Life of Brian in discussion with Jesus of Nazareth

Mark Goodacre is currently teaching a module on Jesus in Film which is good news for the rest of us as it has led to him uploading his Celluloid Jesus pages again, as well as adding a substantial amount of new material and a few extra blog posts to boot.

This week he's clearly been doing the late seventies as there are a few blog posts on Jesus of Nazareth and Life of Brian including YouTube links to all the talks from last year's "Jesus and Brian" conference.

One post that particularly caught my eye was one where Mark discusses being "struck by several Brian - Jesus of Nazareth parallels". The one he discusses is a moment in Jesus of Nazareth when one of the villagers grumbles "What does Rome give us?"* It's memorable of course, because of the famous scene in Life of Brian where one of the leaders of the People's Front of Judea asks "What have they [the Romans] ever given us in return?" only for the group members to reel off an extensive list of benefits of living in the empire.

What makes it particularly interesting to me is the short time gap between the two productions (just two and a half years between the first broadcast of Jesus of Nazareth at Easter 1977 and the release of Life of Brian in the autumn of 1979. Indeed the two films were recorded so close together that Brian was able to use its predecessor's sets. On top of this when you consider that British TV had only 3 channels at this point, that Jesus of Nazareth was a much publicised production and that this line of dialogue occurred in the first episode, then it's fairly likely that at least one of the Python troupe watched it at the time.

Once you picture that, then it's not hard to believe that it's no mere coincidence that this line ended up in the Pythons' film, whether consciously or sub-consciously. Lloyd Baugh mentions Jesus of Nazareth's banalities and this is a particularly bad one - it's just not the way people express this kind of sentiment in real life. So perhaps the embryo of this scene was conceived then, whether spoken out at the time as a way of critiquing the programme, or something that just got lodged in the back of somebody's mind.

I guess what interests me in all this is the way that it faintly mirrors the kind of critique of the early gospels we find in some of the later ones. Much has been made of the negative portrayal of Thomas in John's Gospel. Not a few scholars think that this might be John casting aspersions about Thomas and, by extension, the movement or the Gospel that came to be associated with him. Or think of the many times that Matthew and Luke take a pithy statement from Mark's Jesus and transforms it into a whole scene that makes the original phrase far more memorable - The Parable of the Good Samaritan for example.

Those two example are from different ends of the spectrum. Many who would feel uncomfortable with the idea of John smearing Thomas in this way, would nevertheless be fine with Luke rearranging his material to make a particular point. But there are all kinds of these little interactions between the gospels, particularly the Synoptic Gospels, and given that they were written relatively close to one another it's not unreasonable to imagine those writing later taking their predecessor's words and enhancing, adjusting, correcting and, yes perhaps, even parodying some of what they had to say.

I've just left a comment on Mark's post asking if he can remember any of the other examples of these parallels and will be interested to see whether any of these parallels also happen to parallel how the later gospel writers used their sources.

=========

*Note Mark has this down as "What do the Romans give us?", but on a second hearing I beg to differ.

Bible Films Blog Review of 2014

In previous years, I’ve offered a review of the year, although this has rather fallen by the wayside in recent time. However, 2014 was a bit of a stonker, so it would seem remiss not to do at least something.

The big news was, of course, the long awaited release of a number of biblical epics, which hit not just the odd art-house cinema, or graced a local congregation with a decentish video projector, but in the local, everyday cinemas. Russell Crowe was talking about Noah in primetime TV shows. The Guardian was offering opinion pieces about Moses every time Ridley Scott coughed in a vaguely atheistic manner.

As it turned out neither film made the, um, waves, that their respective studios had hoped for and neither director will be pleased to hear that they are more likely to win a Razzie than an Oscar come the spring.

But before all that there was the matter of the Son of God - not so much the actual one as the cinema release of the Gospel footage from the History Channel’s 2013 series The Bible. Cutting down a TV series to a movie is a risky strategy. On the one hand the popularity of the “best of” genre might mean that he TV series might just be part of a lengthy marketing campaign – the world’s longest ever trailer if you like. But the question still remained, why would people get in their cars, drive out of town and pay through the nose to watch something they have already seen for “free”?

As it turned out Son of God did rather well, perhaps because compelling answers were found to that question. Buying a ticket to Son of God was a statement of faith, a chance to send a message to Hollywood. Or you could buy two and bring along a friend with whom you wanted to share your faith.

From an artistic point of view however the quality of the product was largely the same as that of the original 2013 series. Jesus was still too blond and off-puttingly good looking; the dialogue and the acting still left a great deal to be desired; and it still wasn’t really clear what Jesus was actually about other than being nice.

One Bible film hero who eluded, with consummate ease, any charge of being overly nice, was Russell Crowe’s Noah, who shifted from grunting environmentalist to genocidal maniac over the course of Darren Aronofsky’s Noah. It’s the kind of precipice along which many edge along when they tell us how bad humans in general, and children in particular, are bad for the environment? But that’s another matter.

Actually the scenes where Noah contemplates whether he should kill his own granddaughter were, in my opinion, rather misunderstood. Noah didn’t want to murder members of his own family, he just thought it might be what “The Creator” was calling him to do. After all it was the logical extension of what he had already done – a point that may of the faithful struggle to appreciate. It was a great performance from Crowe, but the terrain of unlikeable anti-hero seemed to leave the film, rather than just its antihero rather unloved. It was a shame. Aronofsky’s bizarre epic was drenched in biblical and other religious references, many of which weren’t even half as odd as the original text.

December is often a busy time of year for those of us interested in Bible films and 2014 would prove no exception. In the cinema Ridley Scott's Exodus: Gods and Kings (my review ) received a fairly lukewarm welcome in many western countries and was banned in several countries in North Africa and the Middle East. In the current climate it's hard to know which is more damaging, western indifference or Egyptian anger.

In the west the film's biggest talking point was the supposed white washing, casting Joel Edgerton and Christian Bale as an Egyptian and someone who manages to pass as an Egyptian for forty years. I must admit I can see both sides of the argument. On the one hand Christian art has always portrayed the faith's heroes in its own image as a way of relating to them. At the same time, as my comments above about Son of God suggest I also like to see more realistic casting.

One film that did embrace a more ethnically accurate Jesus was The Gospel of John the latest output from the Lumo Project (an offshoot of Big Book Media). The series, which is available on Netflix, narrates John's Gospel over dramatized reconstructed video footage. Jesus is played by Selva Rasalingam who is half Tamil. If his face is familiar it’s because he has been playing Jesus in various Lumo/Big Book projects over the last few years, including the music video for Deliriou5?'s "History Maker" and the BBC’s The Story of Jesus (2011). Also part of those projects, as well as 2012’s David Suchet: In the Footsteps of St Paul, is director David Batty.

The Lumo Project will eventually cover all four gospels in the same style, and Netflix features narration in both the King James and the New International versions of the Bible. As a medium it’s very similar to the Genesis Project’s Gospel of Luke (1979) which starred Brian Deacon and was recut as Jesus (1979), certainly it’s quite different in feel from other the two Visual Bible word for word projects Matthew (1994) and Gospel of John (2003).

Given that John’s Gospel only received the word for word treatment 11 years ago, it’s surprising that the filmmakers have chosen to start with John, particularly as John’s wordy gospel is perhaps the one least suited to such a treatment. Personally I wished they’d opted for the only gospel not, yet, to have been filmed this way, Mark. But that will later this year if the IMDb is to be believed. Hopefully it will get a UK Netflix release as well. Incidentally 2015 will also see Rasalingam star as James in a Jesus-cameo film Clavius

The appearance of The Gospel of John on Netflix seems to reflect a broader trend of niche faith-based films being broadcast away from traditional channels. Another such production in 2014 was The Red Tent, an adaptation of Anita Diamant’s historicalish novel of the same name. Diamant’s novel took the stories from around Genesis around Leah and Jacob’s daughter Dinah and re-imagines Shechem as her lover rather than her rapist. Young’s mini-series, which aired on the Lifetime network early in December, cast Rebecca Ferguson, star of 2013’s excellent The White Queen’s, and also features Minnie Driver, Debra Winger, Morena Baccarin and Hiam Abbass in prominent roles. Peter Chattaway has a great interview about the series with the director Roger Young.

The other TV film worth a mention was the BBC animated short film On Angel Wings, which aired in the UK on Christmas Eve. It starred an old man recalling the visit of the Angels on the first Christmas night to the group of shepherds he worked for and how one angel secretly flew him to the stable so he got to meet the baby Jesus. Readers may recall my enjoyment of the Fourth King a fictional tale about the magi. On Angel Wings would make a good companion piece dealing as it does with Jesus' other Christmas visitors.

Then there were several smaller films which brought the more poetic parts of the Bible to the screen. The Song re-imagined the life of King Solomon as an amorous country singer, with nods to both Song of Songs/Solomon and Ecclesiastes. Meanwhile Amos Gitai directed one of the short films in the anthology film Words with Gods. Gitai already has two fine Bible films under his wings, [Esther (1996) and Golem: l'esprit de l'exil (1992)] and here he took the on the work of his namesake, the prophet Amos.

Perhaps the most significant of the films dealing with the more poetic parts of the Bible was Andrey Zvyagintsev's Leviathan. As with The Song it took the form of a modern story, this time the story revolves around a man fighting corruption in the coastal town where he lives, but there is also a healthy dose of the Book of Job. It's also likely to be the most successful of those films with a substantial link to the Bible, having been Russia's entry for the foreign language Oscar it's now one of the final nominations and has already won the Golden Globe in the same category.*

Documentary-wise it was a fairly light year, though it's more than possible I missed something. David Suchet did feature in In the Footsteps of St. Peter, the follow up to his 2013 In the Footsteps of St Paul .

However, there were a couple of new books about Bible Films that are worth a mention. David Shepherd's "The Bible on Silent Film" looks to be an excellent guide to an under-discussed period in the genre's development. I couldn't afford the hardback or a Kindle editions so I've only read excerpts but the bits I've read are full of fascinating detail and insight. Technically the hard back was released right at the end of 2013, but seeing as the paper back will be released in March this year, we can split the difference. I'm looking forward to getting a copy.

Another book to touch upon the sub-genre is Graham Holderness' "Re-Writing Jesus: Christ in 20th-Century Fiction and Film" which touched on Last Temptation of Christ, The Passion of the Christ and The DaVinci Code, as well as various books about the life of Jesus. There were also various books released related to the films mentioned above including a picture book for the team behind Son of God.

And lastly there was a conference. Not so much about a Jesus Films as a very close relation. "Jesus and Brian: or What Have the Pythons Ever Done for us?" ran for three days in June in Kings College, London and featured an impressive team of speakers, including John Cleese and Terry Jones, and even gained some national press coverage. Sadly neither time, nor money, nor health, permitted me to be there, but Mark Goodacre made it, blogged about it and did rather rub salt in the wounds of those of us who would have loved to be there but weren't. I mean, he got to meet John Cleese.

Anyway 2015 promises a great deal. There are various films due for release about which Peter Chattaway is doing some great blogging. He also posts numerous things on the Bible Films Facebook page, for which I'm incredibly grateful. There's also a few books to look out for, including David Shepherd's follow up volume "The Silents of Jesus" and there might even be a book with a couple of chapters by myself to report on in next year's review of the year.

*There were some subsequent edits here, made after the Oscar nominations

Friday Night, Saturday Morning: Monty Python vs The Church

Having been waiting to see this for years now, it was very pleasing to discover that the show had been re-broadcast by BBC4 to coincide with the broadcast of Holy Flying Circus last Wednesday. It's available on iPlayer for two more days.

For those unfamiliar with the details, in the run up to the release of Life of Brian the BBC's late night talk show in hosted the now infamous debate between John Cleese, Michael Palin, Malcolm Muggeridge and Mervyn Stockwood, the then Bishop of Southwark. It must have made a big impact then as well: shortly afterwards the TV comedy sketch show "Not the Nine O'Clock News" produced a well-executed spoof.

Having seen numerous clips of this debate over the years, almost whenever the film is discussed in fact, I have long wanted to see the whole thing, and have wondered why the full version hadn't appeared on any of the many special edition DVDs of Life of Brian.

The most likely reason for this it now appears is length. Given that most comparable programmes today usually restrict such items to 15 minutes; that I always seem to see the same few excerpts; and from what I'd gleaned from various discussions of the programme, I'd always assumed it was about 10-15 minutes. In fact the programme spends over 52 minutes on the subject, briefly squeezing in a song from Paul Jones and a chat with Norris McWhirter before it ended 15 minutes later.

Something else also became fairly clear: the reason that these same few excerpts are repeated again and again (despite the quantity of material) is that the debate was incredibly poor. Leaving aside the fact that Stockwood and Muggeridge, and to a much lesser extent Cleese and Palin, fail to listen to what their opponents are saying, chairman Tim Rice, just lets the church representatives drone on and on about irrelevant side issues. No wonder modern day programmes tend to keep things shorter.

Part of this is perhaps because they missed the crucial opening scenes of the film which established that Brian was not Jesus, but it was mainly due to the pair being allowed to bring notes, and Rice's deferential attitude to them. The 1970s were a very different time, with the authority of the church having a far greater hold - for instance the first ever "Question Time" featured a bishop, but I can only remember that happening once when I've watched it and I'm an avid fan. Stockwood in particular seemed to think the he was entitled to go on and on rather tangentially, and Rice seems too intimidated to step in.

I suppose this was also due in part to the fact that Palin and Cleese were interviewed on their own first, and so, to a certain extent, had already had their say. Yet the subjects being discussed were far less controversial in this section. They talked about the process of raising the finance, and how they develop the script and so on. There were even a couple of interesting points around Bible films. Incredibly for a man who only a few years before had contributed to a hit film about Jesus, Rice had never heard of Rossellini, or Il Messia, which was released just two years after Jesus Christ, Superstar. Secondly Cleese makes the point that three more biblical comedy films were in production, which makes me wonder which one. Wholly Moses (1980) would seem obvious, but it tries so hard to cash in on Life of Brian that it's hard to imagine that it was close to completion much before Brian's welease. Mel Brooks' History of the World: Part 1 (1981) would be the other likely choice, but as to a third, all I can think of is the French film Deux heures moins le quart avant Jésus-Christ, released in 1982.

That said, it was this section of the show that contained what was, for me, one of the most interesting parts of the show.

Rice
"Is there anything that could offend you on screen"

Cleese (shrugs, then pauses)
"I have one tiny quibble and I think that Terry Jones and Graham Chapman would no doubt disagree with me, but I think the crucifixion thing at the end is not about pain, it's about death and they are very separate."

Rice
"So what's your beef?" [i.e. what's your problem?]

Cleese
My beef is that there are one or two close-ups of one or two people registering pain and I think that that confuses what the last thing's about. 'Cos I mean one's not really making fun of the fact that someone has been flayed to this flesh hung down and then nailed up. The point of that last thing is that it's about death, y'know it's about attitudes to death, and it's quite possible, to be relatively cheery about death, quite possible. I'm not saying it's easy.

Cleese elaborates on this later on including talking about how if Christianity is true then death does have a bright side. I must admit that I've never really thought about that final scene in that way. I'm not sure the latter point holds up that well, but I'm certainly intrigued by the part of his answer quoted above.

The above exchange is typical, actually, of Cleese's attitude throughout the debate. It's often been said that he and Palin were trying to have a serious debate and the two non-comedians were playing for, and getting, the laughs. Indeed one point that really stood out to me is when Cleese is trying to make a serious point but because his answer sounds like something out of a Python sketch the audience laugh, and Cleese looks almost aggrieved that his serious point has been lost because it was mistaken for a joke. Cleese steals the show actually. Stockwood and Muggeridge are two smug and too entrenched to really get their point across, indeed it could be argued that this debate was the defining moment of the established church's weakening grip on authority. Palin for his part is clearly furious and insulted and whilst his restraint is impressive, it hampers his contribution to the discussion.

One final thing that I found interesting was how little these debates have changed in some ways. Whenever some perceived "outrage" is perpetuated against Christianity, someone will always object that "they" would dare to do this kind of thing about Islam. This argument is put to Cleese and he demolishes fairly well, by explaining about the dominance, authority, history and impact on the culture that Christianity has had and how this is why they set their sights on it. So it's surprising that 30+ years later the argument is still trotted out overlooking the fact that people do satirise Islam, and that Jesus is also considered a prophet in Islam.

Secondly Stockwood/Muggeridge also lament the declining standards in biblical understanding. Perhaps this is even worse now than it was, but it was interesting to note that this was a point of debate even then. Other things are different though. The opening credits are far racier than any you see today - a couple seemingly naked and in bed stop to turn on the show. It wasn't clear if this was during, after or instead of having sex, but whichever way there would probably be a fair amount of complaint about increasing sexualisation of our culture were this to happen today.

Overall then, the debate was a bit of a disappointment. The best bits have obviously been shown many times before and what is usually left out was fairly dreary. If only Rice had been David Dimbleby. At least Dimble might have heard of Rossellini.

Holy Flying Circus

There have been many controversial films, books and television programmes over the years, but there's something completely different about Monty Python's Life of Brian: people actually like it. Many defend the right of Martin Scorsese to have made Last Temptation of Christ, or Salman Rushdie to have written "The Satanic Verses", but few people have the strength of feeling for them as they do for the anarchic tale of a man who was mistaken for the Messiah.

It's no doubt because of this strength of feeling that BBC4 commissioned Holy Flying Circus about the events leading up to the release of the film. The programme is the latest in a long series of fictional recreations of the off screen lives of 60s and 70s entertainers and focuses on the, now infamous, TV debate between Michael Palin and John Cleese on the one hand, and the Bishop of Southwark and Malcolm Muggeridge on the other. The story is told from three sides, that of the Pythons, that of the programme's production team, and a group of Christians (distinct from Muggeridge and the bishop) who object to the film.

All of which makes it sound rather dull, except for the fact that the story is told in a surreal and Pythonesque way. In addition to the general atmosphere of silliness we also have over-the-top characters, men playing women, animated sequences, John Cleese played as Basil Fawlty, obscure interludes and even a scene inside an alien spaceship. In short Holy Flying Circus tries to make the medium the message.

One further similarity is the way which both films have Jesus speaking at the start of the film and then not really again. Life of Brian famously shows Jesus giving the Sermon on the Mount before the camera pans out to those at the back who can't quite hear what's being said. But Holy Flying Circus has Jesus explain in Aramaic - a clear nod to The Passion of the Christ, another controversial religious film - that the story is largely fictional, and just to make the point it has the supposed Jesus-figure fart.

I suspect that many people, were they to see the film, would find that pretty offensive and will also be unhappy with the language and the nudity. I suspect the programme-makers would defend it on the grounds that doing so re-ignites the same battle now that the Pythons were fighting then. Sadly I don't think that's true. Is using the C word, doing Tourette's jokes and showing a penis for the sake of it really edgy, or just a bit like the kind of jokes Cambridge students might do "on a damp Tuesday afternoon"?

That's not to say it isn't funny. Parts of it are very funny, particularly Mark Heap's turn as the head of the Christian protesters. But overall it's rather hit and miss; the odd laugh out loud moment interspersed with mediocre jokes and self-indulgent rubbish.

But in the final quarter of an hour, the film changes gear and actually gives a reasonable and extensive portrayal of the talk show debate. This was particularly interesting to me as there are still parts of the debate that I have ever seen (indeed I was reflecting earlier that if Holy Flying Circus ever gets released as a DVD this would be an excellent special feature.

This last part of the film, interspersed with the occasional deviation into Michael Palin's mind, is clearly the strongest part as the gags are refined a little and the drama takes over a little. Much of this is also due to a stronger focus on the better portrayed characters. Charles Edwards's take on Palin is outstanding. Complex and nuanced Edwards manages to play the domestic scenes touchingly despite the fact he is playing opposite Rufus Jones in drag. Darren Boyd also does a great job playing Basil Fawlty even if the concept he was given is a bit odd, but the others are rather weak. Punt is hopeless as Eric Idle and he and the three of the other Pythons are all rather two-dimensional. Lastly Stephen Fry's turn as God demonstrated precisely why his status as national treasure is beginning to drift.

So whilst the concept of telling a story about Python in the style of Python is good, and whilst some of the performances are very impressive indeed, the overall effect is rather like the sketch shows described by Palin's taxi driver home - "very hit and miss".

The Sermon on the Mount in Film

Next weekend I'm due to do a talk on "Blessed are the poor in spirit" which has got me thinking about portrayals of the Sermon on the Mount in film. The different films emphasise different parts of the sermon, although obviously the Beatitudes get a good showing in a lot of different films. Anyway, I thought I'd list some of my favourite portrayals and give a brief explanation.

King of Kings (1961)[Pictured above]
In contrast to Matthew's arrangement, Ray uses the Sermon on the Mount as the climax of the movie's first half. The buzz has been building about Jesus so everyone gathers to hear him preach and check him out. It's a spectacular build up and the idea of Jesus moving through the crowd is good, if lacking in realism. Sadly the post-production overdubbing of Jeffrey Hunter's original vocals leaves this feeling stiff and forced. But the build up and the colours are spectacular.

Gospel According to St. Matthew (1964)
Pasolini's filming of this part of the gospel is perhaps the most interesting, certainly from a scholarly angle. Most scholars believe that rather than their being a single key sermon Matthew 5-7 is a compilation of Jesus' teaching. Some films reflect this by simply splitting up the sermon into different parts and placing them throughout the film. But Pasolini stays true to the gospel by leaving all the material, but also acknowledges the scholarly angle by changing the setting, weather and background Jesus is speaking against as well his clothes and hair. Sadly whilst it's clever, it's also a little dull.

Son of Man (1969)
Dennis Potter's take on the Sermon is to excise the Beatitudes and focus on the "Love your enemy" part of the Sermon. The previous scene is critical here: a group of Roman soldiers have just attacked a local Jewish village and there is a seething contempt in the crowd Jesus addresses. Potter plays fast and loose with the wording, but certainly stays true to the spirit of the text. And Colin Blakely delivery is incredible. One of my favourite clips from a Bible Films ever.

Life of Brian (1979)
Life of Brian's take on the Sermon on the Mount is so well known that I knew all the best jokes before I'd even seen it. Still the timing and delivery are so perfect that even after all the times I've seen it, I'm still amused by "Blessed are the cheesemakers". It was perhaps the first time that anyone had ever considered what it was like to be someone at the edge of one of Jesus' sermons. We often wonder how he would have been able to address such a large crowd, but never consider what it was like for those on the edge. What's also impressive about the scene is how it nails so much of biblical interpretation: "obviously it applies to all makers of dairy produce". Of course if you missed it you may very well not understand the whole film. Not normally a problem unless you're about to be interviewed about it on national television as happened to Malcolm Muggeridge.

Last Temptation of Christ (1988)
Like Potter before him, Paul Schrader plays a little loose with the original wording, and gets brilliant results, again thanks to the lead actor's delivery. Last Temptation opts for Luke's Sermon on the Plain rather than Matthew's Mount, and it fits well with the confrontational prophet that Scorsese portrays in certain parts of the film. The spontaneity of this portrayal has a real vitality about it, and the ending, which makes it a little controversial for church use, nevertheless highlights the issue that occurs again and again in the gospels of Jesus' original audience failing to understand him.

The Miracle Maker (2000)
The Miracle Maker makes little attempt to depict the Sermon on the Mount although it does include a few extracts of some of the less famous passages, at least two of which are animated. The "why, then, do you look at the speck in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the log in your own eye?" is played for great comic effect with the audience laughing in the background. But the best part is Jesus' twin similes contrasting the wise man building his house upon rock with the foolish man building on sand. It's a nicely stylised piece of animation, and rather memorable.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Rossellini's Il Messia also includes a segment of Jesus teaching the disciples the words from the sermon whilst they go about their everyday tasks, but I haven't got the time to check it out just now. Does anyone else have any favourites that I've missed?

Not the Messiah on iPlayer

I've just discovered that Eric Idle's oratorio Not the Messiah (based on Monty Python's Life of Brian) played on BBC Radio 3 on Friday Morning and is, therefore, available to listen to on iPlayer until this Friday. It's a bit bizarre really because Mark Goodacre tweeted that he was listening to it earlier in the day, but I assumed that he had bought it on CD or something. Then coincidentally I happen to look (for the first time ever) at what's playing on radio 3's iPlayer channel and there it is. So I'm off to listen to it now.

Refelctions on Jesus Film Sessions at Regents Theological College

I was privileged to take a couple of sessions on Jesus films at Regents Theological College yesterday. I'd been invited by Richard Hasnip (star of the The Follower and The King) as parts of Regents' Performing Arts Track, which includes an entire module on Jesus in Film.

I was lecturing on Last Temptation of Christ and Jesus of Montreal, with 40 minutes on each. The technical set up was surprisingly quick and easy, and, a couple of minor things aside, that bit went fairly smoothly. I'm still trying to work out the best way of combining clips with PowerPoint, especially if the clips are from Region 1 DVDs. I'm not sure that what I did yesterday - flicking between a DVD player for the clips and a laptop for the notes - will really ever work that well, unless the clips start at the beginning of a chapter. Next time I think I'll either rip, trim and embed in PowerPoint (though my ancient version of PowerPoint can't really handle this that well), or perhaps look more closely at VLC and see if it's possible to utilise a more precise playlist or something.

Anyway... I was fairly pleased with how the session themselves went, particularly given the various computer nightmares I'd been having in the days running up to the event. It was a great group: friendly, interested, plenty of insightful questions and (surprisingly) the majority had seen more than 10 foreign language films.

There were a few notable observations. Firstly, someone asked me whether I thought that the alien sequence in Life of Brian was an obscure reference to Jesus' temptation because of the way the Jesus figure falls and is swept up by angels/aliens. It's an interesting theory, not least because I'm never really sure what that moment is about (aside from a nod to the then recent and hugely successful Star Wars), but my hunch is not. In honesty, it's too early to tell. At the very least I'll have to watch if before I can decide.

The other observation that stood out was from Last Temptation. According to one of the class, the filmmakers made it look like you can actually see Dafoe's hand underneath his skin as he pulls out his heart. I'm not sure I have a high enough definition TV/projector to be able to see this, but again, next time I'm watching I'll certainly keep an eye out for it. Incidentally, I also owe that man an apology. At one point I said that Last Temptation was an 18 certificate, which of course it was at it's time of release (and is on my VHS copy. He challenged me on it saying he thought it was a 15, but being the big-head I am I stuck to my guns. However, it wasn't long before I started to get the odd nagging doubt - after all I have the region 1 Criterion Collection disc for this film, not the UK version - and, alas, when I checked out the DVD cover on Amazon it appears that the DVD release has been downgraded to a 15. So, on the off chance you're reading this this morning, sorry!

The first session overran, even despite cutting down on quite a lot of what I had to say, but that seemed to work out for the best. Far more of them were familiar with Last Temptation than were with Jesus of Montreal, and whilst the latter film is fascinating in it's own right, I don't think it's as insightful or as interesting as Scorsese' with respect to cinematic portrayals of Jesus. It was a shame, though, that I only got to show one clip from Montreal. Having written my notes, prepared my slides and produced some notes for the session, it would be nice to have the opportunity to revisit these talks, not least to be able to tighten the content and delivery.

I may at some point record some of this session and put it on the podcast, though it's probably unlikely to happen until next year now. Obviously I'll post news of that here if I ever gat around to it.

Juliette Harrisson-Pop Classics Blog

I could have sworn that I posted this before I went on hiatus, but apprently not. Anyway, Juliette Harrisson - a PhD student from just down the road in Birmingham - has started a new blog called Pop Classics. You'd be forgiven for thinking Juliette's topic is songs from the 60s or 70s, but thankfully not. Instead she's writing about places where classical history appears in popular culture, particularly, it seems, in film and TV. Obviously this means her topic is a little broader than mine, but it's probably still the closest to mine in subject area, at least of all those I've come across thus far. It's nice to have some company. There's already a post on Life of Brian (my posts on this film), and whilst I've read a lot of comments on this film, this is the first time I've heard anyone correct them on their Latin (OK, now I am sure I have written this before! I wonder what happened?) I've added Pop Classics to my blogroll in the right hand menu.

I've also added a link to Henry Nguyen's Punctuated Life blog. It's fairly new and does sometimes contain Jesus film related possts (e.g. The Miracle Maker on Hulu).

The Guardian's "Reel History"

Ever watched an historical epic, and came away wondering how historically accurate it was? If so, and you secretly worry that scurrying away to check it out on Wikipedia may be equally as futile, then you should probably try out Alex von Tunzelmann's "Reel History" column in The Guardian.

Tunzelmann biog describes her as "a historian and writer", name checks her first book ("Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire") and reveals that "she lives in London". Her Reel History articles have been coming out every Thursday since July last year, and are as entertaining as they are informative. Her drawing and quartering of Braveheart is a great example.

So far only two Bible films have been covered: Life of Brian (my posts on this film) and DeMille's The Ten Commandments (likewise). Hopefully, though, there will be plenty more to follow.

Podcast: Life of Brian (1979)

I've just posted September's podcast on Monty Python's Life of Brian.

The other 18 talks in this podcast are still available to listen to.

US Reviews for 'Not the Messiah'

It's well over a year since I posted anything on Eric Idle's Life of Brian based oratorio 'Not the Messiah'. Since then, the show has played in a few places in the US and so Peter Chattaway has linked to a couple of reviews.

Stephen Brookes of the Washington Post called it "hysterically funny" predicting that Idle's "dead-on Dylan impersonation will go down in musical history" and gives a decent indication as to what it might actually sound like.

Idle rewrote the film's key scenes as songs, which Du Prez then set to music with gleeful abandon - mixing spirituals, doo-wop, Scottish ballads, Sondheim-ish show tunes, John Philip Sousa and even a tip of the hat to Handel himself.

Which ratchets up my interest in seeing this yet another notch. Then there's Richard S. Ginell of Variety also mentions the Bob Dylan impersonation and admires the piece's "satire on oratorio form". Ultimately, however, he he finds it all rather "inconsistent".

...There could have been more sustained hilarity, and the most memorable thing in the score remains the classic, chipper holdover from the film, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life."

I know that's intended to be a criticism, but I can't imagine, for even a moment, that it will deter devoted Pythonists from flocking to see it.

'Judith' Calls for Aberystwyth to Lift Life of Brian Ban

BBC Wales has a great story on former Life of Brian star and current Mayor of Aberystwyth, Sue Jones-Davies. It appears that even though Jones-Davies has served on the town's council and has become its mayor the region's ban on the film is still in place almost 30 years after its initial release. The BBC quote her as saying "Given what's on TV now I think it's amazing a ban in Aberystwyth still exists...I think it should be lifted". Whilst the Beeb's article makes it sounds like she's running a campaign on it, reading between the lines it seems far more likely that someone simply asked her a question about it to which she responded. Nevertheless there are some interesting recollections about making the film in the article.

Jones-Davies, of course, played Brian girlfriend, Judith, in the film. I re-watched the film recently and was amazed that I'd never before realised how pivotal Judith's character is in the movie's narrative. We first meet her right after the Sermon on the Mount, and the first shot is a close up on Judith which is accompanied by music suggesting some kind of romantic awakening. It's only after a cut to a wider shot that we see the rest of the group and Francis offers his "blessed is just about everyone with a vested interest in the status quo" remark. Brian turns around to stare at the group, but it's clear that his gaze is on her specifically rather than the group as a whole.

When Brian sees Judith again, with the PFJ, it's a zoom shot over Brian's shoulder. Brian goes over to join, and again his gaze is on her, and the point is underlined by two close ups on her to complement the wider group shot of the five of them.So it appears Brian is motivated mainly by impressing Judith as opposed to some passionate nationalism. There is of course Brian's anti-Roman speeches, but it's likely that most Jews of Brian's day would have similar feelings, without joining 'radical' groups such as the PFJ. However, contrast Brian's passive acceptance of Jesus's sermon with the reactionary criticisms from the PFJ, and, of course, the fact that he is employed in the Roman amphitheatre. It's significant that Brian first expresses his dislike of the Romans only after his contact with Judith.

And these hints continue as the film progresses. For example, after Judith and Brian are reunited after his "you're all individuals" speech. Judith runs towards him exclaiming "Brian, you were fantastic". She is referring to his speech, but he mistakenly thinks her praise refers to their sexual liaison the night before. It's a joke of course, but evidence that, as Mrs Cohen astutely observes early in the film, sex is the main thing on Brian's mind.

So, structurally at least, the film is about boy meets girl. And their relationship, and in many ways the film's narrative arc, ends as she joyously runs off having congratulated him on his crucifixion. She's glowing with pride at his martyrdom; he just wants her back. As she disappears into the distance her image is replaced by that of his mother - the final interchange before Idle's famous closing song - and the 'boy meets girl and leaves mother' story has come, depressingly, full circle.

There's obviously a lot more going on than that, and it's difficult to take isolated lines (like the one above) too seriously, but once you notice it, it's clear that it's Brian's feelings for Judith that really drives the story.

Incidentally, I stumbled across this great selection of Monty Python photos in writing this piece, which include a good number of the film's promotional pictures. There are also some better quality photos at DVD Beaver and the Criterion Contraption's review of the Criterion Collection DVD.

Life of Brian - The Immaculate Edition

I think this is the final piece of news from the backlogue I've been working my way through recently. Sony Home Entertainment has announced that they are to release an "Immaculate Edition" DVD of Monty Python's Life of Brian. The following special features are listed at IGN.com

* Documentary: "The Story of Brian" - An all-new hour-long Revelation from Monty Python
* Featurette: "The Readthrough" - An original illustrated 110 minute recording by The Pythons of their early screenplay in progress
* Four illustrated vintage theatrical radio ads featuring the voices of Mrs. Cleese, Mrs. Idle, Mrs. Gilliam and Michael Palin's dentist
* Five Deleted Scenes:
* Audio Commentary with Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle & Terry Jones
* Audio Commentary with John Cleese & Michael Palin

Peter Chattaway notes that whilst there's some new material, some of it looks to have been copied over from the Criterion Collection edition. It doesn't look like it contains the "Secret Life of Brian" documentary that aired on Channel 4 last Christmas (discussion here), nor does it appear to have the one extra that everyone would really like to see - the "Friday Night, Saturday Morning" debate between Cleese, Palin, Malcolm Muggeridge and the then Bishop of Southwark. A couple of short clips, and the full parody of this debate are available on YouTube, and a detailed overview is available at Wikipedia. I would dearly like to see this in full one day, and so it seems rather strange not to include either this debate or the documentary given that the Criterion set is already pretty expansive. If you're going to try and expand that set you should really include everything you possibly can.

First Reviews for Not the Messiah

It's my daughter's first birthday today, so I hope regular readers won't mind if I go home early to play with her. Fortunately Peter Chattaway has collated a number of reviews of Eric Idle's oratorio Not the Messiah. It sounds like it's more good than bad, especially for Python fans.

More Previews for Not the Messiah

Monty Python fans will no doubt be anticipating the June premier of Eric Idle's Life of Brian oratorio Not the Messiah.

I mentioned a few articles on this project in March, notably those by Playbill, Variety and The Globe and Mail. Peter Chattaway has just linked to another article on it in The Toronto Star. This in turn led me to track down a new article in The Globe and the Mail - an interview with Eric IDle (left in the picture).

Not the Messiah (He's a Very Naughty Boy) - Life of Brian: The Musical

Way back in October, Peter Chattaway posted about Eric Idle's plans to turn Monty Python's 1979 Jesus film Life of Brian into a musical. There have now been a number of articles on this show, which is to be called Not the Messiah (He's a Very Naughty Boy). Playbill reported on it back in October, then Variety covered it last month, and then yesterday Peter linked to The Globe and Mail (although you have to pay for that last article).

Following the success of Idle's "Spamalot", he is, once again, collaborating with composer John Du Prez. However, according to The Globe and Mail article the show's première will be conducted by Idle's cousin, Peter Oundjian - the musical director of the Toronto Symphony Orchestra. Not the Messiah is due to open at the Luminato Festival of Arts and Creativity in Toronto on June 1st.

But notably, according to this latest article at least, this production will not actually be a musical. It will be an oratorio (a non-costumed, non-acted, concert performance usually dealing with religious subject matter) and it will use 40 musicians and 4 classical singers. Idle notes how it it unlikely to cause offence as there is no crucifixion scene. It's "good-natured playing with the concept of [Handel's] Messiah" as much as anything else.

This latest article includes a few interesting quotations for fans of Life of Brian:

"As Handel's lyricist adapted the Nativity story and the Gospel story," says Idle, "this adapts the story of Brian, a simple boy mistaken for the Messiah, which is his curse." He's talking over the phone from his home in Los Angeles, and the end of that sentence is nearly lost in laughter. The mere thought of Brian Cohen, not-Messiah, still makes him giggle...

Idle remembers the film's shoot in Tunisia as "the most fun we ever had." Graham Chapman gave up his heavy drinking habit partway through the shoot in order to play Brian (a role that John Cleese had coveted for his own)...

I love the thought of Idle still giggling to himself at the central concept of Life of Brian almost 30 years later, and it's good to see him exploring more challenging forms and material. I have a lot of respect for artists who continually push themselves and their work in new directions.

Christmas Bible Related Films and Programmes on UK TV

One thing I like to do at Christmas and Easter is have a look through the TV listings and see what programmes/films of interest will be showing over the festive period. I thought, then, that I'd post some of the highlights on terrestrial TV over here. Apologies to readers outside the UK, but I can't really work my way through the listings for every country. (I did note, however, that in the US Jesus of Nazareth is showing on the History Channel, as well as The Passion – Religion and the Movies).

Bruce Almighty - 21st Dec. 8pm - BBC1
A surprisingly deep film considering it stars Jim Carrey, managing to look at a host of issues from unanswered prayer to theodicy. Morgan Freeman's performance as God steals the show and there is at least one brief audio-visual reference to DeMille's The Ten Commandments.

God Gave Rock and Roll to You - 23rd Dec. 6:30pm – Ch4
Documentary with Robert Beckford looking at the relationship between music and religion. I guess this is the music equivalent of The Passion: Films, Faith and Fury. Interestingly, that programme was originally scheduled for Christmas last year, but got moved to Easter as because that was a more religious time, which suggests something has changed at Channel 4.

The Lost Gospel of Judas – 23rd Dec. 8:30pm – Ch4
Documentary looking at the lost gospel of Judas, and trying to determine whether it is real or fake.

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe - 24th Dec. 11:25 am
The animated version of the film which I was obsessed by as a kid (having discovered it on holiday). It's not as flashy as the recent feature film, nor as faithful as the BBC TV version from the late 80s, but it still holds up quite well, although the US accents are a bit strange for a story set in 40s Britain.

CS Lewis: Beyond Narnia - 24th Dec. 11:50am
Documentary-drama looking at the life of the great writer. It's written by Norman Stone who wrote and directed the 1985 version of Shadowlands

Solomon and Sheba - 24th Dec. 12:45pm
Yul Brynner stars as King Solomon, a role he took on after the untimely death of original star Tyronne Power who can still be seen in some of the distant shots. The story is based, of course, on 1 Kings 10:1-13, and so director King Vidor and his writer add plenty of padding to make those thirteen verses stretch for the 135 minutes run time. Solomon and Sheba was one of the first films to use Super Technirama 70. There's an interesting article at the Widescreen Museum discussing this and Disney's Sleeping Beauty.

Joseph and the Technicolor Dreamcoat - 24th Dec. 3:15pm
Donny Osmond takes the title role in this fairly terrible rendition of Andrew Lloyd-Webber and Tim Rice's musical. It's as tacky as you like even starring Joan Collins and Christopher Biggins to turn up the camp factor.

The Secret Family of Jesus - 25th Dec. 8:00pm
Another documentary featuring Robert Beckford about the most talked about religious issue this year – that raised by the Da Vinci Code. It's somewhat sensationally advertised, but surely with a 2 hours runtime it will bring more balance than the book and the film, and hopefully it will reflect the scholarly consensus.

The Magic of Jesus - 26th Dec. 12:40am
Dirty Tricks magicans Barry and Stuart reproduce some of Jesus's miracles. Hardly new territory (magicians have claimed to be able to do various miracles for years), but if they manage to get killed and rise from the dead I'll be seriously impressed.

The Secret Life of Brian - 1st Jan 8:00 pm
Channel 4 are devoting an entire evening to the Pythons. The evening kicks off with this documentary looking at the controversy surrounding the film. I hope they show the complete footage of the TV debate between two of the Python's and a bishop and another religious representative. I don't think it will, but hopefully there will be some interesting footage that I've not seen before.

Monty Python's Life of Brian - 1st Jan 9:00 pm
A film that needs no introduction, but it is part of an evening on the Pythons. The evening continues after this film with the documentary "What the Pythons Did Next".

Honourable Mentions
There's so much religious-related TV this year that I can't discuss everything, so here are a few more programmes of lesser relevance.

23rd, 9:25 am ITV1 - The Way we Worshipped Christmas Special
23rd, 11:40 pm Ch4 - Nuns on the Run (Film)
24th, 3:15 pm BBC2 – A Nuns Story (Film)
24th, 7:35 pm Ch4 – AFI 100 Years, 100 Cheers
25th/1st Jan 9:30 pm BBC1 – Vicar of Dibley
28th, 10:50pm BBC1 – Film 2006: Films of the Year

I'm fairly impressed with this list of programmes / films. Last year there was next to nothing. This time there are a number of interesting documentaries, a couple of Christian related films, and one proper golden-era biblical epic, albeit based on a story that would be unknown to many outside of the church and biblical studies departments. (It almost makes me wonder if it was a coincidence!). It's interesting to see Channel 4 leading the way as well. 10 years ago the majority of religious programming would have been on the BBC, but now their offerings are unimaginative low budget affairs whilst Channel 4 is producing new, engaging documentaries that should attract a far wider audience. It will be interesting to see how they do in terms of quality and ratings.

Silverscreen Beats: Life of Brian

The fourth programme in the 5 part Silverscreen Beats series about music from Jesus films aired yesterday, and it was the turn of Monty Python's Life of Brian. When I first heard about this particular instalment I hoped it might be the most significant episode, but also worried it would just be 15 minutes discussion about "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life". Thankfully, it was the former and not the latter.

There were a few things that I thought were particularly worth of note. Firstly, composer Geoffrey Burgon, who was quoted extensively, expressed his disappointment that no-one ever picks up on the musical quotes he puts in citing, Mozart, Wagner and Monte Verdi in particular. I know that James Monaco in "How to Read a Film" suggests that our lack of appreciation for comedy film demonstrates that we don't really understand the medium of film enough. The fact that the music for Life of Brian has been so overlooked, even when it is actually a key part of the humour, gives some support to his theory.

The other thing that particularly stood out was when Terry Jones admitted he hadn't really liked "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" when he first heard it. The musical analysis of the song reveals how it has the same underlying sequence as the famous do-wop progression (you'll know it when you hear it).

One thing they didn't mention is how the film's score not only parodies 60s biblical epics, particularly King of Kings and Spartacus, but also how the song over the opening credits parodies the Shirley Bassey-esque opening songs of the James Bond franchise.

There's plenty of discussion around about this film, but in particular I'd recommend the chapter on the film in Stern, Jefford and Debona's "Savior on the Silver Screen".

The programme can still heard listened to on the BBC Website. The final programme airs this afternoon and investigates Peter Gabriel's score for Last Temptation of Christ.

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.