Film

Esther and the King

Name: Esther and the King
Genre: Drama
Released: 1960
Cast: Joan Collins, Richard Egan, Denis O'Dea, Sergio Fantoni, Rik Battaglia

Period drama

A 1960 biblical epic about a Jewish woman who becomes queen of Persia and must use her influence to save her people from persecution. Lavish sets, melodramatic romance, and Joan Collins at peak glamour. Built for Technicolor spectacle but creaking under heavy-handed dialogue. For fans of old Hollywood reaching for scripture.

TMDb rating

2.8

Should you watch it?

Watch it if you enjoy big, colorful biblical spectacle where court intrigue and palace politics carry the weight, and you don't mind a stately, old-Hollywood pace that lingers on costume and ceremony.

Skip it if you want a tight, modern pace or a grounded take on the Esther story; this one is earnest, theatrical, and leans on sweeping sets and declamatory performances more than subtle character work.

What it asks of you: It asks for a settled two hours or so and patience with a formal, stagey rhythm, where the drama builds through grand gestures and ornate dialogue rather than quick cuts.

Not sure? Find tonight's pick in a minute.

If you liked this

The Ten Commandments1956

DeMille's monumental biblical saga with the same lush production values, star power, and genuine spectacle. Charlton Heston leads thousands of extras through plagues and miracles with absolute conviction.

But Nearly four hours long and genuinely preachy. The dialogue can be excruciating, and the romance subplot drags.

Ben-Hur1959

Another biblical epic from this exact moment, with Charlton Heston, a chariot race that still thrills, and production design that makes you believe Rome. Sweeping without ever feeling cheap.

But The emotional core is thin beneath all that spectacle. Drags badly in the middle act.

Quo Vadis1951

Robert Taylor in Rome during Nero's reign, with sets so massive they dwarf the cast. Romance, persecution, moral stakes. Shot in Technicolor with an operatic sense of doom.

But Very slow. The love story is serviceable at best, and the pacing assumes you have nowhere else to be.

Not sure tonight? Get a pick in a minute, starting from Esther and the King

The wildcard

Something you would not have found on your own.

The Story of Ruth1960

Both are biblical love stories centering Jewish women navigating foreign courts, but Ruth trusts her instincts while Esther must hide hers. One is spectacle, one is restraint; together they show the era's split vision of female heroism.

Same year as Esther, same biblical genre, but shot in Kenya with Ruth as an active agent of her own survival and agency. Beautiful cinematography and a female lead with actual power over the narrative.

But Much smaller in scale and scope; feels intimate rather than epic. Less glamorous, more genuinely moving.

The Robe1953

First film shot in CinemaScope, and it uses that width to show you ancient spectacle. Richard Burton and Jean Simmons in a story of faith tested under empire.

But Deeply Christian messaging may feel preachy. The male lead's journey overshadows the female characters.

Samson and Delilah1949

DeMille again, with Victor Mature and Hedy Lamarr in Technicolor. Simpler story, more sex appeal, genuine camp energy. Unapologetic about loving its own excess.

But Treats its female lead as a temptress rather than a character. The theology is nonsense.

The Egyptian1954

Edmund Purdom as a slave who becomes a physician; Jean Simmons as a courtesan. Lavish, weird, uneven in the best way. Feels like fever dream rather than faithful adaptation.

But Visibly troubled production history shows. Dialogue stops making sense and actors look lost in the second act.

Solomon and Sheba1959

Yul Brynner and Gina Lollobrigida in a biblical romance with absurd dialogue and genuine spectacle. Earnest about its own ridiculousness.

But Historically incoherent. The politics make no sense and neither does the love triangle.

The Silver Chalice1954

Newman's film debut, playing an artisan in early Christianity. Sincere, beautiful sets, and Newman gives it everything even when the script doesn't deserve it.

But Notorious for spiritual earnestness that curdles into sentimentality. Newman himself famously disowned it.

Demetrius and the Gladiators1954

Vivid Technicolor continuation of The Robe with Victor Mature. Slave revolt and faith in conflict. More action-driven than its predecessor, less pretentious.

But Lower stakes than it thinks. The plot spins marking time between spectacle sequences.

A Man for All Seasons1966

Both explore how a powerless person (or someone made powerless by gender/faith) navigates a tyrant's court by understanding what the tyrant wants. But where Esther uses beauty and cunning, More uses reason and faith — and one survives while the other doesn't.

Staged like a play, austere, intellectual. Paul Scofield as Thomas More, choosing principle over survival under autocratic power. Spare dialogue, maximum moral weight.

But The opposite of spectacle. Deliberately theatrical and static. If you want sets and costumes to dazzle, this will feel like a lecture.

Pather Panchali1955

Both are stories about survival under impossible conditions, but Ray shows you the dailiness of it — the hunger, the small shames, the moments of beauty — where Esther dramatizes it into destiny. One is ancient scripture made glossy; the other is modern life treated as sacred. Watching both teaches you what filmmaking can do.

Satyajit Ray's Bengali masterpiece about a poor family in rural India. Human, tender, observant. The opposite of biblical spectacle in every way, but equally alive to suffering and grace. One of cinema's great achievements.

But Black and white, subtitled, no plot to speak of. Moves at life's pace, not narrative's. Requires patience and attention.