First Feature Length Film

Another fact from "The Guinness Book of Film Facts and Feats". The 1912 film From the Manger to the Cross is often cited as (one of) the first feature film(s) ever made. Here (p.17) it lists the earliest feature films made in the US, and From the Manger ranks fourth, with Oliver Twist being released in 7 months earlier in June 1912.

But it appears that both of those films were well beaten to the tile of first ever feature length film by a 1906 Australian Film about Ned Kelly, The Story of the Kelly Gang. Also ahead of the From the Manger is the 1909 French film L'Enfant Prodigue (which sounds like another bible based film and was the first European feature length film). Interestingly, there's no mention at all of The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ, which some have also claimed was the first feature length film.

Jesus of Nazareth (1916) Final Scenes Guide

It seems worth rounding off my look at From The Manger to the Cross (1912), and the modified version of it Jesus of Nazareth (1916/1919?) by posting a scene guide for the closing scenes. As I noted in my discussion of the film, it is basically From The Manger to the Cross with a tagged on burial, resurrection and ascension.

I noted earlier how these final scenes use a different actor from Robert Henderson Bland who played Jesus in From the Manger to the Cross. Furthermore, whilst posting this, I've also realised that these few scenes actually utilise two different actors to play Jesus as should be obvious from their pictures on the right. Anyway, here is the detail on those extra scenes:

Guide to scenes taken from From The Manger to the Cross
Burial - (Mark 15:42-47)
[extra-biblical episode - The Resurrection
Women at the Tomb - (Mark 16:1-8)
Ascension - (Luke 24:50-51, John 14:6)

What is interesting about these extra scenes is that it shows what the bible doesn't describe - the actual moment of resurrection - and then skips the stories the bible does include, namely the discovery of the empty tomb, and the various reactions to it, and the appearance to various disciples. Whilst films from The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ (1905) to The Passion of the Christ (2004) have shown the resurrection despite it's omission from the gospels, most of them have also shown some reaction to it (although Gibson's film is a notable exception). Here though we only see one woman joining two others. I read this as Mary Magdalene telling some of the other female disciples about his resurrection, although it is hard to tell with such a brief scene (11 seconds and a very poor quality picture). However the shot is interpreted it is hard to fit this scene into any of the post-resurrection accounts that any of the gospels give. Mark lists 3 women who find an empty tomb and run off scared. Matthew has only two women who find an empty tomb and then meet Jesus. Luke has more than 3 women finding and empty tomb and telling the disciples, and John has Mary alone finding the empty tomb, telling Peter and John, and then meeting the risen Christ on her own.

The final scene is the ascension which possibly goes further than any other film in showing Jesus flying off into space, and ends on the sign of the cross. I'm still wondering what the best cinematic depiction is of this scene. I quite like the ones in The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ (1905), where he, quite literally, goes up into heaven in one (smoothish) move, and the one in Dayasagar (1978) where he grows showing the transition from a man to a man of heaven, and the influence his life would have after his resurrection. I also like the brief version in Pasolini's film, and the shot of the event from Jesus' point of view in Jesus (1979).

From the Manger to the Cross (1912)

The term "feature length film" is something of a slippery one. However, if one takes it to mean a film with a running time greater than an hour then it's fair to say that From the Manger to the Cross, made in 1912, was the first feature length film about Jesus.

Although the dating of Jesus films before this date is somewhat unclear, the vocabulary and techniques of the medium of film had moved on considerably in the 7 or so years since the release of The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ was released somewhere between 1902 and 1908. In particular, film-makers had begun to progress in their thinking from film being a novel form of side-show entertainment, to it being an extension of the theatre, and onto understanding it's place as one of the visual arts. Hence, whilst the film is still largely shot in middle distance, there are a few exceptions, and we also begin to see some more visually pleasing camera shots, with more interesting compositions.

Take for example the shot captured above which shows the boy Jesus carrying a plank of wood for his father, inadvertently casting the silhouette of a cross on to the ground. Many consider Chinese shadow plays to be one of the forerunners of cinema, so there is something here of things coming full circle. Elsewhere we see a greater understanding of depth of focus as Jesus enters the shot below from back of the focus field, rather than the front as was more usual. The composition is far more pleasing than anything in earlier Jesus films. Jesus remains the focus of the shot, as we follow the disciples' gaze towards him, and the skyline "points" towards him.

All of this is not bad to say that the film crew that was sent out to the Holy Land were not intended to film a life of Christ, but several other one reel films such as Captured by Bedouins and An Arabian Tragedy. However, inspired by the locations actress, and sometime writer, Gene Gauntier penned a script for the film and persuaded Sidney Olcott (who had previously made the 1907 version of Ben Hur) to direct it.

Looking back over 100 years it's hard to understand how aware people were of what the rest of the world looked like. Today we are used to TV, cinema, the internet, advertising in general pumping images at us at an incredible rate, many of which relate to the rest of the world - not to mention the impact of cheap flights on world travel.

In 1912, photography, and film in particular, was in its infancy, and whilst people may have seen the odd pencil sketch or the occasional photograph of certain sites of interest, the chance to see images of the wonders of the world would have been a big draw in itself. It's no surprise then that the film features the pyramids and the sphinx so prominently when Joseph and Mary escape with the infant Jesus to Egypt. They probably had the pulling power of the groundbreaking techniques of the original Matrix film in our day. Location filming, today the norm, was then not only a novel way to make the film look more realistic, but it gave audiences a chance to see the world for the first time.

The limitations of "silent film" also directed the medium in various ways. Even a brief glimpse at the episodes shown in the film show that, as one might expect, this film emphasises Jesus's actions rather than his words. There are ten or more healings in the film, and the supernatural is in evidence also in a number of dreams, although in stark contrast to earlier films the angelic presence is shown off screen, only represented by a stream of light, or the character's gaze off screen. This active Jesus closely aligns with that of Mark's all action Jesus, even though the film is really a harmonisation of stories from all four gospels.

The film was also highly controversial. Robert Henderson-Bland, the actor playing Jesus, or Christus as he preferred to call it, claimed that "No film that was ever made called forth such a storm of protest".¹ For some, the offence was based solely on an objection to any cinematic depiction of Christ at all. The medium was increasingly being viewed as depraved, and rotten to the core in some church circles. Perhaps some fo the objections however related to the way the film attempted to wrestle its imagery away from the confines of church tradition. For example, the use of a T-shaped cross, or the composition of the last supper (see right) which emphasised how some at the meal ate whilst reclining (Luke 22:14). Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the film was it's omission of the resurrection.

On its release, however, the film seemed to be well received, with some Christian groups rejoicing in such an evangelistic opportunity. Henderson-Bland's portrayal would be one of the best for years to come, capturing both his humanity and his divinity well. He was able to be compassionate and caring for most of the film, and yet is clearing of the temple is one of the most passionate and fearful of them all. The film also captures his relationship with his father nicely in a few brief shots of him spending time alone praying from the Mount of Olives overlooking Jerusalem.

The film also seemed to avoid the charges of anti-Semitism that were levelled at the slightly later Palestinian scenes from D.W. Griffiths' Intolerance (1916), and DeMille's The King of Kings (1927). This was in no small part due to the omission of any sort of trial scene in front of Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin. It is also noticeable that the "crowd" who beg Pilate for Jesus's blood is probably the smallest crowd of any other Jesus film, with the possible exceptions of Il Messia, and Last Temptation of Christ (where Pilate sentences Jesus in private).

Given the positive reception it was no surprise that the film achieved a number of subsequent re-releases, some of them with tacked on "resurrection scenes" under the alternative title of Jesus of Nazareth. There was even a re-release at the start of the sound era, adding a soundtrack with a few sounds effects. Whilst the soundtrack brought the film more up to date, it removed some of the simple spritiuality of the images. I'd advise viewers to day to watch it muted.

Eventually, the film was overshadowed by DeMille's popularist The King of Kings, which outguns Olcott's film for spectacle, but fails to capture From the Manger to the Cross's authenticity and calm sense of spirituality. Whereas DeMille's Jesus is heralded by overbearing fanfare, the Jesus of this film "speaks" for himself.

======
1 - Tatum, W.B., "Jesus at the Movies", California: Polebridge Press (2004). p.30

From the Manger to the Cross Scene Guide

Having mentioned this film a number of times so far, most notably in my Top Ten Jesus Films post and in last week's post in the re-issue under the alternative title of Jesus of Nazareth (1916). As this is a silent film, all the dialogue is obviously conveyed via the intertitles. In this film's case these are accompanied with bible references. This makes the task of referencing the film's scenes and dialogue a little easier, as well as ensuring they are in line with the film-makers' intentions. So I'll forgo the usual citation method in favour of the film-makers' references. Where consecutive verses are separated by a comma this signifies that they appear on separate cards. The words in bold are from separate title cards which introduce each section. I believe these headings are imposed on pictures from Tissot's illustrated bible.

The Annunciation and the Infancy of Christ
Annunciation - (Luke 1:27;28)
Joseph's dream - (Matt 1:19,20,21)
Birth of Jesus - (Luke 2:4,7)
Shepherds and Angels - (Luke 2:8,10)
Wise Men - (Matt 2:1)
Joseph is warned in a dream - (Matt 2:3)
The Period of Youth
Return to Nazareth - (Matt 2:19)
The Boy Jesus - (Luke 2:40,42,43,45,46,51,52)
After Years of Silent Preparation: Heralded by John the Baptist
John the Baptist - (John 1:23, 36)
Calling the Disciples
Calling of the 1st Disciples - (Matt 4:18,19,21)
The Beginning of Miracles
Jesus heals many - (Matt 4:23)
Wedding at Cana - (John 2:1,7)
Jesus Heals a Leper - (Mark 1:40)
Jesus heals a Paralytic - (Mark 2:4,11)
Widow of Nain's son - (Luke 7:12,14)
Anointing at Simon's House - (Luke 7:37,47)
Scenes in the Ministry
Teaching from a boat - (Mark 4:1)
Walking on Water - (Matt 14:25)
Many Healings - (Mark 6:56)
Mary and Martha - (Luke 10:38,39,40,42)
Attempted Stoning - (John 8:20,58)
Raising of Lazarus - (John 11:1,17,40,43)
Healing a Blind Man - (Matt* 20:29,34)
Jesus Anointed at Bethany - (Matt 26:7,8-9,11-12)
Last Days in the Life of Jesus
Triumphal Entry - (Luke 19:37, Matt 21:9)
Clearing the Temple - (Matt 21:12)
Plot Against Jesus - (Mark 11:18)
Temple Healings - (Matt 21:14)
Prayer on the Mount of Olives - (Luke 21:37)
Judas agrees to betray Jesus - (Mark 14:10)
The Last Supper
Washing the Disciples' Feet - (John 13:5)
Last Supper - (Mark 14:8,18, John 13:26, Luke 22:19,20)
Crucifixion and Death
Gethsemane - (Matt 26:47, Luke 22:41)
Jesus's Arrest - (Matt 26*:46, John 18:6)
Judas Hangs Himself - (Matt 27:35)
Trial before Pilate - (Matt 27:2)
In Front of Herod - (Luke 23:11)
Pilate Orders Scourging - (John 19:1)
Crowd Orders Jesus's death - (John 19:5,6)
Mocking - (Matt 27:31)
Road to the Cross - (John 19:17, Mark 15:21, Luke 23:49)
Crucifixion - (Mark 15:25, Luke 23:34,42,43, John 19:28,25)
Death - (Matt 28:5, John 3:16)

Notes*Two of the references given on the cards are wrong (as indicated above by asterisks. The first is cited at Mark 20, whereas the second is cited as Matt 31.

This is possibly the only Jesus film to show Jesus parading through the streets of Jerusalem with a T-shaped cross. Although a number of films show the two thieves crucified either side of Jesus on such T-shaped crosses, Jesus is always crucified on one that is the traditional shape. Jesus (1979) also proved something of a watershed here, being one of the first films to show Jesus carrying the cross beam alone, as has been shown to be more historically likely. Since then the majority of Jesus films have followed suit - although The Passion of the Christ is a notbale exception. In either case, the cross itself is always a † shape in all other Jesus films.

As I noted when looking at the re-named, re-issue of this film Jesus Christ Superstar (1973) was heavily criticised by Christian groups when it came out because it omitted the resurrection. Yet note that this was not a new thing, both the earliest passion plays (which were focussed solely on Jesus's suffering), and this film (which shows more of Jesus's life but tells the story up "to the cross" as per its title) this was far from a new thing then - it goes back to the very start of cinema, and indeed, older Christian tradition. The truncated ending, and the film's emphasis on the works rather than the words of Jesus, have led many to find similarities between this film and Mark's gospel in particular.

The healing of the Widow of Nain's son (picture right) is one incident that is ot included in many Jesus films, only this film, and Jesus (1979), although it is also included in episode 6 of the Living Christ Series. I can't recall a film that shows either this raising, or that of Jairus's daughter but omits Lazarus's, other than those based solely on one gospel.

Similarly sparse are films which show Jesus washing the disciples' feet, although this has increased in recent years with The Gospel of John (2003), and The Passion of the Christ (2004). Prior to that, I can only recall this film, Il Messia (1975) and the Living Bible Series.

Of all Jesus films, this one is perhaps the one that shows the greatest range of Jesus's childhood in the "Period of Youth". Obviously a great many films show the birth and the incident in the temple when Jesus is 12. A few also include the return from Egypt. This film also shows some very naturalistic footage of Jesus growing up, with his mother as a toddler, both parents as a young child, and then helping his mother around the age of 10-12. After the temple incident, we see him helping Joseph carry some wood. The brevity of these scenes, no doubt due to what seems to us a short running time, but was then one of the longest films ever made, help this natural feel. They are wordless, and are of every day tasks. Another shot achieving a great deal of naturalism is the one shown at the top of the post where Jesus prays on the Mount of Olives.

One curious aspect of this film is the way it includes two different versions of women anointing Jesus. This, like the two accounts of Jesus clearing the temple in The Gospel Road, is unusual, both amongst Jesus films, but also as an interpretation of multiple, yet variant accounts of similar incidents in the gospels. Most scholars would consider there to have only been one anointing, with the author of Luke relocating it - presumably because it fits in with the surrounding incidents, forming a section focussing on those outside "respectable" Jewish society. John's relocation of the story to Lazarus's house in Bethany, and naming of the woman as Mary, either reflects and alternative tradition, or most likely is to strengthen the link between Lazarus's death and resuscitation and Jesus's coming death and resurrection.

W. Barnes Tatum in his analysis of the film in "Jesus at the Movies" comments on how the screenplay, written by a woman Gene Gauntier has a very positive view of women, omitting incidents which portray women as harlots and seducers, such as the woman caught in adultery from John 8 and the dance of Salome, and including incidents which show women in a more positive light such as the two anointings, Mary being praised by Jesus for sitting at his feet and learning from him. Gauntier also played the Virgin Mary. The film also omits any kind of "trial" before Caiaphas or the Sanhedrin, perhaps to remove potential anti-Semitic incidents.

Top Ten Jesus Films

Peter T Chattaway has just had his list of Top Ten Jesus Films published by Christianity Today. We chatted a bit about the subject a while back and I've been meaning to post my list for a while. Peter's films are:

The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ (1902-05)
The King of Kings (1927)
The Gospel According to St. Matthew (1964)
The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965)
Godspell (1973)
The Messiah (1976)
Jesus of Nazareth (1977)
Jesus (1999)
The Miracle Maker (2000)
The Passion of the Christ (2004)

Since Peter has now had his list published, and, as this is the last major post before Good Friday I thought it was probably about time I posted mine up as well. We actually agree on 6, although I'd be happy to swap 2 of those 6 for 2 on my list of honourable mentions further below. However, here are my Tope Ten Jesus films in chronological order:

From the Manger to the Cross (1912)
More of a film than The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ, more natural and genuine than DeMille's The King of Kings, This film, for me, stands out as the best Jesus film of the silent era. Controversial in it's day, for its very existence, (not to mention its ommission of the resurrection), Sidney Olcott's film has a quiet dignity about it, which is best captured by turning off the overbearing sountrack which was added later. The film was re-issued with a resurrection scene in 1916 as Jesus of Nazareth, and under that title again in 1932 with sound.

Golgotha (1935)
Golgotha was the first Jesus talkie, and set a high standard for those that were to follow> originally released as Ecce Homo. Julien Duvivier's use of the camera was way ahead of his time and he manages to capture the miraculous events in Jesus's last week as if they were the most natural thing in the world.
My review

King of Kings (1961)
The first Hollywood film about Jesus since the end of the silent era 34 years earlier. King of Kings remains enjoyable even though behind the scenes power stuggles destroyed the films promise. The Sermon on the Mount scene is still wonderful though, even if elsewhere Jesus is squeezed out of the film by the zealots.
My review

Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (1964 - The Gospel According to St. Matthew)
Widely considered the masterpiece of the genre, at least among film critics, Pasolini's neo-realist style gave us a Jesus of the people, who delivers his pithy sayings with revolutionary urgency. The camera work draws the viewer into the story more, whilst the use of ordinary people cuts through the gloss of so many Jesus films both before and afterwards.

Il Messia (1975 - The Messiah)
The Godfather of neo-realism was Roberto Rossellini who ended his career with this film. Like Pasolini's film, Rossellini depicts a peasant Jesus, who continues his carpentry even as he teaches, and whose followers pass on his message at the same time he does. Of all the versions of Jesus in film this one perhaps focusses the most on his teaching. The film is also unusual for it's opening scenes from the time of Samuel.

Jesus of Nazareth (1977)
One of my least favourite films in this list, and yet where would the genre be without it? In many people's eyes the definitive film Jesus, and a favourite amongst the faithful, Zefferelli does so much very well. Sadly, his leading character is dreary, and the film drags on without a charismatic compelling lead. That said the other performaces are wonderful and the period detail is impressive.


Last Temptation of Christ (1988)
A mixture of the good, the bad, and the dull. In parts Scorsese's film soars breathing new life into the character of Jesus and challenging the viewer about their cosy pre-conceptions. In other places though the film, is just bizarre and has offended many, whilst still other places seem to drag. For those looking for fresh insights and who like to judge films on their merits there is plenty to be mined here. For those who find whole films are spoiled by particular sections stay away, particularly if you are easily offended.
My review

Jesus (1999)
Jesus explores similar territory to Last Temptation, but in a safer more palatable form. Sisto's performance has many strengths, but it slightly spoilt by a few too many scenes of of him goofing around. That said the early scenes are particularly strong. Much of it is speculation, but certainly such that is within reason. It's also one of the few films to clarify that that it was the Romans, not the Jewish leaders that were in charge in Jerusalem in Jesus's time.

The Miracle Maker (1999)
The claymation version of Jesus's life is one of the genre's highs. Whilst clearly less arty than Pasolini's film, it is theologically, and historically strong, and surprisingly moving for a stop motion film. Ralph Fiennes does an excellent job as the voice of Jesus, and Murray Watts's scripts is excellent but the most credit must go to the team of animators who produced a wonderfully realistic and creative film.
My review

Passion of the Christ (2004)
Whilst there are several troubling aspects of this film Mel Gibson did plenty of excellent work with this as well. The film looked incredible, and whilst it starved us of insights into Jesus's earlier life, the few scraps we were allowed certainly aroused our appetites for more. And as filmic meditations on the stations of the cross go, I doubt it will be surpassed.


Honourable mentions
There are a few films which I had to exclude, for various reasons, but which really deserve a mention.

Son of Man (1969)
Son of Man isn't really a film, it's the filmed version of a Dennis Potter play. Nevertheless it remains one of the strongest visual portrayals of Jesus to date. Colin Blakely portrays a Jesus with fire in his belly, who speaks in the language of normal people, but in a manner that makes his collision with the authorities inevitable. The Sermon on the Mount scene again is amazing, and deserves repeated viewings.

Life of Brian (1979)
This is excluded form the list becuase it isn't actually a film about Jesus (although he makes a brief cameo at the start). Instead it's about the folibles of religion, and of humanity in general. Life of Brian does what all good films do - be excellent at something. In this film's case its comedy is hilarious hwilst remaining thoughtful. As a result it has gained a dedicated following, and appears time after time in those "best of" programmes.

Jesus of Montreal (1989)
Jesus of Montreal is another satire, only this time the target is modern day Quebec. The film follows five actors as they put on a controversial passion play which and finds the life of the groups leader mirroring that of Jesus whom he plays in the film. Perhaps the strangest scenes at a first viewing, is actually one of the best - where Jesus wanders through the subway proclaiming God's judgement in the style of Mark 13.

Book of Life (1999)
Hal Hartley's film stars Martin Donovan as Jesus returning to earth on the eve of the new Millennium, and finding that his love for humanity conflicts with his mission. Another sharply observed satire which explores form as well as content.