Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

shakercoola A historical epic about the birth of the Islamic faith and the story of the prophet and disciples of Muhammad ibn Abdullah who, according to Islamic doctrine, was sent to present and confirm the monotheistic teachings preached previously by Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other prophets. It is a fabulous story with intrigue and drama and one of very high production values and a spellbinding musical score worthy of its Oscar nomination. The battle scenes at Badr and Uhud are spectacular and compelling viewing for 3 hours. In accordance with the beliefs of some Muslims regarding depictions of Muhammad, his face is not depicted on-screen nor is his voice heard. This is, I believe, not only rightly so respectful, but it works creatively too by lending an atmosphere and mystery, and because it is a story about faith alone. Watching this film - the English language version - in the same month that it is finally to be released in the Middle East after 42 years make it a little more special. The film will now reach twice the number of Muslims than there were in 1976, and so it is high time the rest of the world embraces the story of the 7th Century Messenger.

Fletcher Conner It is important to preface this review with the confession that I am largely ignorant of the stories of the Quran and was viewing the film as my first introduction to these stories.The Message was visually very similar to the famed epic "Lawrence of Arabia" however it failed to resonate like "Lawrence of Arabia" because despite its striking visuals, beautiful score, and epic nature, it lacked captivating characters. This was because the main characters, Mohammed and his family could not be portrayed in accordance with Islamic tradition. This left the director, Moustapha Akkad, in a difficult position, how do you tell as story without ever showing the protagonist? He does as good as a job as could be hoped for, having characters repeat what Mohammed says to them and speak directly into the camera when addressing the Prophet. But they were forced to have Mohammed's uncle, Hamas, played by Anthony Quinn, serve as a de facto protagonist. While he does well, it is like telling the story of the Gospels without showing Jesus and having John the Baptist as the main character.The film was also clearly make with a Muslim audience in mind, as it was not overly accessible to someone who was not familiar with the story or characters. It took almost half of the film for me to be figure out who all of the characters were and how they were connected. By the ending and the final battles, it really felt like "Lawrence of Arabia" but without the central character that the audience could connect to and rally around.

Brather Arms Those who blindly criticise Islam with their sword of words are those who never will realise the truth of why over a billion follow and love Muhammed PBUH. Sadly this film does not show many of his great qualities, but is excellent in what it does show. 3 hours are too short for this great life to be portrayed in. Loved the film and is fairly accurate in what it does show. Judged by the smallness of the means, and the extent and permanence of the work that our Prophet pbuh accomplished, no name in world's history shines with a more specious luster than his. Billions became obedient to the Faith. And beyond all this, his words have governed the belief of generations and nations. His just rulings we accepted as our rule of life, and our certain guide to the world to come. Our voices invoke blessings on him, whom we esteem the very Prophet of Allah. Judged by the standards to human renown, the glory of what mortal can compare with his?

ansreaganite-845-889351 Cinematically, it was pretty good. Clearly a lot of work went into the sets, costumes & locations. While the acting was adequate, I have to disagree with other reviews in that I did not think it was Anthony Quinn's greatest work. Maybe because I viewed it through the lens of Christianity or maybe it was the way the actors talked to the camera when addressing Mohammed (i.e., it is against Islam to show the likeness of Mohammed - sort of a parallel to Jews never wring the word God - they spell it G-d), the movie had an odd "vibe" about it. The story itself is difficult to follow, much like the Koran itself. Though downplayed in the movie, early messages from God conflicted with later messages. It also plays up the 'peaceful' side of Islam, (but there again the movie has some fantastic battle scenes, if you overlook the overly fake looking blood) which stands in stark contrast to the evidence we see on the nightly news. Ideally, every Muslim would embrace the teachings of this movie and renounce the more radical teachings - not just the modern day "terrorist" mindset, but the way the early Muslims treated women in the early years seems to be quite different than today. I can't think of a Christian equivalent of this movie, as most movies about early Christianity only tell a small portion of the story. This movie attempts to explain the roots of Islam from when Mohammed began hearing from God at age 40, in about 610 AD to the full establishment of Islam around the world. It does to a reasonably good job for the early parts of Islam, but I kind of got lost in all the who's fighting who scenes. It was apparently all historically verified at the time of its making by Islamic scholars,which is explained at the beginning and end of the movie, which only adds to the eerie feeling the movie being less documentary and more propagandist. So, in short, the cinematic presentation is quite good, but the story is hard to follow and I felt it had a propagandist "vibe" throughout the movie. If you have 3 hours to kill and are interested in the subject matter, you'll likely enjoy it. For me I got restless in the middle when I started to get confused about who is battling who and for what reason.