A misunderstood hero.

The film original title: God in the World
Written by: Torah, history
Director: (read on)
Playing EVERYWHERE

It is one of those long term, open ended dramatic projects that are difficult to review because the ending hasn’t happened yet. However if the show follows the requirements of a good story (of which we are not certain) a lot can be deduced from its beginning.

This classically archetypal tale (at least at its first and the second act) follows a character of a Creator who struggles for perfection, goodness and harmony. His arch begins with having limited consciousness, not knowing what to do and how to evaluate itself and the outside. In the process of bringing elements to existence, the Creator learns their value and builds a moral scale. He did not know they were good or bad before he created them. His names things that he continues to bring into existence as “good”.

The horrifying first image of almost unnamed abyss with no direction, no separation, no purpose and no place. Plenty of water. The first creation, full of ambiguity, awe and danger is is looked at from above by the Creator, who at this time does not know yet. His inner struggle (for self expression? consciousness?) is yielding light. This is a major step forward for our hero. The inciting incident of the story.

It opens nicely: with Bereishit (at the beginning) - no back story here! However early on the script backs off returning to the creation of a human. Why do the writers do that? Why such narrative devise so early on? Wise rabbis comment that it’s in order to clearly point to the first objective of the story and that is justification of the rest day upon the creation. This reviewer respectfully wants to offer his interpretation: it is to position the created elements, that is humans, within “good” context, even though they do not deserve it.

The Creator brings into existence a human, his (what will turn out to be) rival. At first he does not see much separation between himself and his deed. (He created his “rival” copying himself). This opens an interesting dramatic question: is the villainousness of man an inherit trait of the Creator, or does it result from some mishap during the creation? In either case the Creator is to blame. As in every good story, he is a character with a flow. It is left to us to identify with him and cheer him in his attempts to become a complete, fulfilled being.

The creator overlooks his obvious creative limitation - human, which is the only element that is not immediately upon its creation commented upon as “good”. Rather it is included in all that has been created, which is labeled “very good”. It is as if the Creator knew that something was not quite right but went with His euphoria anyway. (How human of Him). This wish-full thinking of our hero will come to hunt him later. Because human kind is far from “good”. The creator has to struggle to keep his "goodness" intact and frequently has to annihilate his rivals. When they reappear they are conniving, lying, blaspheming and stupid.

The opponent, later transformed into a group character, is a rather dull, pathetic creature, overplayed and predictable. The Creator on the other hand is portrayed so subtly that spectators at times do not see him on screen! We wonder where was the director of this show!

The journey of our hero at times is heartbreaking. He faces constant objections, lack of understanding and has to fight the plethora of human vices. It takes its toll. At the beginning of the third act the protagonist needs to be kept on a life support system.

Mixed genres annoy. Melodrama blends with horror, suspense with cheesy sentimentality. One more time somebody assumes the audience to be less intelligent that they really are.

Production values are spectacular. The size of the production is breathtaking. The sets bring awe, however costumes are only passable. Music is superb (too many composers to list here).

The question remains: will our hero make it? Will he fulfill his destiny? Will he complete his character arc? Will the opponents evolve and change?

I am waiting not only for the conclusion of this huge story but also for its sequel which is clearly assured by the box office success of the original.

Top image: Hieronimus Bosch