• Bible Films Blog

    Looking at film interpretations of the stories in the Bible - past, present and future, as well as preparation for a future work on Straub/Huillet's Moses und Aron and a few bits and pieces on biblical studies.


    Name:
    Matt Page

    Location:
    U.K.












    Wednesday, July 21, 2010

    Arts and Faith Top 100 Reviews

    Back in March I mentioned the 2010 Arts and Faith Top 100 films. Over the last few months, the folks at Image Journal, who host Arts and Faith these days have been busily getting members of the forum to produce reviews of all 100 films, and these have now all been posted.

    As I mentioned back then, most of the Bible films on the list have been culled leaving only four (three of which are modernisations), but you can view their reviews at the following links:
    #10 - The Gospel According to St. Matthew (Il vangelo secondo Matteo) - Steven D. Greydanus

    #22 - A Serious Man - Michelle R. King and Andrew Spitznas

    #88 - Jesus of Montreal (Jésus de Montréal) - Peter T. Chattaway

    #92 - Son of Man (Jezile) - Tyler Petty
    Thanks to the Image staff for putting the list together, and to the authors named above for their contributions.

    Labels: , , ,

    Monday, May 17, 2010

    Further Thoughts on Son of Man

    My film night group watched Jezile (Son of Man) last night. For most of them it was their first viewing and they seemed to really enjoy it, particularly the ending which has apparently put many others off a little. It was also the first time I have watched it in a few years, and I think the first time I've seen it on a big screen (and in widescreen).

    I was a little disappointed that there wasn't much I noticed for the first time, although that's perhaps not surprising given how much I talked about the film when I first saw it in 2006. One thing that did stand out this time however was Mary's halo depicted in the shot above. It's interesting that Mary gets a 'halo' shot whereas, as far as I recall, Jesus does not. This ties in with one of the observations of one of my friends that Jesus almost isn't the main character. Whilst there's about half an hour in the middle where Mary is absent, overall this is as much a film about her as it is about Jesus, something that is reflected in the film's DVD cover which has a big close up of Mary across the top, but only a rear mid-shot of Jesus on the bottom.

    I also noticed that healing which Jesus performs when someone is lowered through the roof is not a paralytic man lowered by his friends (as in Mark 2 and parallels) but an apparently dead child handed down by (presumably) his mother. Whilst this change is obviously more emotionally powerful, it also means that out of only three miracles there two cases of someone being raised from the dead (the other being Lazarus). This counter-balances the lack of a resurrection for Jesus, and also puts an emphasis on Jesus' miracles as being acts of liberation from oppression. There are none of the nature miracles here, and it's significant that the only miracle we are shown which is not bringing someone back to life is the exorcism of a tormented girl.

    Lastly, I also noted the very secular take on the woman caught in adultery. Firstly the woman is not so much brought to Jesus, he just 'happens' to be in the right place at the right time. Secondly the crowd is not dispelled by an apparent conviction of their own sin, but by some soldiers, and then lastly there's no mention of her sin, or her need to "sin no more". This is an interesting development, not because it justifies the woman's actions, but because it emphasises that violence, particularly mob violence, is wrong in itself. It's not wrong because it is hypocritical (for we are all sinners), it's just wrong.

    Labels:

    Monday, November 03, 2008

    DVD Review: Son of Man

    It's over two and a half years since Dimpho Di Kopane's Son of Man (my review) garned rave reviews at Sundance. Since then there's been a lot of interest about when the film is to be released, indeed it's perhaps the most frequent request for information I get. So I'm pleased to announce that the DVD finally goes on sale today.

    When I saw this film back in July 2006 it was on a screener DVD with a pan and scan aspect ratio, so it's nice to finally see the film in widescreen (16:9). The scenery becomes all the more impressive. The transfer is pretty good although on my DVD player there was a flicker at the bottom of the screen. No such problems on my laptop though (and my DVD player is getting on a bit now). The menu screens are nicely put together and the subtitles are towards the small side so they don't cover up too much of the action (they are however 'burned in').

    There's also a good selection of extras comprising six featurettes. Each is around 3 minutes long and features excerpts from various interviews. As you would expect Andile Kosi, who played Jesus, features fairly prominently, as co-writer / translator Andiswa Kadame, and Ntobeko "Top C" Rwanqa (James).The Company talks about Dimpho Di Kopane, the theatre co-operative who masterminded the project. This is where the film's actors, singers and dancers are from, and the film explains how most of them were picked from obscurity. It also talks about how they collaborate and learn from one another.

    The Gospels in Modern Africa - Talks about the significance of portraying Jesus as a black man. Crucially, it also explains the significance of the way the resurrection is portrayed. That's particularly useful as it's one cultural reference point that will escape most northerners. Kadame also explains that Jesus's death was based on that of activist Steve Biko - something that was new to me.

    Music - Whilst Son of Man is not a musical as such, the music is as significant here as in any other (non-musical) Jesus film, not only contributing to the films distinctive African flavour, but also giving it a real intensity. This featurette talks a little about South African music, its dependence on rhythm and harmony and how much of it is played on hand made or improvised instruments.

    Audience Reactions - This was apparently filmed after a screening and we get a handful of views from those outside the project. This is really the only place where those outside the company get to discuss the film. As you'd expect they are all rave reviews.

    Gabriel - An introduction to, and an interview with, James Anthony who plays Gabriel in the film. Anthony was used extensively in publicising the film, and his angel Gabriel is easily the film's most iconic figure. In many ways the film in general tries to be anti-iconic which means that when the angels do appear, their appearance carries all the "wow" factor that is required. This allows Anthony and co. to act very naturally, (perhaps that should be humanly?) and results in making the supernatural elements of the film very believable.

    The Message - This is perhaps the weakest of the six segments though not without interest. Indeed Andile Kosi's admission that he never believed violence was the solution certainly informs the film's strong 'non-violent resistance' ethic as typified in the scene where Jesus asks his disciples to turn in their weapons. But it ends on Rwanqa talking about how the film is about "everyone being equal". Whilst that's undeniably one of the film's convictions (and certainly pretty laudable), I'm not sure that is the film's 'message' as such.


    Studio: Spier Films

    Language: Xhosa
    Subtitles: English

    Format : Region 2 DVD
    Number of discs: 1

    Classification: 12
    Run Time: 91 minutes

    ASIN: B001GVN87Y

    Labels: ,

    Tuesday, October 07, 2008

    Son of Man DVD Finally Gets a Region 2 Release Date



    Release Date: 3 Nov '08
    Studio: Spier Films

    Format : Region 2 DVD
    Number of discs: 1

    Classification: 12
    Run Time: 96 minutes

    ASIN: B001GVN87Y


    It's been a long time in coming but it look like 2006's Son of Man (see previous posts) will finally be released on DVD next month. Although there's nothing on the film's official web site, it's now listed at Amazon who confirm the release date as the 3rd November. There's no word yet as to whether there will be any special features, but I hope to find out soon.

    Thanks to Kevin Neece for the tip off.

    Labels: ,

    Thursday, February 28, 2008

    Podcast: Jezile (Son of Man)

    The fifteenth entry in my podcast is up. This month I'm discussing Jezile (Son of Man). The other entries are also still available.

    Labels: ,

    Tuesday, March 13, 2007

    Lucifer - Movie Star

    Whilst the devil never quite seems to get the leading role in a movie, he is certainly a frequently used member of the supporting cast in two particular genres – the horror film and the biblical epic. Leaving the horror genre to those better equipped to comment on it I thought I would make a few comments on the portrayal of Satan in Jesus films. Since the main place that the devil appears in films about Jesus is his temptation in the desert, that will be the main focus.

    The earliest silent films didn't really have much room for the temptation scene. The lack of sound meant that dialogue could only be conveyed by using intertitle cards whilst the actors mimed. Wordy episodes like the Sermon on the Mount, or the temptation in the desert didn't really work with these restrictions so such episodes tended to be either ignored, or only dealt with briefly.

    The first major American Jesus film to cover this material was Cecil B. DeMille's The King of Kings (1927). Occurring right at the end of the silent era, DeMille's film started well after Jesus's baptism and temptation, but inserted a temptation into the clearing of the temple scene. Satan takes human form, but his dark attire makes it clear to the audience who he is. He troubles Jesus with a single temptation – to gain the kingdoms of the world by bowing to him. Jesus refuses, and shortly afterwards is able to resist a similar offer from Judas and the mob that accompanies him.

    The portrayal of the devil as a human is actually the standard approach for the Jesus biopics. One film that deviated from this norm was Nicholas Ray's King of Kings (1961), here there is no external figure, we simply hear Satan's voice and see Jesus's reaction. Satan's voice, however, is different from that of Jesus. So whilst this film depicts Satan as internal rather than external , he is still distinct from Jesus as such.

    In a similar manner to DeMille, Pasolini uses a darkly dressed human figure to tempt Jesus in the wilderness. As this film is portrayal of The Gospel According to St. Matthew the conflict between Jesus and the devil uses first evangelist's dialogu almost word for word. Jesus's time in the desert is brief, dealt with matter of factly before Jesus goes about starting his movement. Jesus's rejection of the devil's temptation to gain power aligns well with Pasolini's marxist agenda.

    Arguably the most interesting and thorough portrayal of Satan comes in George Steven's Greatest Story Ever Told. Here Satan is credited as "The Drak Hermit" and played by perennial evil actor Donald Pleasance. As Jesus climbs the crags of the wilderness he encounters the hermit in a cave. The two talk for a while before Satan begins to tempt Jesus. This non-confrontational approach is more beguiling as opposed to the confrontational methods used in other films. Unlike other Jesus films, The Dark Hermit appears later in the film also. At a later stage he tries to encourage the crowd to make Jesus the messiah by giving him a messianic title in their presence. As the story draws to it's climax, the hermit makes two final appearances, near Judas as he contemplates suicide, and stirring up the crowd that condemns Jesus to death.

    The seventies films largely ignored the temptation scene and the corresponding mentions of the devil. This was understandable for Jesus Christ Superstar which was essentially a passion play, but it is strange that such a long, detailed look at the life of Jesus such as Jesus of Nazareth should omit this episode as well. Ironically, this was the time when Satan's popularity in the horror genre was really beginning to come into its own.

    Away from the increasingly materialist west, the 1978 Indian Jesus film Dayasagar developed the tradition in a new direction. Its Jesus was not a human figure, but a far more mythical looking beast, albeit one of a similar height and shape to an adult man. Aside from his appearance, the encounter with Jesus is fairly standard, but whereas film's such as Ray's could be read as denying the reality of Stan, Dayasagar depicts the spiritual realm as equally real as the physical world, and as fully able to interact with it.

    Perhaps the most extensive treatment of the temptation of Jesus is of course Scorsese's Last Temptation of Christ. Obviously the film's climax is where the devil (portrayed here as a young, innocent looking girl) tempts Jesus to come off the cross and settle for a normal life. But the film also contains a more standard temptation sequence, and part of Jesus's susceptibility to his final temptation arises because the devil appears differently every time Jesus encounters him/her.

    The temptation scene itself commences as Jesus draws a circle in the dirt and sits in it waiting for God. The devil appears to tempt him in a number of different forms; as a snake with Magdalene's voice, as a lion who sounds like Judah, and finally as a burst of flame with vocals by Martin Scorsese himself. Later on, Jesus is tempted in the Garden of Gethsemane where he appears as John the disciple. The temptations in this film are markedly different from the gospels, focussing more on Jesus's internal dilemma concerning his identity - the movie's major theme.

    A number of more recent films have also examined the temptation Jesus faced in new ways. The animated film The Miracle Maker switched from its standard 3D animation to its more psychological 2D drawing style for this segment of the film. This makes this section more subjective, it also allows for a smooth transition from the desert to the top of the temple, something the gospels never really explain.

    The Jesus mini series (1999) combines most of these elements into its version of the temptation. Satan is actually represented by two different human figures. Initially, we see a attractive woman dressed seductively in red. Then she changes into a man who, like Pasolini / DeMille is dressed in black. In contrast to the sexual seduction suggested (although not voiced) of the female Satan, the male Satan tests Jesus in a more intellectual manner. For example, the temptation to turn stones to bread is in order not just to feed himself, but all the starving of the world.

    Like Last Temptation Satan also appears in the Garden of Gethsemane, again trying to tempt him away from his destiny, but in the process handing Jesus a convenient opportunity to provide an apologetic for modern day faith. Interestingly neither temptation appears to be as challenging as the one that faces him at the start of the film - to marry Mary of Bethany and settle down with her.

    Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ also tries to avoid portraying Satan as one particular gender. Whilst Satan is played by an actress, her feminine characteristics are minimised, her hair and eyebrows are shaved off, and she wears a heavy dark robe. The story only concerns the events of the last 24 hours of Jesus's life, so the temptation in the desert story is not a part of the narrative. Nevertheless, Gibson, like Scorsese and Young before him, allows Satan the chance to tempt Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. This androgynous Satan figure is also the only film by this point that does not try to befriend Jesus and cajole him into sin. Furthermore, as Jesus suffers his fate, Satan mocks him by parodying the Madonna and child.

    The 2006 South African modernised Jesus film Jezile (Son of Man) brings a new twist to the film. Not only does this film feature the first black Jesus, but also the first black devil. The film portrays a defiant political Jesus promoting for non-violence resistance to the forces which oppress his people. Jesus's defeat of Satan early in the film captures his saying about binding the strong man in order to plunder his goods. As a beaten Satan roles down the hill, Jesus has struck a decisive blow in the spiritual realm which will impact the physical world he seeks to change.

    Filmmakers have chosen a variety of ways, then, to portray Satan, but despite this a number of alternative approaches suggest themselves. No film, as far as I am aware has sought to use the voice of the actor playing Jesus to also speak Satan's lines. This move would suggest the reality of the way temptation tends to affect most humans. Additionally, with the exception of Dayasagar, none of these films really explored what Satan, a fallen angel, might actually look like. This suggests there is plenty of scope for creativity in future Jesus films.

    Labels: ,

    Wednesday, December 13, 2006

    Peter Chattaway on Ethnicity in Jesus Films

    Over at Film Chat Peter has linked to his article for the Mennonite Brethren Herald, "Ethnicity in Jesus Films". The article's fairly brief but Peter manages to cover The Nativity Story, Color of the Cross, King of Kings (1961), Dayasagar, The Miracle Maker, The Passion of the Christ and Son of Man

    Labels: , , , ,

    Tuesday, October 17, 2006

    Ron Reed's Top 5 Bible Films

    Back in April, Peter Chattaway posted his top ten Jesus films, as did I. (A few days later Entertainment Weekly caught onto the trend in time for Easter, and went 2 further with their top 12).

    Another of my bible-film-loving, Canadian friends, Ron Reed has, belatedly, joined in and posted his Top 5 over at his Soul Food blog. Ron's five are: Son of Man, The Passion of the Christ, Last Temptation of Christ, Jesus of Montreal and The Miracle Maker (links are to my reviews). It's a good list, and it's interesting that all 5 are from the last 18 years.

    Ron also mentions my podcast on Jesus of Nazareth, calling my British accent "plummy" (ha!).

    Labels: , ,

    Monday, October 09, 2006

    Ron Reed on Son of Man

    I'm used to nodding my head whenever I read a film review by Ron Reed - one of my favourite film writers and a good friends to boot. So it's no real surprise to find that he shares my appreciation for Mark Dornford-May's Son of Man. Ron's written about it on his "Soul Food" blog, but here's a brief excerpt
    It's got elements fairly early on that put me on edge, pushing my "uh oh this is heresy" or "darn they're completely humanizing/politicizing the story" buttons. But frankly, I like my Jesus movies that way: otherwise, I'm too sure where they're headed, and I just sit in my theatre seat checking off the Bible stories, nodding at the orthodoxy. This one rattled me enough, and shuffled the story around enough, that I was leaning forward in my seat right through.
    I'm not quite sure what he sees as "heresy", found little that way myself, but I certainly share his appreciation for the film (see my review), and it's definitely it's different-ness that I admire. Any Canadians interested in seeing it (or just anyone near Vancouver) might like to know it is showing there tomorrow as part of the VIFF.

    Labels:

    Thursday, September 21, 2006

    Jezile (Son of Man) – Jesus’s Key Speeches.

    Ever since my review and scene guide for Jezile (Son of Man) I’ve been meaning to post something specifically about the various speeches Jesus gives in the film. Jesus’s speeches in this film are more political than any other Jesus film I can think of, and this has been considered one of the reasons why the film has yet to have a wide release in the US. Claiming a political stance for Jesus is a risky business (although that doesn’t seem to stop many people), but I think this film does it reasonably well. Whilst it may look on the surface like this film’s Jesus makes ‘political’ speeches as opposed to the ‘spiritual’ ones of the gospels, I want to examine the two key speeches in the film to see exactly what they do say and how much of it has a basis in the source texts. (Inevitably this list will not be exhaustive).
    Speech 1 (~30 mins)The occupiers and elders blame the people for the robbery, unrest and killing. Unrest is due to poverty, overcrowding and lack of education. We must prove to them that we are committed to non violent change. Then negotiations can begin. We must not let ourselves be corrupted, but rather fight poverty, epidemics and thuggery. Listen, listen..Each human life is important. It’s our right to protect our beliefs…

    But this never becomes the right to kill.

    We don’t need weapons to fight this battle
    [The disciples hand in their guns]
    This is perhaps the least sourceable of the speeches Jesus gives. Even so there are echoes of John 11:47-48 in the first sentence, Matt 26:52 in the third (although this verse needs to be balanced with Luke 22:36 & 38), and Matt 5:48 in the fifth. The line “this never becomes the right to kill” is clearly linked to not only the sixth commandment, but also Jesus’s teaching on how this should be expanded (Matt 5:21-22; 38-39; 43-44). Whilst these verses have certainly been selected to bolster a certain point of view, there’s no doubt that they are in the screenwriter’s mind. The call to the disciples to leave their former lives behind them also evokes the stories of Matthew/Levi and Zaccheus
    Speech 2 (~ 37 mins)
    We are too busy with modern trivialities as if they are the most important things. If you constantly find fault with yourself, you will lose the struggle with real sin. All authority is not divinely instituted. If you follow me we will have peace.

    I’m not here to destroy beliefs and traditions but to create them anew. We must forgive those who offend us and those who trample on our comrades, otherwise our hatred will destroy our future.

    When those with imperial histories pretend to forget them, and blame Africa’s problems on tribalism and corruption, while building themselves new economic empires, I say we have been lied to. Evil did not fall.

    When I hear someone was beaten and tortured in the Middle East I say we have been lied to. Evil did not fall.

    When I hear that in Asia child labour has been legislated for I say we have been lied to. Evil did not fall.

    When politicians in Europe and the USA defend trade subsidies and help restrict the use of medicine through commercial patents I say we have been lied to. Evil did not fall

    When you are told, and you will be, that people just “disappear” you must say we have been lied to. And evil will fall.
    This is perhaps the Key speech that the film presents. The opening sentence seems to summarise Matt 6:25-34 nicely, but the rest of that paragraph sounds more like the kind of things we think Jesus would say, rather than being things he actually did say. In fact, it could be argued that these sentences go against certain things Jesus said. For example, Jesus considered that each person needs to eradicate the personal sin in their lives (based on say Mark 9:43-48 and parallels). Alternatively, John 19:11 records Jesus telling Pilate that his (corrupt) power was divinely instituted. That said it’s also worth noting that Jesus says “All Authority on Heaven and earth has been given to me”. But this paragraph is just the opening to the speech, when it gets going it is clearly expounding the teaching of Jesus evoking Matt 5:17 (“I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil”), Matt 5:38-48 (Love your enemies), Matt 6:14-15 (Forgive men their sins). The final part of this speech is reminiscent of the sending of the seventy two in Luke 10, particularly the line about seeing “Satan fall” (v.18). From the film’s point of view, however, this final line is also significant because it explains the significance of the film’s later variation of Jesus’s “crucifixion”.

    In some ways, however, picking through these two speeches to find echoes of verses from the gospels is only one way to approach this, and it is perhaps more reasonable to examine the speeches as a whole and ask whether they fit a biblical perspective or not. There is a huge swathe of individual verses which are used to justify non-violence as something Jesus both taught and practised, but no single speech that neatly sums up that philosophy. Clearly the filmmakers have taken the stance that it is appropriate to lump these disparate quotes together in order to forge two such speeches, and I’m certainly sympathetic to that approach.

    The problem with this methodology is that things are not always that simple. Jesus may have said "those who live by the sword, will die by the sword" (Matt 26:52) after Peter had cut of Malchus’s ear, but the reason he had the sword in the first place is because it seems that Jesus told him to bring it (Luke 22:36, 38).

    On balance, I personally see the various words from the Sermon on the Mount, and Jesus’s example as he is arrested, tortured and killed, as outweighing the verses that are routinely used to argue for violent / military methods on occasion. I have to admit, however, that the Luke 22 verses trouble me. But then it’s easy to sit in my ivory tower and pontificate about such things. What Dornford-May and co. have done is take a radical message about non-violence to a context where the words of Jesus still need to be heard.

    Labels: ,

    Wednesday, September 13, 2006

    Jezile (Son of Man) Website

    Last month, I reviewed Mark Dornford-May's Son of Man (see also my scene guide) which, after rave reviews after Sundance, is now starting to get some wider distribution.

    The main news is that there is now an official website at Spier Films. There's not much on it just yet, but you can sign up for details of its release. I've updated the side-bar list of forthcoming films accordingly, and also put it in a slightly more sensible order of release date (rather than the bizarre order it was in before).

    Whilst I'm at it, I've added a couple of extra items to my blogroll. Gareth Higgins is author of one of my favourite Faith and Film books - "How Movies Helped Save My Soul" and does the annual Film review of the year at the Greenbelt Festival (and is far too humble to mention either). Definitely one to keep an eye on if you're a film lover. Matt Rees, and I did a year out together, which, amazingly, was ten years ago now. It's good to bump into him again in cyberspace. Finally Robert Torry and Paul Flesher have a blog called Film and Religion which will tie in with their forthcoming book of the same title.

    Labels:

    Friday, August 18, 2006

    Jezile (Son of Man) Scene Guide

    Having reviewed Mark Dornford-May's Son of Man a fortnight ago, I now want to examine the passages from the bible it utilises. This is slightly more complicated than usual as the modernisation necessarily distorts some of the passages. It's also difficult because the imaginative treatment of Jesus's death is a more symbolic treatment of the events than a literal modernisation, but more of that below.
    Temptation - (Matt 4:1-11)
    [extra-biblical episodes]
    Annunciation - (Luke 1:26-38)
    Magnificat - (Luke 1:46-55)
    Birth of Jesus - (Luke 2:1-7)
    Shepherds and Angels - (Luke 2:8-20)
    Wise Men - (Matt 2:1,11)
    Joseph Warned - (Matt 2:13-5)
    Slaughter of the Infants - (Matt 2:16)
    Baptism - (Mark 1:9-11)
    Calling the 12 - (Mark 3:13-19)
    Death of Herod - (Matt 2:19)
    [Various Teaching]
    [extra-biblical episode - amnesty]
    Adulteress - (John 8:2-11)
    Jesus Anointed by a Woman - (John 12:1-8)
    Judas' Agrees to Betray - (Mark 14:1-10)
    [Various Teaching]
    Jesus Predicts his Death - (Mark 8:31)
    Healing of a Paralytic - (Mark 2:1-12)
    [Various Teaching]
    Raising of Lazarus - (John 11:1-44)
    Exorcism of Young (Wo)man - (Mark 9:14-29)
    "Sermon on the Mount"
    [extra-biblical episode]
    Jesus and the children - (Mark 10:13-16)
    Triumphal Entry - (Mark 11:1-10)
    Conflict with the Elders - (John
    [extra-biblical episode]
    Pilate and the Elders - (John 18:28-31)
    Last Supper - (Mark 14:17-25)
    Jesus Predicts Peter's Denial - (Mark 14:26-31)
    Gethsemane - (Mark 14:32-42)
    Arrest of Jesus - (Mark 14:43-50)
    Beating and Mocking - (Mark 14:65)
    Peter's Denial - (Mark 14:66-72)
    Burial of Jesus
    Death of Jesus
    "Resurrection"
    Crucifixion
    Ascension
    Notes
    The following paragraph contains spoilers. As referred to above, the most inventive re-interpretation in the film is the events of Jesus's final week. In order to create a credible scenario, and to fashion the most compelling message for it's audience, Dornford-May moulds the arrest and death of Jesus into that of modern, African, minority-resistance leaders. So the narrative departs from the biblical order of events as early as the Triumphal Entry. Immediately afterwards Jesus meets with Caiaphas and Annas ("The Elders") in the parallel of the Sanhedrin (or not) trial scenes. Pilate then meets with the elders and agrees to turn a blind eye to their actions regarding Jesus - washing his hands in the process. The film then moves to the Last Supper and Gethsemane and Jesus's arrest. However, when Jesus is mocked and beaten, he is beaten into a coma, and then placed in the grave, and then shot. It is left unclear as to whether Jesus dies from the beating or from the shooting. However, then his mother Mary learns of the location of Jesus's body and releases him from the grave (a "resurrection" of sorts). Mary then displays his body on a cross - the significance of which is discussed in my review. Finally, we see Jesus climbing a hill with a host of the feathered angel boys - a scene of ascension. The result is a iconic yet modernised depiction of the events of Christ's death which relies on visual and thematic similarities for its points of comparison rather than strict adherence to the original narratives.

    The issue of laying down arms is key to this film. The common episode from John 8 where a mob is dissuaded from executing an adulteress is not only included here, but also preceded by a scene where Jesus gets the twelve to surrender their guns. Both scenes how weapons of one form or another being laid down. Later when the Sermon on the Mount is disbanded by government soldiers Peter considers throwing a rock, only for Jesus to order him not to, prefiguring the arrest in the garden. This ties in with the film's overall theme of non-violence and a call to a peaceful resistance movement. Matthew, for example, is not a tax collector called to surrender his ill gotten wealth, but a resistance fighter who has to lay down his arms to follow Jesus.

    I want to revisit the various blocks of teaching in a later post, as in most cases it has been radically revised. Essentially, each section of teaching pieces together a number of disparate phrases from the gospels, and then updates them so they form coherent sermons to the modern world he inhabits. That said one speech is delivered to a crowd from the top of an iron shack - a subtle reference to the Sermon on the Mount.

    Labels: , , ,

    Thursday, August 03, 2006

    Jezile (Son of Man - 2006)

    It's been said many times that Jesus didn't just arrive on earth simply as a man, but he came to first century Judea, as a first century Jewish man. Over the centuries, that incarnation has given artists of every age and race sufficient scope to bring Jesus to the people dressed in their own skin and culture. Mark Dornford-May's Jezile (Son of Man), which sets the Jesus story in the context of a modern, anonymous African township, is the most recent addition to this rich history, and the first time such a re-contextualisation has been attempted in a film made outside North America.

    There are three major challenges to such a project. Firstly, the actor playing Jesus has to be engaging and believable in the role, and this gets harder as the actors looks move further away from the disappointgly popular, floaty white robes, long hair and a beard stereotype. Andile Kosi, who plays Jesus, is almost the polar opposite of that stereotype - a short haired, shaven, black-African dressed in jeans and a checked shirt. Yet it is easy to relate to him in the role, not simply because he is the one doing the talking, but because he effortlessly blends strength and compassion, and an easy going nature with a compelling, passionate personality.

    Secondly, the film has to draw creative and, more importantly, credible representatives of the key figures and events of the original story. If these don't ring true, or they feel too simulated, the whole project comes off as contrived. The creativity and initiative shown here is truly impressive managing to both embody the biblical narratives whilst also tearing through pious and kitsch tradition. The healing of a paralytic lowered through a roof feels far more natural than it ever did in any telling of this story set in the first century. Likewise, Herod's slaughter of the infants is brought uncomfortably close to home, creating fear and tension even though we know Jesus's survival is assured. Jezile also breathes new life into over-familiar bible characters. The shepherds are mere boys, as are the angels who appear to them. The disciples are drawn from both peaceful men (and women) and from freedom fighters who are challenged to lay down the weapons as well as their lives.

    Following on from this is the third difficult area, namely that Jesus has to have something tangible to oppose that resonates with the film's audience. Godspell for example, fizzles out just when the story should be starting to get interesting, simply because there is no such obvious opponent. When it comes to his big confrontation all they can find oppose him is a poorly made robot. Here however, the enemy is far more real. The backdrop of politics and corruption that leaves millions living in tin shacks around many African cities is something one cannot help but imagine that Jesus would oppose if he were around today, and it is hard not to imagine that those who benefit from this state of affairs would want to destroy anyone who threatened such a profitable status quo. Pilate's troops masquerade as agents of peace from a neighbouring country, maintaining their power by manipulating local gangland leaders Caiaphas and Annas.

    Finally, the film has to work well as a film, and it is this area in particular that has seen the film gain such strong praise from those who saw it at Sundance. Whilst Dornford-May primarily has a background in theatre, he has quickly adjusted to his new medium. He uses a variety of techniques to bring the film that bit closer to modern viewers, including shooting some of the film's narration in the style of news footage, and showing other scenes, in particular the supernatural elements, as shot through a camcorder. That said, he blends them well with more naturalistic, and intimate footage to prevent them becoming gimmicky, or the film becoming too much of a documentary. Dornford-May also allows the camera to dwell on the incredible scenery that surrounds the townships, comparing the beauty of God's creation with the unsightly shacks that humanity has left some of its members to live in.

    One of the other things Dornford-May attempts is re-inventing key works of Christian painting. So early on we see Jesus as a child sat on Mary's knee, wearing a party hat crown. The film dwells on this motionless scene for several seconds. Likewise after Jesus's death, Mary (played by the director's wife and co-writer Pauline Malefane) holds his body in the traditional "Pieta" pose, only here they are on the back of a truck driving along the road.

    The film also comments on the way Jesus's activity was recorded and preserved for a wider audience. As noted above Jesus's miracles are recorded on camcorder by Judas, and used as evidence against him. Conversely, Jesus's actions start to be recorded and celebrated in murals on walls in the townships, disseminating the stories about him into accessible "language", and announcing them to a wider audience. As a result Jesus's popularity grows, and he begins to pose more of a threat to those in power.

    At this point, everyone in the audience knows Jesus's days are numbered, and it's no real surprise when Jesus is arrested shortly after sharing a final meal with his followers. What is surprising however is his crucifixion and death. (Readers wanting to avoid spoilers are advised to move onto the next paragraph). Jesus, like so many anti-apartheid leaders before him, is beaten to death, and buried in a shallow grave. In South Africa, the families of those murdered in a similar way eventually decided to break a strongly held African taboo and display their dead bodies for all to see. In so doing, they were able to show that their loved ones had not simply had an unfortunate accident, as the authorities often claimed, but had clearly been murdered. So the film reflects this later tradition. Once Jesus's body is found, it is his friends and family that tie Jesus's dead body to the cross. Christian theology has often held that the cross declares to the (spiritual) powers that be that their days are numbered. This crucifixion makes a similar declaration to the political powers.

    It's a political end to a very politically charged version of the Christ story. Whilst the film has no real doubts about Jesus's divinity - showing a number of miracles, prayers and confrontations with Satan, it is the political aspect of Jesus's brief time on earth that is of most concern. Many European and American Christians, living in a culture where religion and theology have been almost totally separated, will not be entirely comfortable with this. Yet Jesus's core belief in this film is that "This is my world" - a statement that is both political and theological . Likewise, when the early Christians claimed Jesus was King and Lord of all the world, they also meant that therefore Caesar wasn't. Such radical, political statements lie at the hearts of Son of Man, and we ignore them, and it, at our peril.

    Labels: ,

    Friday, April 21, 2006

    Son of Man chosen for "25 Years of Sundance"

    Biz Community, a news outlet in South Africa, has a story that South African modernised Jesus film Son of Man will be playing as part of a 25 year celebration of the Sundance Film Festival.

    Sundance Institue at BAM will be showing in New York, from the 11th to the 21st of May, at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. It will include "films from the 2006 Sundance Film Festival, live music from emerging composers, programs that reveal the creative process, and discussions with filmmakers".

    Son of Man was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at this year's festival and has been chosen for the World Cinema competition. It will be airing twice: on Sunday, May 14th at 6:15pm, and the next day, Monday, May 15th at 9:30pm. Tickets are available online

    In case you've not heard of the film before it gained incredible reviews at this year's festival including ones from Roger Ebert and John Horn of the LA Times. I've posted on this film four times already (Blog post 1, Blog post 2, Blog post 3, Blog post 4) and so I'm obviously excited to see it starting to open upto a wider audience.

    Labels:

    Friday, February 03, 2006

    Ebert on Son of Man

    Roger Ebert has posted his thoughts on Son Man:
    The South African film renaissance continues with one of the most extraordinary and powerful films at Sundance, Son of Man. This is the story of Jesus, told in episodes from the New Testament, but set in present-day Africa. This is a Jesus (Andile Kosi) who says the same sorts of things he says in the Bible, is not 'updated' except in some of his terms of reference, and yet sends an unmistakable message: If Jesus were alive today, he would be singled out as a dangerous political leader, just as he was the first time around.

    The movie has relatively little spoken dialogue, but a great deal of music, that joyous full-throated South African music that combines great technical skill with great heart. Some of the best moments belong to a chorus, singing the praises of the lord. Others belong to an actress named Pauline Malefane, who plays Mary, and sings in celebration after being told she will be the mother of Jesus.

    She's told by an angel; the angels in the movie are small African boys with a few feathers attached here and there, looking on with concern. Jesus's disciplines include a few women along with the men this time, and they follow him through the townships of Cape Town as he preaches non-violence. Television news tells of occupying forces and uprisings, the modern version of the Roman concern with the Jews. Judas spies on Jesus with a video camera. The secret of the movie is that it doesn't strain to draw parallels with current world events because it doesn't have to.

    The movie was directed by Mark Dornford-May, but it is an improvisational collaboration of the Dimpho Di Kopane Theater company, which also created Dornford-May's great U-Carmen (2005), a version of Bizet's opera sung entirely in Khosa. That, too, starred Pauline Malefane, a trained opera singer.

    I find it very interesting that the film plays strongly on the political angle of Jesus. Scholars are increasingly emphasizing that the charge nailed to Jesus' cross was a political one, not a religious one (King of the Jews).


    Obviously pretty much every Jesus film for the next few years will be reacting in some way to The Passion of the Christ. That film removed any political aspect from Jesus's death altogether so it's nice to see the balance being restored.

    Tnere's some more info in this article Son of Man Stuns Sundance

    Matt

    Labels:

    Los Angeles Times review of Son of Man

    Peter Chattaway has posted a review of Mark Dornford-May's Son of Man by John Horn of the Los Angeles Times. Since you can read it at either of those sites I won't post it in full, but I do like what he says here
    At every narrative turn, Dornford-May said he tried to keep focused on interpreting the Gospels as not only a spiritual story but also a political one, "with a message of humanity and equality. That is something I believe quite passionately in," said the director, who was raised Methodist and remains a regular churchgoer. "I find it amazing that the church spends any time debating whether gay people should be priests when people are dying of hunger and sick people can't get medicine."

    Dornford-May said he wrestled with how to depict the New Testament's miracles, which include Jesus raising the dead and healing the sick. The solution was to show them as recorded by a video camera carried by Judas, so that the audience is forced to look at Jesus through the eyes of his betrayer.
    That's a fascinating use of creative camera work to look at the story from a new perspective. It's also one of the advantages of setting the story in a modern context - you couldn't do that in a 1st century context!.

    Matt

    Labels:

    Friday, January 27, 2006

    First reviews for Son of Man


    Son of Man has been debuting at the Sundance Film Festival this week. I've been trawling the internet for a few days hoping to find some reviews for the film, and finally a few are up.

    Variety reviewer Dennis Harvey's comments look a little drafty at this stage, but he seems to like it:
    All this purposeful restraint underlines tale's resonance for modern audiences, particularly wherever poor and ethnic minorities fight for equality. As a spur for discussion in both church and educational settings, "Son of Man" could hardly be bettered.

    Lenser Giulio Biccari's crisp, clean images typify the fat-free clarity of all design and tech contribs here.


    A while ago I linked to this review by John Cooper on the Sundance Festival website but I may as well include a quote from it at this point:
    In song and originality, the spirit of Son of Man is contagious, a life-enriching elixir for Christians and non-Christians alike who feel mired in the unyielding bigotry of fundamentalism. By modernizing one of the world's most famous stories, Son of Man creates lasting resonance and imparts a significance that is truly glorious.


    I also notice that Connie Clark , chaplain at Wyoming State Hospital has responded to the post at Mark Goodacre's New Testament Gateway with the following information:
    I saw the film today at Sundance. It was a beautiful piece of work, very moving, and in many ways a believable rendition of Jesus' life and ministry into another culture, time, and place. I had the opportunity to ask Mark Dornford-Mays, the director, the one question that puzzled me: Why did we not hear in Jesus' preaching or teaching any reference to God, prayer, or religious observance? Did he mean to imply that Jesus was not the Son of God as well as the Son of Man? Mr. Dornford-Mays answered that Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man, and pointed out that Jesus is pictured praying twice, and that other elements of the film (such as the frequent inclusion of angels) point to his divinity. I would love to see the film again and may do so if I can snag a ticket on Friday morning, the last showing.

    Mr. Dornford-Mays said the stage version of "Son of Man" will be touring the U.S. next January-February. He did not say anything about the release of the film but I will be looking for that information.

    Finally, Michael Ferraro of Film Threat seems less impressed:
    "it still isn’t as refreshing as it tries to be. The story of Jesus is one of the most influential and inspiring tales to a countless number of people. Even those people can’t want to see it every single day told in countless fashions, do they? For having a background in theater, director Mark Dornford-May executes some fine cinematic sensibilities...Dornford-May’s spirit prevents this from being totally dreadful. Too bad they weren’t focused on a something more original


    Hope that whets your appetites a bit.

    Matt

    Labels:

    Friday, January 20, 2006

    Son of Man comes to Sundance -- an update


    Peter Chattaway reports how the new South Afircan filmSon of Man is playing at Sundance. He actually made his first report on it back in November. I echo Peter's sentiments about being keen to see it. It's billing itself as the first black Jesus movie, and putting it in the context of modern day Cape Town. I'll post more details on it as I come across them. For now, Peter has posted a couple of extensive blurbs on the film so rather than cut an dpaste them here, I'll just point you towards FilmChat

    Labels: