Jesus' Humour in Bible Movies

I got a question from a friend asking if I knew of any clips of "Jesus laughing or being funny in any Jesus films" and if seemed like it might be an interesting subject for a blog post. They mentioned The Chosen and I agree it's an obvious starting place, because Jesus' sense of humour is so much more fully developed in that series than any other production that I'm aware of. So maybe we can take that as read, or maybe we'll just return to Jesus' sense of humour in The Chosen because it's quite a topic in itself. Feel free to post any good examples in the comments.

The Comedy Jesus Films

An obvious place to start is comedies which feature Jesus as a character. However, in most of the obvious examples, Jesus is played straight, it's the antics around him where characters might be said to joke; or it's the fact that a non-joking Jesus is in an unusual context that provides the humour.

Take for example Luis Buñuel's The Milky Way (1969). Jesus appears a few times. The first time he is thinking of shaving his beard off. It's a funny scene, but the joke is about quirky juxtaposition. Moments later Jesus is running late – again, a normal element of being human that somehow feels at odds with how Jesus is traditionally portrayed

I covered 9 films that could be classed as comedic in my book, but most of them were based on the Hebrew Bible. Nevertheless only one of them was written in that style of humour where one of the characters provides humour by saying intentionally funny things (e.g. Jerry in Seinfeld or Chandler in Friends), Hal Hartley's The Book of Life (1998). Here the 'funny' character is Satan even though Jesus (who has come to judge the living and the dead) remains the 'hero', though much of the humour comes from the quirky and surreal world to which Jesus returns.

Indeed the existing comedy Bible movies are mostly written in that style where the characters themselves play things straight despite the fact they exist in a funny / absurd world / situation or they are the absurd ones. None of these films play Jesus as absurd, though I've not seen much of Black Jesus (2014-19) yet.

Perhaps the most obvious example of the absurd universe model is the most famous comedic Bible Film Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979). Here Jesus only appears briefly at the start delivering the Sermon on the Mount in traditional fashion. The humour comes from the absurd conversations that happen at the edges of the crowd and then as the film pans out further we discover Jesus may very well be the only sane character in the entire character.

The other film that might qualify as a comedy Jesus film is Get Some Money (2017) directed by Biko Nyongesa. The original short film of the same name was billed as a comedy about Judas' suicide. As someone not really familiar with a Kenyan sense of humour I found it difficult to relate to the humour – suicide tends not to be played for laughs in Anglo-American culture. Some bits were still amusing though again Jesus himself was not making jokes or wry observations.

Lastly there's Jesus of Montreal (1989) which, as it is often observed, is not really a Jesus film at all as much as a film about Jesus which leans heavily on allegory. Interestingly Daniel, the character in the film who is portraying Jesus in a play, does have a sense of humour, but that's no something that carries over to his performance of Jesus. So the Christ-figure is funny, but not the Jesus figure. Indeed many of the classic Christ-figure films give their hero a sense of humour, but I'm going to resist going off on that tangent.

In short, while several films are funny about Jesus, none of those really portray Jesus as having a sense of humour. However, there are several of the more traditional-style Jesus films which do give Jesus a sense of humour, so lets turn to them now.

Son of Man (1969) 

Dennis Potter's play, Son of Man was groundbreaking in so many ways, but it was when Gareth Davies adapted it for the BBC that elements of Jesus' humour began to emerge. The actor Davies picked as his lead – Colin Blakely – gives an electric performance as Jesus and his version of the Sermon on the Mount is a particular highlight. There are a few changes to the script. I'm not sure whether Potter rewrote it for the television, or if that was down to Davies, or just the way Blakely delivered the scene. Perhaps a combination of the three, but it's there that a couple of little humorous interjections emerge. The potential is there in Potter's words, but Blakely injects the scene with the impression that not only does his Jesus realise humour is a useful tool, but that he is clearly revelling in using it. "It's easy to love those who love you" says Blakely with perfect comic timing "Why even the tax collector can do that". Later, he admits it would hurt were someone to strike you on the cheek and when Brian Blessed's Peter adds "Yes, especially if I were to do it Master!", Jesus roars with laughter along with everyone else. The signs of Jesus' sense of humour are brief, but very much there.

The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)

Scorsese's interpretation of the story was different in so many ways from its predecessors that it's hardly a surprise that humour is one of the elements of Jesus' humanity (though perhaps it's a divine characteristic too) which it draws out. In some ways this is surprising as Jesus tends to be very intense and serious in this movie. The first flicker of a sense of humour here occurs in the stoning scene. Jesus is challenging the crowd about their own sin. When Zebedee steps forward claiming he's not done anything wrong, Jesus asks him his mistresses' name. It's meant rhetorically, but when another member of the crowd shouts out "Judith", Jesus raises his eyebrow wryly. At a recent screening, which I introduced, the audience laughed at that moment. 

Shortly afterwards the disciples arrive at the Wedding at Cana, which Nathaniel (whose cousin is getting married) is helping out with. When the wine runs out Jesus asks what is in the nearby jars. Nathaniel informs him that they're only water – he filled them himself. Jesus suggests he check anyway. Nathaniel is insistent, but eventually gives way, only to discover they are now filled with wine. Nathaniel stares back at Jesus open mouthed. Jesus – in what has become a much used meme, raises his glass with an told-you-so smile.

There's not much more to it than that, but certainly this was a development, and moreover it's perhaps the only moment in any Jesus production prior to The Chosen where I smile at Jesus' sense of humour. 

The Visual Bible: Matthew (1994)

If Scorsese's introduction of a Jesus with a sense of humour was a bit of an innovation then Regardt van den Bergh's Matthew was a revolution. Bruce Marchiano received instruction from his director to play Jesus as a "Man of Joy" (p.72) and inspiration from an 8 year old friend who remarked "Well I sure hope he smiles a lot because Jesus in the other Jesus movies never smiled, and I know that Jesus smiles all the time". Marchiano certainly delivered on that guidance, giving the most joyful, smiley portrayal of Jesus imaginable. Even the passages where it's hard to image Jesus smiling, Marchiano keeps going, for example the 7 woes of Matt 23. He later reflected that "Jesus smiled bigger and laughed heartier than any human being who's ever walked the planet". While it occasionally rankles with an old curmudgeon like me, many have found it life-changing.

But smiling and laughing are not the same as "being funny" and here van den Bergh and Marchiano were limited by the former's decision to stick to a word for word adaptation of Matthew's text. Yet while Matthew is not the kind of witty text that will instantly have you in stitches, it's important to remember even the deliberate examples of wit we do have from that period do not seem particularly funny to us today. 

In that context there are one or two moments of humour in Matthew that feel not out of place in that context and the film certainly tries to stress the point that this is meant to be humorous. The most memorable is when it comes to Matt 7:3-5 ("How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?"). This bit of comic exaggeration often cited as an example of humour in the Bible and, as if to underline the point, Marchiano picks up a big piece of wood and holds it against his eye as he delivers the line. It's not the greatest piece of comic delivery, but it does, at least, make the point. 

Jesus (1999)

Roger Young's miniseries tries, as much as any previous Jesus film, so show Jesus having a laugh. There's the moment when he and his disciples rush to a water point, desperate for a drink and he playfully splashes them with the water and another similar moment later on. 

Perhaps the most memorable scene in this respect is when some street performers seek to get the crowd – which Jesus is part of – to dance. Jesus (played by a youthful Jeremy Sisto) is very keen and jumps right up. Thomas (of course!) is less entranced and so Jesus seeks to coax him out of his shell a bit. It plays as funny, but in real life I would hate it if someone tried this. Jesus! You don't need my compliance to validate your own joy at dancing.

Elsewhere Jesus' style of preaching is more open than in many films. When he preaches he doesn't just get the kind of questions we find in the Bible, also gets heckled, and his reaction is to laugh along. Jesus himself doesn't tell jokes in this film, but he certainly is shown to have a good sense of humour.

More recent productions

All of these examples are from the twentieth century. Are there any, more-recent examples? Casting my mind back, I remember Jesus being generally cheery and good natured in films such as The Miracle Maker (2000) and Risen (2016) and perhaps even a little self-depricating in such a way as to suggest he doesn't take himself too seriously. But neither contain laughter, humour or jokes. Meanwhile 2006's Color of the Cross, Son of God (2014), Killing Jesus (2015) and Last Days in the Desert (2016) probably reversed the general trend of getting Jesus to lighten up a bit from his earlier silver screen outings, and presented him as a more serious figure. Likewise other non-English language efforts such as Shanti Sandesham (2004),  Jezile (Son of Man, 2006), Su re (2012) and The Savior (2014) also have a more serious-minded approach. There is are a couple of exceptions and like Son of Man (1969) above, both are from British television...

The Second Coming (2003)

In 2003 Christopher Ecclestone, the (then) future Doctor Who, starred as the son of God come back to earth as a working class Mancunian. Northern humour was very much part of the mix. In one scene as he speaks to a vast crown he reminds them of scientific breakthroughs with potentially apocalyptic consequences and asks  "Do you think you're reading for that much power?...You lot?....You cheeky bastards!" 

The line that most stays with me comes from the end of the first episode. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it (it's currently on the Internet Archive), but even twenty years after watching it I could remember the episode's final line. "Well, maybe two".

Second Coming is far from a conventional Jesus film, and it's notable that this was an ITV production rather than something from the BBC. This is very much a Jesus who jokes, even if he's arguably more intense than many of the others. Moreover this is a Jesus who jokes and uses humour, but doesn't really smile and laugh that much (and when he does it's slightly unnerving).

The Passion (2008)

The Passion first broadcast by the BBC in 2008 contains a few humorous notes in its very first scene. Jesus and the disciples are attempting to buy a donkey and its colt and when their business is done the seller realises who Jesus is. Jesus asks him what he's heard and when the seller mentions overthrowing the Romans Jesus replies "Does this look like an army...apart from John and James". Later Jesus uses sleight of hand to inject a bit of humour into "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" and also to turn some of his questioners cynicism back onto them. 

This is also a Jesus who smiles and laughs as well. But the series is also keen to show those around Jesus laughing at the things he says, or more to the point how he says it. When Jesus is told "the elders instruct us" he counters "and you must listen to what they say...just don't do what they do". As Jesus, Joseph Mawle's delivery is good hear, his relaxed delivery and timing make many lines that read straight in the Gospels become funny. That is also due to Frank Deasy's script which rephrases the words from the Gospels making them more lively and immediate.

Over to you

That's all of the best examples I can think of, having mulled over this for a week or so. Did I miss any? If so, let me know in the comments below.

Podcast: Jesus (1999)

The latest entry in my Jesus film podcast is up, and this month I'm talking about Jesus (1999). That's eleven entries now which means I've been going for a year now (as I didn't do one in December last year. By the way, does anyone know what the podcast equivalent of a blogiversary?).

The other ten talks (Jesus of Nazareth, Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo, The Greatest Story Ever Told, Jesus of Montreal, Jesus Christ Superstar, The Miracle Maker, Il Messia, King of Kings, Last Temptation of Christ and Life and Passion of Jesus Christ are all still available to download.

Jesus (1999) - Scene Guide

Having reviewed the Jesus mini series yesterday, I thought I would follow it up as normal with a scene guide. The gospel citations here follow the usual rules. There are actually two different version of this film in circulation. The one I am most familiar with is the International version which concludes with a scene where the modern day Jesus meets some children in Malta (I believe). The US version is the one where Mary recalls Jesus as a child resurrecting a bird, an episode not dissimilar to one from certain versions of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. There are only a few differences between the two versions, and most of them relate to the incidents not found in scripture. Those changes which do relate to scriptural incidents are minor. Full details of the differences between the two versions can be found at Hollywood Jesus.

Part 1
[Extra-biblical episodes]
Mary and Martha - (Luke 10:38-42)
John the Baptist - (Mark 1:4-8)
Boy Jesus (Luke 2:41-50)
Jesus’ Baptism - (Mark 1:9-11)
Temptation - (Matt 4:1-11)
Andrew & John follow - (John 1:35-40)
Mary tells Joseph she is pregnant - (Matt 1:19-20)
[Extra-Biblical Episode]
Wedding at Cana - (John 2:1-12)
Catch of Fish - (Luke 5:2-11)
[extra-biblical episodes]
Death of John - (Mark 6:17-27)
[Extra-Biblical Episode ]
Woman caught in Adultery - (John 8:2-11)
Clearing the Temple - (Mark 11:15-19)

Part 2
[Extra-Biblical Episode]
Various Teaching
Calling of the 12 - (Mark 3:14-19)
Calming the storm - (Matt 14:22-33)
Canaanite Woman - (Mark 7:24-30)
[Extra-biblical episode]
Lazarus Raised - (John 11:1-44)
Triumphal Entry - (Mark 11:1-11)
[Extra-biblical episode]
Last Supper - (Mark 14:12-31)
Judas’ Betrayal - (Mark 14:10-11)
Gethsemane - (Mark 14:32-42)
Jesus’s arrest - (Mark 14:43-50)
Peter’s Denial - (Mark 14:66-72))
Sanhedrin Trial - (Mark 14:53-64)
Pilate 1st trial - (Luke 23:1-7)
Before Herod - (Luke 23:8-12)
Pilate 2nd trial - (Luke 23:13-25)
Jesus is Whipped - (Matt 27:26)
Crucifixion and Death - (Mark 15:22-41)
Judas Hangs himself - (Matt 27:5b)
Burial - (Mark 15:42-47)
Mary M & the Empty Tomb - (John 20:1-2)
Peter & John at Tomb - (John 20:3-10)
Mary M meets Jesus - (John 20:11-16)
Thomas Doubts - (John 20:25)
Appearance to Disciples - (Luke 24:36-40)
[International ending - Extra-Biblical]

A Few Notes

This film is a prime example of the harmonising tradition in Jesus films. Rather than exclusively or primarily following a single gospel it blends all four together. Hence key incidents exclusive to John, such as the wedding at Cana, raising of Lazarus and some of the resurrection stories are included. Whilst this is not uncommon, we also see the script writer Suzette Couture pick and choose the most vivid incidents from each of the synoptic gospels. Hence Luke's version of the call of Simon Peter (where he is only convinced after a miraculous catch of fish) is included in preference to the more mundane version in Matthew and Mark. This is of course only after John the Baptist has dramatically pointed out Jesus to Andrew and John. The interaction with between Jesus and Mary and Martha is only found in Luke's gospel yet included. Similarly only Luke's gospel puts Jesus on trial in front of Herod, and only Matthew has Peter attempt to walk on water and Judas hang himself. As a result of this and my familiarity with the film I've made more effort to locate the exact story where it seems warranted.

It's also noticeable how this film opts neither for the single trip to Jerusalem we find in Mark's gospel (and the other synoptics), nor the threefold trip to Jerusalem unique to John's Gospel. Whilst it is difficult to be precise (and unclear whether this was intentional on the part of the writer) it would appear that both parts of the film start in Galilee, and end in Jerusalem. Hence at the end of part 1, Jesus visits and clears the temple, before returning at the start of part 2 to the Sea of Galilee, to pick his diciples. and meet them across the water.

The other distinctive thing about the screen play is the prominence it gives to women. Many Jesus films have taken a number of different women and boiled them down into one> Usually this is achieved by making Mary Magdalene not only the woman who witnesses Jesus's resurrection but also the woman of sinful life who anoints Jesus, and the woman caught in adultery. Jesus Christ Superstar even portrays her as mothering Jesus as well - in a manner reminiscent of the Virgin Mary.

By contrast this film gives a detailed portrait of a number of many different women around the life of Jesus, being at pains to make them distinct. So, whilst Mary Magdalene is, in keeping with the old western tradition, a reformed prostitute, it is another woman who is caught in adultery. Mary of Bethany is distinct again - shown as the woman Jesus had to leave behind to fulfil his calling. Jesus's mother also has a prominent role, and even Herodias and Salome get an above average quantity of screen time. Furthermore, there is the story of the Syro-Phoenician woman (which appears in no other Jesus film), not to mention Martha. Admittedly, the film excludes the Samaritan women, Jairus's daughter, the haemorrhaging woman, and the crippled woman who was healed on the Sabbath but I imagine screen time was a limiting factor. Nevertheless the prominence of women in this film combined with the way Jesus treats them in particular in this film, make this film particularly appealing to many women.

Finally there is the closing scene in the international version where Jesus appears as a modern man. Interestingly most British viewers I have encountered consider this scene very American, which is ironic since that is one of the few places it was not shown. There is also a difference of opinion as to whether this scene is a plus or a minus. Amongst others, I know that Mark Goodacre considers it a plus point, whereas I would strongly disagree. I'm not sure whether it's the music, or the children that I find grates. Certainly I like the idea of showing Jesus's relevance for today, but this ending just doesn't do it for me.

Jesus (1999 - mini series)

The most controversial Jesus film of all time, Martin Scorsese's Last Temptation of Christ (1988) opened with the following disclaimer:

This film is not based upon the Gospels but upon this fictional exploration of the eternal spiritual conflict.

Whilst this didn't prevent the protests and objections it was no douby intended to, it did create some space for Scorsese to explore aspects of the life of Jesus which the gospels do not.

In some ways, then, such a disclaimer wouldn't be out of place at the start of this film. Of course this Jesus mini-series (1999)is neither as theologically dubious or offensive to some as Last Temptation, nor quite as dull as that film is in places. That said, it was certainly not made simply to illustrate the gospels, but to get behind the text of the gospels and try to flesh out their central character. (Of course, essentially art should be exploration of its subject matter, and so no bible film should require such a disclaimer, but that's an issue for another day.)

In order to acheive this Jesus imports a greater proportion of non-biblical episodes into its script than any other Jesus film apart from Last Temptation, and uses the gospel material sparingly. As the film approaches its halfway point, Jesus has only really been baptised, tempted and joined by a few disciples - the events of his birth and childhood are only briefly sketched out in a couple of flashbacks. The second half is not dissimilar. A couple of miracles and a bit of teaching, and the film moves into Holy Week.

Many considered this to be the film's greatest weakness. I would strongly disagree. In contrast to Last Temptation the extra-biblical material this film offers feels like it could reflect what actually happened in the life of the Jesus we find in the gospels. Of course we are not told when Jesus's father died, or if he struggled to find work, or if he ever loved anyone, nor do they tell us how he reacted when he encountered zealots. But, by and large, all of these are certainly possibilities - many of them probablities extraploated from what we know from other historical sources, or from what he said and did that the gospels have recorded.

The effect of this is to present a very human Jesus. One of the most powerful scenes in the films comes when Joseph dies, and a cocktail of his grief, aloneness, responsibilities and the cost of him doing God's will cause him to breakdown and weep. This is a Jesus we could relate to, who emptied himself to become fully human.

The other major way the film uses its extra-biblical material is to sketch something of the historical context that surrounded these events. Of course time, and the demands of populist TV allow only a brief impressionistic sketch, rather than a detailed historical portrait, but compared to the lack of historical context surrounding many popular Jesus films, such as The Passion of the Christ, this is a major asset. Perhaps more than any other film this one demonstrates the politics at play, to which Jesus ultimately fell victim. Pilate, (played by Gary Oldman) is undeniably in charge. Caiaphas is shown early on as an heroic figure, risking his neck (quite literally) to preserve vital Jewish religious privileges. Although he still plays a pivotal role in Jesus's death, his actions seem primarily motivated by his desire to quell a potential uprising that history suggests frequently bubbled beneath the surface. Ultimately, Pilate's cunning manipulates Caiaphas in such a way as to leave the high priest taking the blame, while passing himself of as compassionate. It's possibly the most satisfactory visualisation of the almost noble Pilate presented in the records of Jesus's trial and the brutal scheming butcher that history presents us with.

But no Jesus film is perfect - in fact they rely on each other to cover their backs so they can explore certain aspects more thoroughly - and this film is no exception. Perhaps this film's main weakness is that it wants us to like its Jesus too much, and doesn't trust itself as much as it should. Hence, the scenes of him playing around with his disciples, which start out as a breath of fresh air, eventually turn into an unwelcome draught. Whilst it does well at establishing a Jesus we can relate to, and banishing the traditional image of a boring and irrelevant Jesus, it fails to clothe him with any authority, or his actions with much significance.

That said, Jesus remains one of the strongest Jesus films of the last 25 years, and it is pleasing that eventually it has been released on DVD in Britain.

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.