SAMSON: Where Is Cecil B. DeMille When We Need Him?

Charlton Heston, who knew a thing or two about the subject, reportedly once said that the Biblical epic is the hardest to bring off. The new movie Samson, dripping with good intentions, is clearly out to prove him right. The filmmakers are determined to make a family-friendly, faith-based Biblical epic even if they have sanitized the source material beyond recognition. Samson, ultimately, is of all things, cavalier with the Bible.

Samson an odd hero for a family-friendly flick

The character of Samson is an odd choice for this type of vehicle to begin with. He appears in two chapters of the Old Testament Book of Judges, a blood-drenched document which contains some of the oldest writing in the Bible. It’s also not remotely politically correct or family-friendly. Samson was also an incorrigible horndog who patronized prostitutes, in addition to being a robber and a homicidal maniac.

As used in the Old Testament, by the way, the word Judge does not have primarily juridical connotations. The Old Testament Judges were essentially tribal military chieftains with the power to administer justice. Samson judged Israel for twenty years.

Samson, the latest feature from Pure Flix Productions, which also produced God’s Not Dead, presents its hero as a whining crybaby. This is so wrong, it’s actually painful to watch. This is compounded by the casting of Taylor James in the title role. James, whose previous roles include “Gym Assistant” in Blitz, “Young Actor” in The Power of Three and best of all, “Atlantean Military Messenger Uncredited” in Justice League, like much of the cast seems to struggle with an unnecessary English accent. Oddly, James is English.

Taylor James is Jason Momoa light

Ironically, James played an Atlantean in Justice League. One can’t help feeling that he was cast at least partially because of a superficial resemblance to big screen Aquaman Jason Momoa in some of his publicity shots. He has, however, none of Momoa’s brooding intensity or sheer, intimidating physicality. And although he does periodically manage a winning grin – with a mouthful of teeth far too white for 1170 BCE in Judea – for the most part he doesn’t get much above the Steve Reeves school of acting, and Reeves’ lines were dubbed.

Throughout most of the movie, James is downright sullen, as Samson rebels against his destiny. Like any number of Marvel superheroes, he’d rather be just a regular dude, and marry Philistine beauty Taren (Frances Sholto-Douglas). His parents, played by Rutger Hauer and Lindsay Wagner, reteaming from the 1981 Sylvester Stallone cops-and-terrorists movie Nighthawks, insist that he fulfill his destiny as a holy warrior because, just like Spider-Man, with great power comes great responsibility.

The movie’s Delilah is played by television actress Caitlin Leahy, who is absolutely beautiful and manages to look comfortable in the period costumes, an underrated talent, despite her improbably blue eyes. Leahy is not advantaged by having to affect an English accent, which wasn’t necessary in the first place. No one spoke English three thousand years ago, not even the ancestors of the English.

Trying to make Delilah sympathetic

As with Samson himself, the overwrought screenplay is determined to make Delilah more sympathetic than the Book of Judges makes her. It is almost traditional in film adaptations of the story to have Delilah fall in love with Samson and regret her collusion with the Philistine authorities. There is no Biblical basis for this, other than the single sentence “And it came to pass afterward, that he loved a woman in the valley of Sorek, whose name was Delilah.” (Judges, 16:4) Nowhere does the Bible say that Delilah reciprocates those feelings, and her behavior certainly belies any depth of feeling.

Nonetheless, the movie skims over the Biblical account of Delilah’s attempts to find out the secret of Samson’s super strength. Admittedly, it doesn’t speak well for Samson’s intelligence that on at least two occasions when Samson gives her a bogus story, like that if he’s tied up with new ropes that have never been used, he will be like any other man, she actually ties him up and then, lo and behold, a bunch of armed Philistines appear. With a track record like this, it certainly bears asking why he’d ever tell her about the hair. But that’s exactly what Judges says happened. The movie rewrites it to make Samson seem less stupid, but it certainly seems ironic that most screenwriters never would have treated Harry Potter, or even Twilight, so cavalierly.

The book was better

The screenplay, by Jason Baumgardner, Galen Gilbert, Timothy Ratajczak and Zac Smith, is oddly unfaithful to the biblical narrative and makes a ton of rookie mistakes. And in fact the credits do not even contain a “based on” credit for The Bible or the Book of Judges. A disclaimer wedged into the end credits does state that the movie is based on the Biblical account, but that certain incidents and characters have been created. Certainly The Bible, for example, does not contain a brother for Samson played in the movie by Greg Krieg.

The Bible also does not drone on endlessly about a prophecy of a deliverer. This is Hollywood formula writing that has nothing to do with the Old Testament,  which is actually more interesting. While Judges does make reference to God’s intention that Samson will start to make a stand against the Philistines, it does not in any sense make it clear that anyone else knows about this. The movie wholly omits what could have been a visually and dramatically more interesting prologue, with an angel who turns out to be God himself.

The screenplay’s other major failing is making its hero reactive rather than proactive. Unlike the Biblical version, the movie’s Samson never does anything until acted upon. That would be poor storytelling in any movie but it’s fatal here. The Biblical Samson is an instigator – as portrayed here he doesn’t even fight back until enough sand has been kicked in his face. No question – the book was better. But of course we’re talking about a movie whose creators don’t even realize that the “corn” referred to in the Old Testament is actually maize. Yes, the Israelites eat corn on the cob in this one.

The bad guys give the movie a pulse

More forgivable are the additions of Billy Zane and movie co-producer Jackson Rathbone as psycho father and son Philistine rulers. Movies benefit from a running antagonist for the hero, and Zane and Rathbone are about the only things that give this talky, plodding Sunday School lesson a pulse. As your basic guyliner-wearing, sociopathic Philistine prince, Rathbone in particular revels in his character’s sheer badness, and doesn’t for a second, thank God, try to humanize him.

There are two directors credited, Bruce MacDonald, whose sole previous directorial credit is the Christian surfer romance The Perfect Wave, and Gabriel Sabloff, billed as co-director, who has helmed the Revelation Road post-Rapture dramas and Apostle Peter and the Last Supper. They are not up to a story of literally Biblical proportions. Audiences might, and I stress might, be able to overlook the bush league CGI backgrounds, the laughably fake beards, and that old standby of this type of movie, the man versus lion fight, which is done less convincingly here than in any number of fifties Hollywood sand-and-sandal epics, or even the Italian Hercules movies of the sixties. But there is an overall clumsiness to Samson which smacks irritatingly of cable TV re-enactment shows, and audiences are being charged first run ticket prices for this. On top of that, the big action set pieces, the only remaining reason to see the movie, are not particularly exciting. In one of the biggest scenes, in which Samson slays a thousand Philistine soldiers with only a donkey’s jawbone as a weapon, it is painfully obvious that extras are holding back while a small handful of stuntmen rush in on Samson, only to be tossed aside.

Where is Cecil B. DeMille when we need him?

The entire exercise will make viewers old enough to remember Cecil B. DeMille miss him dreadfully. DeMille was often castigated for bad taste, emphasizing size over substance, and putting too much sex and violence in his movies. Guilty. But he did, as Bob Hope once remarked, bring something new to movies: customers. And to be fair, when it came to the Bible, the sex and violence were already there. He just didn’t take them out. The Bible, particularly the Old Testament, is painted in broad brush strokes and DeMille got that. DeMille’s version of Samson and Delilah, which starred Victor Mature and Hedy Lamarr, had cheesiness to spare, but it was never dull and DeMille’s climactic destruction of the Philistine temple was far more impressive than the seen-it-once-seen-it-a-thousand-times CGI effects relied on here.

Samson: Conclusion

Aimed squarely at Christian audiences looking for inspirational family entertainment, Samson is a preachy and plodding drama that’s light on excitement, action or any real sense of spirituality. Ironically, it’s likely to be most admired by those who haven’t read the source material.

What do you think? Is SAMSON a fresh, family-friendly Biblical epic, or a clunky retread? Tell us your thoughts in the comments below!

Samson was released in the US on February 16, 2018 and will be released in the UK on March 2, 2018. For all international release dates, see here.