glimpsed through the enveloping darkness, contributed nothing towards carrying the story onwards. This contrasted very poorly with "Sodom and Gomorrah" - a longer film that also only featured one battle, but a lengthy one which Robert Aldrich shot sequentially in daylight so that viewers could understand the tactics adopted by both sides and follow the ebb and flow of fortune right through.

The brief critique above is probably sufficient to explain the poor IMDb User ratings for this film, but I must acknowledge that I enjoyed re-watching it very much more than I had expected to, and after all personal enjoyment is the reason for watching this type of film. I do not find it easy to understand what so much attracted me to the film but a partial explanation was certainly the acting (despite the poor dialogue that was imposed upon the cast by their filmscript). Apart from Joan Collins as Esther, Daniela Rocca gave a fine performance as Queen Vashti (as well as what may be the nearest to a striptease to have ever been featured in a film produced under the Hayes code. One may wonder what that of Rita Hayworth in "Salome" would have been like if she had been allowed to finish it and not interrupted by the arrival of John the Baptist's head on a platter, but as things stand the palm has to be awarded to Daniela Rocci. She probably only got away with it because the Queen paid for her folly with her life a few sequences later in true Hayes Code style) On the male side Richard Egan provides a commanding and sympathetic portrait of King Ahasuerus but the honours are shared by Denis o'Dea as the wise and discrete elder statesman Mordecai and Sergio Fantoni who plays Haman brilliantly, always showing a smiling face to the world and displaying complete self- confidence that he is clever enough to achieve his goal whatever minor obstacles crop up en- route. Rick Battaglia as Simon - a non-biblical character - also plays his part extremely well.

Ultimately however the whole is often greater than the parts, and this seems to be particularly true here. Hollywood-Italian Sword and Sandals epics almost always have a very fine musical score carefully integrated with a deliberately rather poetic (or even Shakespearean dialogue), and with both the lighting and cinematography, that enables them to capture a mood of relaxation and fantasy. Even children's films such as "Hercules, Samson and Ulysses" which initially seem totally laughable still have something of this quality. Surrender yourself to the mood and forget reality for a few brief hours, and you may find this is one of the films that still has a lot to offer. Rating it is not easy. Based on its technical failings and inadequacies my rating would probably be 5, but I have preferred to rate it on the cinematographic experience it provided for me and have rated it at 7.

What does it say about a movie when Joan Collins is one of the best things its got going for it.

[bensonmum2 · 5/10 · 26 February 2006]

Esther and the King may appear unusual if you take a look at the usual things I write about. But because Mario Bava was so heavily involved with the film, I just had to give it a go. While the visuals may not be as vivid and exaggerated as some of the films he had more control over, you can see his influences if you look closely. There are several scenes that demonstrate Bava's use of color. One very brief scene early in the film shows the palace guards turning a wheel to close the gates. This scene that lasts less than 10 seconds is lit in very dramatic style with a wash of green and red. It's trademark Bava.

As for the film, I really didn't expect to enjoy it as much as I did. Oh, it's not great by any stretch of the imagination. Esther and the King was part of the flood of Biblical epics that were made in the late 50s to early 60s. Actually, Esther and the King should be called a mini-epic. It's not as sprawling or grand as the big budgeted Hollywood epics. The sets look cheap in comparison and there are no great action sequences. The first half of the film drags by at a snails pace. The final thirty minutes do provide a little suspense and save Esther and the King from becoming a total waste of time. I'm not even going to discuss how well the film follows the Biblical story as that's a topic best covered elsewhere.

I've never cared for Joan Collins, but here she's quite good. I found myself believing in her character and rooting her on. Another standout to me is Sergio Fantoni as the evil Haman. The man plays a bad guy to perfection. The rest of the cast is serviceable but not spectacular.

ESTHER AND THE KING (Raoul Walsh and, uncredited, Mario Bava, 1960) **1/2

[Bunuel1976 · 6/10 · 30 April 2010]

Much like another feminist and contemporaneous Biblical epic i.e Henry Koster's THE STORY OF RUTH (1960), this turns out to be more enjoyable and even compelling than one expects it to be. Actually, although I was aware of Mario Bava's engagement as a cinematographer here, it had not occurred to me that he was also a co-director (which prompted this unforeseen revisit from yours truly – a few weeks after Good Friday which would have been the ideal time for it). As was often the case with such U.S./Italian co-productions, a Hollywood veteran 'supervised' the production actually helmed by an Italian craftsman; in Bava's case, he had already collaborated with Jacques Tourneur on THE GIANT OF MARATHON (1959) and would do so again with Henry Levin on THE WONDERS OF ALADDIN (1961; see my review above). However, when it comes to ESTHER AND THE KING, it seems that Raoul Walsh's involvement was much more hands on since, atypically for him at the twilight of his impressive career, he was also the producer and co-screenwriter of the film! Joan Collins and Richard Egan ably portray the titular roles of the Hebrew maiden and the Persian King and the cast list is peppered with recognizable faces that add appeal to the alternately solemn and campy proceedings: Denis O'Dea (in his last screen appearance as Collins' uncle and Egan's trusted counselor), Rik Battaglia (as Collins' embittered fiancé and Egan's former friend), Sergio Fantoni (clearly enjoying himself a great deal as the film's leering villain), Daniela Rocca (as Egan's nymphomaniac wife – the dance sequence ending with her topless has to be seen to be believed), Rosalba Neri (as Fantoni's ambitious but ill-fated mistress), Gabriele Tinti (as Battaglia's pal) and Folco Lulli (regrettably wasted in a throwaway cameo towards the end of the film). While the few scattered fight sequences are not particularly vivid or exciting, another element I enjoyed was the equally rousing and lovely music score that is here credited to Angelo Francesco Lavagnino (a peplum veteran) and Roberto Nicolosi (a Bava regular).

OK Movie, appallingly bad rendering of scripture.

[hsfld · 4/10 · 21 December 2004]

The book of Esther is one of my favorite books of the Bible, I have read it completely many times and have done several in depth studies. This movie, less the names of the characters, has no resemblance to the source account. I am very open to artistic license and understand that often for many reasons stories are adapted from the original source, but the deviations in this account are incredible. Examples: queen Vashti at the start of the account, is deposed not for having an affair, but for refusing to present herself to a group of the kings friends to be ogled at, (in the Persian Culture this would have been a very disgraceful position). Vashti was in the right not the king. The nature of the relationship between Esther and Haman (the antagonist) in the Bible is not personal, in fact there is no real conflict stated between them until the end. In the Movie Esther is engaged at the beginning, there is absolutely no evidence of this in scripture. Some of these variations may seam minor but the ones I stated are very major to the interpretation and application of the story, I won't get into this because this is not a Bible class. I could probably present 50 other major variations, which is incredible because the biblical book is only 10 chapters. In conclusion this is an OK movie but a terrible account of the biblical record. Read the book!

Nice Adaptation of the Book of Esther

[siameseoverlord · 7/10 · 3 January 2005]

I just got finished seeing this historical drama. As a religious Jew, I wondered how the story would be played out on the big screen. I enjoyed it very much, even though it has a lot of "historical liberties". Overall, its a pretty good version of the Book of Esther, and while not as big an epic as The Ten Commandments, it still adds in a little "extra" drama to keep the non-Jewish audience interested. While not exactly what happened, most of the story is accurate.

Joan Collins is very beautiful, and gives a believable performance as Esther, and Dennis O'Dea is excellent as Mordcai. The Actors playing King Ahaserous, and Prince Haman, were just a little too clean-shaven and handsome; but that's Hollywood!

I will probably watch it again, before I un-tivo it...

A biblical heroine diminished by the Hollywood standard of what is bigger must be better.

[mark.waltz · 4/10 · 21 April 2014]

Any biblical epic which features a eunuch in drag that resembles Harvey Korman on "The Carol Burnett Show" has to be seen to be believed. And any biblical epic which stars Joan Collins, of all people, as a Hebrew heroine is also bound to be fodder for all sorts of ridicule. Practically every woman in this film is a much over painted dark exotic beauty, abliet one obviously a bit older than Collins (presumably to make her look better), including the adulterous Persian Queen murdered so that King Xerses (Richard Egan) can choose a new one after returning home from battle only to discover his wife's trampy ways.

Slow and tedious, violent and brutal, yet lavishly filmed by veteran director Raoul Walsh, this is obviously the film that lost Collins the role of Cleopatra which she was rumored to be in consideration to take over when Elizabeth Taylor appeared too ill to continue. Collins was much more convincing as the Egyptian princess who schemed to become the Pharaoh's wife in "Land of the Pharaohs", which at least became a camp classic. Other than the presence of the drag queen eunuch who prepares all the candidates for the King's hand in marriage, there was not a bit of humor, even in the stupid dialog that was just dull rather than silly.

A well-paced movie and touching tale of Esther's devotion

[lora64 · 10/10 · 13 April 2001]

Amidst the wars, pageantry, violence and mayhem, not to mention palace intrigues, is a touching story of Esther's growing love for the king, played by Richard Egan, one handsome fellow, I must admit. In many of the quieter scenes the lovely music adds much to the atmosphere, evoking gentler moods and feelings. As well, I've always admired Denis O'Dea whatever role he played, and here as the steadfast Mordecai he gives a fine performance as usual. I like the sincerity of the actors, and an innocent portrayal of Esther by Joan Collins is so refreshing. The pace of the story is steady throughout so that one doesn't feel slowed down. Most action episodes are fierce enough for me, thank you, as some violence is inevitable in movies such as this. All in all it's a good movie that I personally cherish.

Best of the three out there

[dunsuls-1 · 7/10 · 4 May 2013]

Finally a version of Esther and the King a little more entertaining than "One Night with the King"or "Esther and the King 2006"that were both reviewed on this blog.Released in 1960,and running 109 minutes, back when they regularly made adaptations of Bible stories with great liberties,we get this Raul Walsh produced and directed version of the story that is the root of the Hebrew Holiday of "Purim".Again a major issue of not mentioning her real name of "Hadassah"but thats par for these old adaptations.You have to decide would you rather these or none at all?? Since I've reviewed "Ben-Hur"and"The Ten Commandments" and "Ivanhoe" amongst others,I think you know my stand on that.This movie also a flaw that I can't really buy, Richard Egan as King Ahasuerus but Joan Collins as Esther more than offsets that and Sergio Fantoni as Haman is slimy enough.There's a little luridness quality in some parts due to a early assistant director by the name of Mario Bava. However,all things included,I enjoyed it more than the other two films that tell the story.

A dragger

[Leofwine_draca · 4/10 · 20 August 2021]

I watched this Biblical epic chiefly for the involvement of Mario Bava, who acted as assistant director. It's a rather stodgy and pedestrian Hollywood-style story which focuses on the history over drama, incident or excitement. A youthful Joan Collins plays the titular character, trapped and used by the men in her life, but there's too much of the romance here and little danger or excitement when it comes down to it. Interesting to see the familiar Italians in the cast (Rik Battaglia, Gabriele Tinti, Rosalbi Neri) at an early stage of their careers, but as a film it drags.

More a testament to Brillcreme and Aqua-Net than to The Bible!

[Poseidon-3 · 31 March 2004]

There isn't a whole lot to distinguish this middling biblical epic from the sea of others that came out in the mid-50's and early 60's, but it offers a certain degree of entertainment. Egan (decidedly miscast) plays the King of Persia (with Brillcremed hair and a standard American accent) who returns from a long battle to find that his wife has been enjoying the services of one or more of his men. He excuses himself from her and sets out to find a new virgin bride, choosing from all the maidens in his kingdom. Virginal Jewess Collins (yes...that's right) is the title character. She is snatched away mere moments before becoming wed to Battaglia and is taken to the palace to be groomed for the selection process. Once there, she is protected by her uncle O'Dea (who entreats her to hide her Jewish heritage) and is targeted by Fantoni who is Egan's right-hand man. Fantoni has another lady in mind for the throne so he can use her to his own ends of taking over the kingdom. Eventually, Collins realizes that she and only she can spare her people from destruction and she decides to leave behind her dreams of a life with Battaglia and pursue Egan. Egan, still in very good shape physically, makes a handsome king and gives an okay performance. He is just patently contemporary in his look and delivery. Collins is very attractive throughout (complete with heavy bouffant 60's hair!) and does an adequate job as well, but is always more interesting as a villainess than as a docile young maiden. O'Dea lends able support as her wise and stalwart uncle. It would be difficult to summon up a more virile, hirsute, hunk of man than Battaglia as Collin's abandoned lover. Seeing him, one can understand the torment she had at having to turn her back on her past and move on. The location work, fancy sets, pageantry and gauzy costumes keep this from being too dull, but there is an awful lot of chatter and hand-wringing in between the action sequences. Stay awake for the scene in which Egan gifts Collins with a tiger cub and then immediately steps over to a lyre and plunks out what sounds like the opening strains of "Born Free"! As expected, considerable liberties have been taken with the original story, yet it doesn't result in that much more spectacular a film.

Not as good with time

[dunsuls · 7/10 · 19 June 2002]

Saw this in the movies as a child and just lately on tape.I must say it doesn't stand up at all.All that is memorable is a young Joan Collins. A hint of Mario Bava's work to come is not enough to trace this flick. Pass it by unless you wish to be transported to a youth that never really was.

'A softer war, fought with gentler weapons'

[Cristi_Ciopron · 6/10 · 17 August 2012]

There are many reasons to watch this _peplum—and first of all the director—Walsh (also producer and writers; otherwise, much better known for his Westerns and gangster movies), then its cast (Daniella Rocca, Rosalba Neri) and crew (did you spot Bava on the credits?); the subject of 'Esther …' was mighty topical—intolerance, etc., and who could prevent Walsh from giving it a goofy, lavish and slightly sleazy twist.

It's nothing less than an author movie—directed, written and even produced by Walsh. The goofiness and insouciant dumbness of the approach can't be disputed.

This movie of decadent glamor and bright Technicolor comes from Walsh, triply at its helm; he was a cognate of sorts of that generation—Ford, Hawks, Wyler.

And it's also a transition _peplum, given its hybrid origin—Walsh on the one hand, in charge of many—and a handful of Italians, on the other.

The strident, embarrassing, annoying anachronisms and goofiness are to be resolutely forgiven, in the name of that swiftly all—pervading gusto—which the Italians of course had—and since the blessed age of Pastrone—the Pastrone—but which daddy Walsh, now in the twilight of his career, also had, and abundantly. What heartrending beauty!

And Leone, who directed the best _peplum ever, is not far!

There's a bit of enjoyable, glamorous decadency—like a foretaste of Leone—but then again, there's generally a bit of decadency, at least in Walsh's later outings.

8Never mind the lecturing about Mordecai as a socio—political and administrative reformer; there are better things in Walsh's _peplum. The beautiful and nymphomaniac Vashti is played by the herself gorgeous, slightly plump, big—breasted Daniela Rocca.

9After dancing, this rejected, despised and fun—loving Queen bares her tits in front of an assembly, the spits on the King, whose instincts are left cold, even frozen, by her lovely dance; this was a nicely done scene. Otherwise, Persia had an enlightened monarch, a reformist with democratic leanings, ready to temper the autocratic tendencies that made those oriental realms, kingdoms and empires, known. At least, that's Walsh's take on the events.

10Unfortunately, Esther herself, bravely as she behaves, tends to be a bit of a bore—it's not the role, but the actress. I also thought Naaman was more handsome than his King. Walsh knew to shot the Persian knights, the mounted military, and those scenes are also vivid. Many things in 'Esther …' already point towards a suggested Eurocinema sleaze—nudity, murders shown graphically, etc.. Nice turns of phrase abound—we hear about 'scorching deserts', etc.. The eunuch—in—chief is a corny, caring and protective uncle, ready to correct injustices and abuses, if in his strength to do so. I have eagerly awaited for the sight of the necropolis—well, the scene looked creepy enough. The idea of a Jew hiding between tombs is, of course, delirious. The king proves to be a reasonable guy, not at all like one of those nasty oriental monarchs. Anyway, the institution on the Purim is a fine, touching scene.

Walsh's Persia is a very Romanized, Latinized one, with the barbarous Persians looking like clean—shaved Roman officers with '50s hairdos. The men in the movie—be they Persian, Judean or even Syrian—are resolutely in the square—jawed, Germanic—looking category. Well, not the eunuch or Mordecai, but the sexually—active ones, the males. Conveniently Aryan and Septentrional.

Flat, talkative, boring

[searchanddestroy-1 · 6/10 · 28 July 2022]

That's the only sword and sandal film that Raoul Walsh made, and thats a good thing. The problem with this film is that it is empty of battle sequences but only indoor secenes with plenty of dialogues. The same with many many pure Italian sword and sandals of this period, late fifties and early sixties. I highly prefered Howard Hawk's LAND OF PHARAOHS, starring the same Joan Collins, but for Warner instead of Fox. Intrigue, treason, only the terrific production design and settings bring a positive touch to this co production, half American half Italian.

Peplum adaptation of Old Testament book

[darius_m_klein · 8/10 · 23 August 2008]

What do you get when you put middle-range American stars in the leading roles in a peplum film? Pretty good peplum, that's what. Contrary to what one might expect, "Esther and the King" is not a lavish Hollywood historical spectacle in the mode of DeMille, but is an Italian production using Joan Collins and Richard Egan to play the eponymous characters. For this reason the film is often characterized as a bargain-basement epic, whereas it is actually a peplum with a slightly higher than average budget. Appealing performances by the leads, a delightfully schlocky musical score, a good story, and atmospheric sets and cinematography makes this an enjoyable sword-&-sandal effort.

Nice looking costumes, good looking actors, bad movie!

[gazebo · 15 March 2004]

This is a good looking movie, too bad it is so mediocre. Joan Collins is beautiful and her acting is okay, but it can't save this movie. The other actors were okay too. This movie was hampered by the campy dialogue and a mediocre script. I was unhappy that partway through the movie, the story veers away from the traditional bible story of Queen Esther. I heard that this movie is one of Joan Collins' least favorite movies, and I understand why now. Somehow, if the writer of this movie had gone the traditional route of Queen Esther accusing Haman at the banquet, there would be the much needed drama and excitement.

However, if anyone has a hankering to see a real campy film filled with pretty people, pretty clothes and silly dialogue, this is it!

I give this movie a "D".

The Book of Esther (Movie Version)

[bnwfilmbuff · 8/10 · 2 February 2022]

Excellent casting, an intelligent script, high production values and great acting makes this a worthwhile viewing. Not completely true to the bible but in the neighborhood. Collins is especially effective as Esther and Fantoni as Haman.

The king and E.

[dbdumonteil · 13 April 2010]

They say it's more Mario Bava's work than Raoul Walsh's whose métier was not really the biblical epic .The cinematography ,often dark,recalls some of the Italian director's horror movies,particularly Haman's henchman's murders.And I think that Joan Collins was better at playing a Villainess as she did in Hawks' "land of the pharaohs" .

The part of Simon-played by Ric(k) Battaglia ,a specialist of the cheap Italian sword and sandal ,who played such figures as Orlando(Roland) or Vercingetorix- was made from start to finish by the screenwriters ,to create a dilemma for the heroine.The Bible,anyway,is given a rough ride :nothing is told ,for example ,about the fact that Mordecai -not Esther's uncle ,but actually her cousin,which does not make a big difference anyway- did not want to make a deep bow to Haman.

Richard Egan ,on the other hand, is a good king ,he has style ,and he is as convincing a monarch as he is the good doctor,Pollyanna's friend ,the same year.