Inspired by the scriptural tale. Moabitess priestess Ruth is drawn both to a Judean man and to his talk of a forgiving God. After tragedy strikes, she begins a new life in Bethlehem.

"The Story of Ruth" received favorable reviews upon release. Variety called it "a refreshingly sincere and restrained Biblical drama, a picture that elaborates on the romantic, political and devotional difficulties encountered by the Old Testament heroine." I like the word "restrained" in that review. Although the overall theme is definitely the promotion of the Judeo-Christian god, especially over false idols, it is never to the point where it seems unbearably preachy. There is much more focus on the love life of Ruth, and the conflict between the two countries, Moab and Judea. It almost makes me want to learn more about the history of Moab and find where it disappeared to.

"The Story of Ruth" is a 132 minute spectacle based on the Book of Ruth in the Bible. The problem is that Ruth is a relatively short book...and a HUGE amount of padding was needed to make such a lengthy film. And, like so many biblical epics of the 1950s-60s, most of the story is pure fiction....created out of the heads of the writers from the studio. So, if you are looking for a story close to the source material, then you might want to skip this one.

When the story begins, the child Ruth is sold to the temple where Chemosh* is worshiped and children are sacrifices. Ruth is excited when she later is chosen to be sacrificed...but her joy was cut short when they found a blemish on her and sacrificed a different child instead. Of course, none of this major portion (the first 50 minutes) of the film is in the Bible. Where the biblical story actually begins is after the death of Ruth's husband...and Ruth and her mother-in-law don't escape from Moab as much as they just left and headed to Judea.

The second half of the story is closer to the source material. And, Ruth's love interest, Boaz, is played well by handsome Stuart Whitman. All the racist and religious hatred of Ruth by Judeans was completely fictional...but otherwise it was a decent representation of the book.

So is it any good? Well, it entirely depends on what you are looking for in the movie. If you want one that sticks close to the book of Ruth, then you'll be disappointed. But, if you don't mind all the fictionalization, it is pretty exciting in some places...especially the first portion which is mostly about child sacrifice. I really wish, in hindsight, that the film had bee all fiction and they hadn't bothered with the Ruth tie-in....as the fictional stuff was pretty interesting.

My review: For a biblical purist, a 4 or 5. For someone who just wants to be entertained, a 7. For me, I think it merits about a 6 overall. The acting is quite good by Whitman and Elana Eden in the title role.

By the way, John Banner of "Hogan's Heroes" fame is in the film as the Moabite king. But he sounds like his voice was dubbed by another actor...which is a bit strange.

*Chemosh worship was apparently a thing in ancient Moab and it did involve child sacrifice. I did a bit of research about this and, apparently, so did the writers.

Anyone expecting an elephantine spectacle with a cast of thousands for this Old Testament story will be sadly disappointed. The Story of Ruth simply does not lend itself to that kind of treatment. In fact for the screen quite a bit of liberties were taken with the story in terms of adding plot that the Old Testament Book of Ruth simply doesn't have.

Ruth is an unusual character in the Bible. First she's a female protagonist, one of a select few there. Secondly her story gets its own book in the Old Testament, a short item of only four chapters. Lastly she's the first non-Hebrew protagonist in the Bible since Abraham sired the Hebrew people.

It's a simple story in the Old Testament. Ruth is one of two Moabite women who marry the sons of Elimelech and Naomi. When Elimelech and sons Mahlon and Chillion die, leaving Naomi a widow with two widowed daughters-in-law, Naomi decides to return to Israel. One daughter-in-law, Orpah, bids her goodbye. Daughter-in-law Ruth however says she will not desert her. She's going to give up the life and culture of Moab and her people will be Naomi's people in the most famous line from the Book of Ruth.

That's all there is to explain Ruth the Moabite coming to live in Israel with her mother-in-law. Director Henry Koster directed a film with a whole involved plot which goes into Ruth being a Moabite priestess and the reason for the death of all the men in that family. It's a nice story, but not the Old Testament.

The second half of the film involves Ruth and Naomi and a blood relative's named Boaz and Boaz's courtship of Ruth. Boaz has a rival in another relative who is closer to Naomi who's name isn't mentioned, but the film names as Tob. We get a few more details from the Bible for the screenwriters to work with in this part.

Henry Koster directed many a film with a religious theme and had success with The Robe and A Man Called Peter among others. This film is not as good as the other two, but still is both reverent and entertaining.

The cast performs well. Israeli actress Elana Eden is in the title role and like her fellow Israeli thespian Haya Harrareet from Ben-Hur saw her career dissipate in the Sixties. The two men in her life are Tom Tryon as Mahlon and Stuart Whitman as Boaz. Broadway veteran Peggy Wood is Naomi and the best in the film is Jeff Morrow as the overbearing and drunken Tob who with a little bit of trickery Eden gets to renounce his claim on her. It was the law back in the day.

The real story of Ruth is in that title phrase. Before there was a New Testament and a group of men were told to spread the faith, this story shows that God is taking converts. His wisdom and mercy are not the exclusive property of one race, but are universal. And in fact the children of Boaz and Ruth start the royal line of Israel beginning with their great grandson David.

But it all begins with how Boaz and Ruth get together.