Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Good start, but then it gets ruined

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Two Outstanding Set-Pieces, the "Orgy" Ritual and the Final Battle Highlight this Slow, Talky, sometimes Dull Display of Hebrews, Egyptians, and for Spice the "Queen of Sheba" around a Thousand Years B.C.Taken from a few Snippets in the "Old Testament" it tells the Extra-Biblical Story of Solomon (Yul Brynner) and the Queen of Sheba (Gina Lollobrigida). "Sheba" (as she is called here) is sent by Pharaoh to Spy and Seduce Solomon into Revealing His Secrets.Speaking of Revealing. Sheba is Shown in an Array of Alluring Apparel to the Delight of Solomon and 1950's Audiences. There is much Prancing and Dancing.The Movie is Typical Cornball for the Genre that was about to End its Cycle a Year Later with "Ben-Hur" (1959) and although that Film Swept the Oscars the "Biblical Epic" and the Cheap Sword and Sandal Imitators were Designed for the Dustbin of Hollywood History after a Ten Year Run.This one is Worth a Watch with Low Expectations and for Eye-Candy Enthusiasts.Note...Tyrone Power died of a heart-attack during filming and was replaced by Brenner. The production does have a faded glow residue.

Note One. "Sheba" was the name of a country, not a person. Calling the heroine of this film "Sheba", therefore, is about as logical as making a film about Cleopatra and calling her "Egypt", or about Queen Victoria and calling her "Great Britain". The Queen's personal name is not recorded in the Bible, but tradition gives it either as Bilqis/Balkis or as Makeda. Note Two. The Queen of Sheba would have been black, or at least much darker skinned than Gina Lollobrigida. Hollywood squeamishness about interracial love affairs is doubtless to blame for this piece of miscasting. Note Three. What is a blue-and-gold macaw (native to South America) doing in the ancient Near East? Epic films based upon the Bible were popular in the 1950s, but sometimes they were only very loosely so based. "Solomon and Sheba" is a case in point. The biblical account of the Queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon is a very brief one, but this film uses it as the basis for a particularly complicated plot. In this version Sheba is an ally of Solomon's arch- enemy, the Pharaoh of Egypt, and conspires with the Pharaoh to undermine him. The idea is that she will seduce him and persuade him to allow pagan worship in Jerusalem, thus provoking his own people to rebel against him. The plan comes close to success, but Sheba begins to fall in love with the man she has sworn to destroy. There is also a sub-plot involving Solomon's jealous brother Adonijah who covets his throne. Cecil B. DeMille, the man whose "Samson and Delilah" is often regarded as marking the beginning of the fifties epic cycle, once wrote "I am sometimes accused of gingering up the Bible with large and lavish infusions of sex and violence. I can only wonder if my accusers have ever read certain parts of the Bible." There certainly seemed to be an unofficial rule that epics were exempt from the strict rigours of the Production Code, provided the film as a whole conveyed some improving religious or moral message. Sexiness was next to godliness. In "Salome", for example, Rita Hayworth was able to get away with performing a provocative dance because in this version of the story (contrary to the Biblical one) Salome is a virtuous heroine who is trying to save John the Baptist's life."Solomon and Sheba" was made six years after "Salome" and goes a lot further than that film, or than anything made by DeMille, in its intermingling of sexiness and godliness. The film even includes an orgy scene which was virtually pornographic by the standards of fifties Hollywood, but its overall message is essentially "Judaeo-Christianity good, paganism bad". The orgy is presented as a "love feast" in honour of a Sheban god, with an implied subtext that those who do not acknowledge the one true God will lack moral strength and be unable to resist sexual temptation. The film ends with Sheba's conversion both to the worship of Jehovah and to the paths of virtue. The film was hit by tragedy when the original Solomon, Tyrone Power, died suddenly during filming; Yul Brynner was hastily drafted in to replace him and Power's scenes had to be re-shot. The director, King Vidor, seems to have been unhappy with Brynner, who he thought was too calm and self-assured; he felt that Power would have been better at portraying the conflict in Solomon's nature between love and duty. The best acting contribution comes from George Sanders (generally a decent villain) as the villainous Adonijah. (Sanders also played the Philistine King in "Samson and Delilah"). There may have been some truth in Vidor's criticism, but I felt that Brynner was not too bad, bearing in mind that he had inherited his role from another actor with a rather different style of acting. La Lollo, however, is weak as Sheba; it is all too clear that English is not her native language and her lines were sometimes difficult to understand. I assumed that the role of Abishag (an innocent young girl in love with Solomon) was being played by Pier Angeli, who seemed to specialise in sub-standard epics (she also had parts in "The Silver Chalice" and "Sodom and Gomorrah"), but in fact the role was taken by Pier's twin sister Marisa Pavan, whose English is no better than Lollobrigida's. Or for that matter than her sister's. The film was made in 1959, the same year as "Ben-Hur", one of the greatest epics, but the two films are in nothing like the same class. "Solomon and Sheba" was made on less than half the budget of the other film, and at times it shows. When the Temple in Jerusalem is struck by lightning, it is obvious that what we are seeing is a model (probably one put together by a child playing with Lego bricks). The acting is variable in quality and the plot at times defies belief, especially during that scene (not found in the Bible) where the entire Egyptian army are so dazzled by the sunlight reflected from the shields of the Israelite soldiers that they plunge to their deaths in a canyon. (And remember: the Israelites of this period would only have had bronze shields, not polished steel ones). DeMille might have been able to acquit himself of gingering up the Bible; the verdict against Vidor and his scriptwriters on this charge must be "guilty". 5/10

I just saw Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, and I must express my total disagreement on how the story is told in the movie. first of all, I find it unfortunate casting, mainly referred to Adonijah, according to 1st Kings chapter 1, verse 6 (1st Kings 1-6), Adonijah was very good-looking, and George Sanders was well on in years and anything beautiful. following the steps in 2nd Samuel, of children born to King David in Hebron, the king's David firstborn was Amnon , Adonijah was the fourth child who has King David in Hebron of Haggith. In the film, Salomon kills Adonias (this fight was when died of a heart attack Tyrone Power, who was the first to embody Salomon), but it was not King Solomon who killed Adonias but according to 1st Kings 2-25, reads: "Then King Solomon sent by the hand of Benaiah son of Jehoiada, who attacked the (Adonias), and died." and so Hollywood producers always changing the stories as always, thinking only about money, how to get higher profits on their investments. personally I find it deplorable. I'm also in total disagreement with the queen Sheba history in the movie.

In cinema, we have always lost as well as gained. In the post war era we got a load of upcoming sprouts with new ideas. Changing social mores gave greater latitude in the kind of stories we could tell. And yet the older generation, for whom movie making was purer, unpretentious and above all visually orientated, were still alive and, once in a while, kicking.Now, Solomon and Sheba is a dead-looking production if ever I saw one. Even though it was released the same year as Ben-Hur, one of the most successful ancient world epics ever made, you can still see the format is getting a little tired. This isn't so much Sunday school story come-to-life as cheap and somewhat half-hearted excuse for a bit of bare flesh and erotic dancing of the kind that they really went in for in the 50s. For a production of this kind, it is woefully low budget. The sets look like you could punch holes in them, and the costumes look like they were cut up from old curtains (net curtains in Gina Lolobrigida's case).The screenplay too is utter trash. Complete changes in character and drive are crammed into single scenes. The dialogue is not bad as such, it is merely bland and unmemorable. And then there are the actors. Yul Brynner, standing in for Tyrone Power (who was dead at the time) giving a reasonably understated performance, but doing little more than sitting around looking thoughtful. Screen brother George Sanders simply looks worse the wear for age, and it appears likely he simply couldn't be bothered any more, especially for something like this. Finlay Currie, now something of a fixture in the biblical flick, makes a brief and fairly run-of-the-mill appearance. The rest of the cast are so dull they are not even worth a mention.But does any of this really matter? Well, of course yes it does to some extent. We expect a little quality control even in a picture like this. But when you're watching a colourful adaptation of some millennia-old mythology, it's acceptable for realism and dramatic intensity to play second fiddle to the power of the images. And this is where our afore-mentioned old-school approach comes in.This was the final feature film of veteran director King Vidor. Vidor had been handed one crummy project after another for the past decade or so, and yet unlike Sanders he never lost his professional interest – in spite of a rather troubling experience on this particular production. Solomon and Sheba is packed with the kind of visual splendour that Vidor had been crafting since the early 20s. In the battle sequences he works round the small number of extras by focusing on dynamic snippets of action, often having fighters surge towards the camera for that added impact on the audience. In Brynner and Lolobrigida's boat scene the eerie willow fronds add a layer of atmosphere that makes up for any deficit in the acting. All of this is enhanced by the sublimely moody cinematography of Freddie Young – the only other outstanding name in the production crew. Best of all Vidor does this without resorting to any fancy camera tricks.Is Vidor's compelling imagery enough to save Solomon and Sheba? Not quite. Nothing could really turn back the tide of paltriness that washes over every other aspect of the picture. But Vidor's efforts at least make it easy on the eye. With that in mind, you can quite happily enjoy this as pretty no-brainer entertainment, just as you can the pictures of Cecil B. DeMille (although Vidor is far more surreal and spiritual then the earthy DeMille). If you keep your eyes peeled for things like that jolly conga line snaking its way through the surprisingly risqué pagan rite, or a soldier getting a round shield pinned to his face like a bronze-age emoticon, you might even find a few laughs in this ostensibly serious feature.