• 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, June 03, 2015

    Background to The Miracle Maker


    Back in 2000-01 when The Miracle Maker first got released on VHS I managed to get hold of some form of special edition which also came with a novelized version of the book aimed at children. I always meant to read it and now that my own children are about the right age for it we recently sat down to read it together.

    Like most such books most of the dialogue comes straight from the script and the more descriptive passages are based solely on what we see on screen. However there are a few parts of the book, particularly in its second quarter, where the writer (Sally Humble-Jackson) adds a little flavour of her own.

    It's hard to know how authoritatively we should take such comments. Is Humble-Jackson fleshing out aspects of Murray Watts' original vision, or just using her own creative license? Nevertheless, as this is one film I've written quite a lot about I thought I would include a few aspects as interesting background.

    The one character whose story is enhanced here out more than any other is Matthew the Tax Collector, and Humble-Jackson provides most of the extra detail in Chapter 4, where Jesus calls Peter and Matthew either side of the miraculous catch of fish. The scene takes place at the port-side where Matthew is collecting taxes from those who pass, both Peter and his fellow fishermen and Mary Magdalene. Here are some of the excerpts from the start of the scene, before Jesus has encourage Peter to put his boat out again:
    The tax collectors had once been ordinary Jews, until the Romans gave them a job. Now they were seen as scum...

    ...Matthew, the tax collector, sighed. She'd crossed the border so she had to pay [Magdalene]. It wasn't his fault - he didn't make the rules...

    ...Matthew flinched. Was he to blame if the nets came up empty? 'It's the law' he tried to explain, over the din of the mad woman.
    Later Jesus begins to preach and catches Matthew's eye. "The tax collector's heart missed a beat. No-one ever met his eye". Then we're given this description:
    Matthew looked uneasily at the flimsy roof of his tax-booth. One day an angry fisherman was going to knock it to the ground. He imagined himself flying to the safety of a tree, high in the branches where nothing could hurt him. And then he closed his eyes and sighed. Who'd want him in their tree? No-one...
    Even from so far away Jesus could see the glitter of tears.
    Finally we come to Matthew's appointment.
    How he wished he'd never become a tax collector. Then he might have been able to look Jesus in the eye...Matthew began to shake. More insults, more anger.
    'Matthew,' called Jesus again, 'follow me!'
    Baffled, Matthew lifted his head. He looked Jesus in the eye. And what he saw there filled his heart with longing. All the things he'd done wrong...they didn't matter any more. His sins had been forgiven! Slowly he got to his feet. With trembling hands he threw down his money and went to Jesus' side.

    Matthew? The tax collector? The others were shocked - but when they saw the love in Jesus' eyes they felt ashamed of themselves.
    Now none of this goes against the scenes we see in the film, but it certainly offers more than is the film itself. And it's a really interesting exploration of the character's inner journey at this point.

    There's one other section that stood out for me, from the next chapter (five) concerning the extra-biblical villain Ben-Azra. Ben Azra is brought in to play a similar role to Zerah in Jesus of Nazareth (1977) and Livio in Jesus (1999) - the extra-biblical authority figure pulling all the strings in the background. And there's a little insight into his character as well:
    Ben Azra, for instance, had grown rich and powerful by helping the Romans keep the peace. He thought the people would tire of this magician from Nazareth, but as the months passed, the crowds just got bigger
    The detail about how Ben Azra had gained his wealth is a step beyond what we get from the film, though it's certainly a very reasonable step. It also contrasts with the above description of Matthew whose wealth had also come because he had sided with the Romans

    Labels:

    Saturday, April 21, 2012

    A Bit More on The Miracle Maker

    I've written about The Miracle Maker many times before, most commonly around Easter when I find myself watching it perhaps with my children, or perhaps just with others. This year we sat down to watch it as a family and I had a number of new thoughts about it that I hadn't really considered before. One of the things that demonstrates the film's quality is that despite multiple viewings over the years I still find myself noticing new things about it each time.

    Some of the things I found most striking this time around occurred in the opening minutes. In fact the first is the first thing we see as the film starts - the story is dated as "Year 90 of the Roman occupation". The significance of this is that it places the film right away not in our own time frame - viewers of the film unaware that Jesus' ministry was around 30 AD will be none the wiser - but in terms that would have been very resonant in Jesus' day. Straight away it tells us that this is the story about a man, and a people, living under occupation and subjugation. Not just from their own lifetimes but from that of their grandparents and great-grandparents. And the hopes for a messiah are nudged a little into the limelight.

    Our first real glimpse of Jesus is as his overseer is about to strike Mary Magdalene. Jesus steps in, parries the man's blow and saves Mary from being struck. This is a deft combination of two leading aspects of Jesus that the film is keen to emphasise: his strength and his compassion.

    Having begun his ministry Jesus heads to the Jordan to be baptised. But rather than be baptised by John, Jesus crouches down and baptises himself. The early church is often accused of being rather embarrassed by Jesus' baptism by John. In Mark's Gospel it's a straightforward case of John baptising Jesus. Matthew has John question Jesus' request: surely this is inconceivable. By the time the fourth gospel is written Jesus is no longer baptised by John. Whether or not it's accurate to describe this as the early church being embarrassed by the incident, it's interesting that the film portrays things as somewhere between Matthew's version and John's. Jesus still gets baptised, but it's not John who does it.

    Having returned from his post-baptism temptation in the desert Jesus comes out and meets up with his old friend Lazarus. Like much of the early part of this film this is dramatic fiction. What's interesting, though is that Lazarus seems to be attempting to tempt Jesus as well. His words are not suggestions of inappropriate miracles, or self-gotten gains, but simply to turn his back on his ministry and return to normal life. It's intriguing because temptation is often far more like that than the kind Jesus undergoes in the desert. Lazarus is Jesus' friend and doesn't realise what he is doing. The temptation is subtle, but then it so often is. 

    The climax of the first half of John's Gospel (and of the first half of many a Jesus film) is the raising of Lazarus from the dead. Whilst this story is included, the climax of the first part of the film is another of the occasions when Jesus raises someone back to life - the daughter of Jairus. The switch fits neatly with the films desire to appeal to children, but it also fits its desire to be more inclusive to women. Not only is Tamar female, but also the woman who is healed in the interlocking episode. It's also the moment when Jairus, his wife and Tamar decide to follow Jesus, which I suppose raises the question for children of whether they will follow Jesus, something backed up in the film's closing scene.

    The lighting in this scene (pictured above) is really striking. I don't know a great deal about classic art, but it feels a bit like Caravaggio, though that probably exposes how little I know about that period/movement. That said it might also have been inspired by 19th century painting such as those by Carl Bloch, Gabriel Max and the Russian artist Ilya Repin. Given that the 3D scenes were created by the Russian teams of animators the latter might makes a good deal of sense. In any case it's beautifully lit and captures a certain painterly quality.

    The raising of Jairus's daughter is Jesus' greatest triumph, but he comes down with a bump. The scene that immediately follows depicts Jesus hearing about the death of his cousin John the Baptist. Aside from the personal grief Jesus experiences, it's a painful reminder of what is to come for Jesus and in a sense it marks the start of the second half of the film, foreshadowing that which is to come. The first part has been about miracles, strength and compassion all three of which find their expression in raising Tamar to life. The second part will focus on Jesus' death.

    Given that this film was made to appeal to children, it obviously had to include Jesus saying "unless you become like a child you will not enter the kingdom of God". Here the film includes the full incident which begins with the disciples arguing about who is the greatest (Mark 9:33-37, though whereas Mark places the story in a house in Capernaum, the film locates it by a camp-fire on the road). Indeed, the argument amongst the disciples flares up whilst Jesus is picking up firewood. This accentuates one of the other key themes of the film, and particularly the second half: Jesus as a servant. It also echoes the incident from John's Gospel where Jesus washes the disciples' feet. In both cases the disciples are arguing over who is the greatest (John 13 c.f. with Luke 22) and in both cases Jesus responds in the opposite spirit by doing the work of a servant.

    The servant theme finds its fullest expression in Jesus' death as the suffering servant of Isaiah 40-55. One key hint to this is when Jesus appears before Herod and the film shows the tetrarch pull Jesus' beard. The man of strength and compassion, is now in need of someone to step in and defend him as he defended Mary Magdalene earlier in the film.

    Labels:

    Thursday, September 08, 2011

    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?

    Labels: , , , , ,

    Wednesday, November 10, 2010

    Comparison: Good Samaritan

    Last week I looked at various Jesus film portrayals of Jesus' Gospel Manifesto from Luke 4, as part of trying to find a suitable clip for a session on Luke I'm taking. I also want to include a clip of the Parable of the Good Samaritan, so I thought I add a few notes here as well (times indicate the point at which the relevant clip begins).

    Kings of Kings (1961) - 1:28:20
    Whilst Ray's Jesus is one who speaks about "peace, love and the brotherhood of man", the story part of the Parable of the Good Samaritan is missing. All that is left if the question "I'm a camel driver, who can I call my neighbour?" and Jesus' answer "He to whom you show mercy and compassion, whether you know him or not. This is all part of the Sermon on the Mount scene.

    Godspell (1973)
    - 35:08

    One of Godspell's strengths is the way it creatively re-tells the parables, reflecting the fact that when Jesus first spoke them there was a freshness and vitality about them. Here the Godspell trope act out the story with their hands. There's a slight change to the characters here, We get a priest, a judge along with the Samaritan, rather than a priest and a Levite. Curiously however there's a suggestion that the Samaritan is drunk.

    At the end of the parable, the Samaritan is then hoisted onto someone's shoulders and paraded along until Jesus interjects with Matt 6:2-5 ("So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets...").

    Il Messia (1975)
    This is the only film to show Jesus telling the parable in standard fashion. In fact it's a fairly unremarkable sequence, in keeping with the off-hand way Rossellini has Jesus deliver much of his teaching. Sorry I didn't note down the starting time for this one.

    Jesus (1979) - 60:48This was, for me, the most memorable moment. Initially we see Jesus being questioned as per Luke, but then there's a watery dissolve into a dramatised version of the story. It's wordless, accompanied instead by a incredibly memorable little jingle, before we dissolve back to Jesus and the crowd. A couple of points here. Firstly, all three of those who approach the beaten man do within a very short period of time. This keeps the story brief, but it does rather let the first two off the hook to a small extent. The road looks busy, so the hurrying by looks less like desertion and dereliction of duty than it looks like simply leaving it to someone else. Secondly, here it's a woman who asks Jesus the initial question rather than an expert in the law which makes the scene softer and less confrontational. Likewise it's a young girl, not the original questioner, who answers Jesus' closing question, leading Jesus into "suffer the little children" passage.

    Mary, Mother of Jesus (1999)
    This version has Mary telling Jesus the story as a boy in keeping with the high view of Mary the film has. Jesus ends by asking "so the Samaritan was good?" to which Mary, rather curiously replies "yes, even though he was a Samaritan". The scene following this one links in, showing Jesus getting beaten up by a group of boys but refusing to fight back.

    Miracle Maker (2000) - 45:50
    This is one of the sections in this puppet animated film that switches to 2D, hand drawn animation, and it's done in a rather angular spiky style, which might actually be quite scary to younger children. It also explains some of the cultural reference points such as how the priest believed it made him unclean to touch a dead body, the Jewish people's hatred of the Samaritans (even showing one the children shouting out that he hates them). In the context of the film this is probably my favourite portrayal, but for a free-standing clip I don't think it would work so well.

    So none of these are ideal really. What I probably will do instead is show the Mitchell and Webb version of the story, which never fails to amuse me, and ties in somewhat with Mary's response in Mary, Mother of Jesus

    Labels: , , , , ,

    Wednesday, March 03, 2010

    Persona on Miracle Maker

    My friend Stef recently watched The Miracle Maker for the first time and has posted his thoughts over on his Filmsweep blog an his Persona persona. He's clearly a big fan: he's spent most of the week lamenting the fact it's dropped out of the Arts and Faith top 100.

    Labels:

    Thursday, December 17, 2009

    Oops

    Just realised this week that I seem to have been classing The Miracle Maker as a 1999 film rather than one from 2000. I have no idea that is, or how many times I have done it on various articles. All I know is that I used to call it a 2000 film, and then I went wrong.

    It also means I need to re-evaluate my various film related lists of the decade, although I'm not sure onto which it would force it's way.

    Labels:

    Thursday, May 28, 2009

    The Miracle Maker on Hulu

    Following on from an earlier post where I mentioned that US residents can see Last Temptation of Christ, for free at hulu.com, then Henry Nguyen has noticed that you can view the Miracle Maker there as well.

    As I'm based in the UK, I'm a bit off the pace with Hulu. Certainly it look like the content is there (or, in my case, not there) legally, but how do they make it financially viable? I guess the content includes advertising. Does anyone know if commercials crop up in the middle of films or only at the start?

    Labels:

    Tuesday, April 14, 2009

    Even More on The Miracle Maker

    Following on from last Monday's post on The Miracle Maker, I re-watched the final half hour with Nina over the course of the Easter holiday, and, once again, I noticed some new details that things I've missed previously.

    I've talked before about the various issues surrounding the depiction of the table used at the Last Supper:
    The initial decision facing the film-makers at this point is whether or not to mirror Leonardo's famous painting, as this is the definitive artistic image of the Last Supper. However, in most cases, where a Leonardo derived composition has been rejected, a more modern arrangement is taken with all the disciples around two or more sides of long tables. It's noticeable for example that Jesus films never show all the disciples eating at separate tables all within the same room, even though John's gospel happily accepts Jesus did not treat all his disciples equally (John 13:23-25). Almost without exception the disciples are pretty much treated equally. However, film-makers are also at pains to visually highlight the other-ness of Jesus, so, as far as I am aware, no film-maker has ever located the Last Supper on round table as per King Arthur - in fact Jesus is always seated centrally, even though that is only assumption based on traditional Christian Art and the assumptions drawn from our culture.
    In light of these comment I'm surprised that I've not noticed the layout adopted by The Miracle Maker, whereby Jesus and his disciples sit down one side of a Leonardo Da Vinci style top table, but there are various other tables in the room where people like Cleopas and Mary Magdalene sit. IT's shown here before the disciples arrive.Such an arrangement deftly combines the oneness of Jesus's new community with his own uniqueness and importance, as well as bridging between traditional depictions of the Last Supper and Twenty First Century sensibilities. It's also interesting that, it's difficult to ascertain where exactly Jesus sits at the table. It would appear to be in the corner nearest the door, rather than in the middle.

    Cleopas, Jairus and Tamar are also present in the Garden of Gethsemane. I noted last week the words that Jesus says to Cleopas and Jairus. This time it was the words that Jesus spoke to Tamar that caught my attention:
    In my father's house there are so many rooms, I'm going to find a wonderful place for you. One day you will always be with me.
    What struck me about this is that it's these words that Tamar repeats into the camera at the end of the film. That scene is the worst of the whole film, but the subtle exploration of the oral tradition around Jesus's words, and the way they are spread from one to another is certainly interesting.

    Finally, I've often talked about how this film switched to 2D animation to indicate that the story is moving to a "state of mind" - flashbacks, parables, temptations, and so on. But what struck me for the first time is that the sighting of Jesus by Mary Magdalene by his tomb, and the majority of the other post-resurrection appearances, are shown in "factual" 3D. In other words the decision to use 3D here is very much a theological one: the resurrection is portrayed as an actual historical event rather than the non-literal, shared conciousness, of some other interpretations.

    Labels: ,

    Monday, April 06, 2009

    Further Reflections on Miracle Maker

    We watched The Miracle Maker yesterday at our Palm Sunday church social, and even though it was perhaps the 5th or 6th time I have watched it, I was pleased to see a number of details that I hadn't noticed previously (see my review, scene guide, podcast or all my posts on this film). It did make it all the more disappointing that most of the adults present wrote it off as a kids film and went out for a chat instead, but it was a lovely sunny day so who can blame them?

    The first thing I really noticed was the scene with Mary and Martha (and, in this case, the still alive, Lazarus). As with the gospel accounts, Mary sits and listens whilst Martha complains "Jesus don't you care that my sister has left me to do everything tell her to help me". But whereas the response recorded in the gospels rebukes Martha and exemplifies the behaviour of her sister, her Jesus solely focuses on Martha, saying to her "don't miss the one thing that matters for you". There's no mention of Mary choosing correctly. I'm not sure whether this reflects the film makers' desire not to draw attention to Mary, or whether they thought this lack of comparison with Martha's sister portrayed Jesus's actions as kinder, or whether it was something else entirely.

    Of course the female character that we see following Jesus most closely is that of Tamar - Jairus's daughter - who gets raised from the dead about halfway through the film. Poignantly, however, the film follows this scene with the moment that Jesus hears that his cousin John the Baptist has been killed. The contrast between the joy of raising a child to life and the grief and fear of knowing his kin and forerunner has been killed, not to mention that between the person he was able to save from death and the person he wasn't, is nicely highlighted by the juxtaposition.Jairus ultimately becomes the unnamed follower of Jesus who is walking with Cleopas to Emmaus on the day of Jesus's resurrection. However, Jesus seemingly knows this in advance. When Jesus arrives in the Garden of Gethsemane the two of them are already present and ask Jesus to join with them so he can answer their questions (above). However, Jesus explains that he needs to go and pray but tells them "I will come and talk to you Cleopas. I promise I will come to you Jairus, very soon, and we will talk about many things".

    After Gethsemane comes Jesus's trial and we're introduced to another figure from the Jewish establishment figure who the gospels suggest ultimately becomes one of Jesus's followers - Joseph of Arimathea. Initially Joseph is simply objecting to the unlawfulness of the trial, but when others there begin to turn on him, asking him if he too is a follower of Jesus, he goes quiet and admits he knows nothing. There's an abrupt cut to Peter who is likewise denying Jesus in the courtyard outside.

    Once Jesus is condemned the film moves relatively quickly to his crucifixion. But whilst the film largely skips over Jesus's abuse at the hands of the various guards and soldiers, it does appear to show Herod pulling out a part of his beard. This is taken from Isaiah 50:6 ("I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting") which traditionally, has often been seen as a prediction of Jesus's suffering due to the other details it provides. Indeed even though there's no explicit mention of Jesus's beard being pulled out in the gospels, I believe that this interpretation was one of the reasons that depictions of Jesus began to give him a beard. From the various images that we have it wasn't until the 6th century that Jesus began to be shown with a beard.Of course the fact that Jesus was Jewish also suggests that it was likely he had a beard: the smooth faced paintings of the 4th-6th century were mainly attempts to reimagine Jesus in Roman culture. One of the things I like about this film is the way it puts things in their historical context. So this time aroundI noticed this little detail from the shot above, taken from the parable of the wise and foolish builders. Having sweated away digging foundations into the rock so he can build his house, the wise man finally gets to enter his house. But before he does so, he stops and touches something he's put on his doorpost. Whilst this could be a door bell, or even just an attractive feature, the safest bet is that this is a mezuzah a copy of the shema encased in a box and attached to the door post. This very Jewish image sets Jesus words in an interesting context, and highlights the way that Jesus is reinterpreting his Judaism around himself.

    Another example of this is as the centurion at the foot of the cross witnesses Jesus's death. Instead of saying "surely this was was the Son of God" he says "surely this was was a son of god". It's been a long time since I studied NT Greek but I this is something of an alteration from how this passage is usually translated. Quite how you view such an alteration depends, I suppose, on how you interpret scripture. Some will, no doubt, be unhappy with this slight alteration from the actual words of the original. Personally though (assuming that there was an actual centurion who did indeed make such a proclamation), I think it's more realisitic that a roman soldier would have expressed himself in terms of his own pluralistic worldview, which by this point would have called the very much human Caesars sons of god.

    Labels: ,

    Thursday, January 22, 2009

    Murder in the Miracle Maker?

    So Nina and I watched a bit of The Miracle Maker over the weekend and I noticed a few new things this time around. The first of which was this rather odd-shaped package that Peter seems to have with him. Not sure whether this is meant to pre-figure Jesus's death and his body being wrapped in preparation for his burial, or it's a variation on "pick up your cross and follow me" or whether it's just that someone made up a parcel that just happened to be body shaped. I suspect the latter.

    On a more serious note, I was also struck by the suddenes of Jesus's transition from teknon to spiritual leader. He starts the film as a builder/carpenter, and then goes, seemingly leaving his employers somewhat in the lurch. Then he goes home to his mother, she remembers his childhood, and the next day it's off to the River Jordan to get baptised.

    Speaking of which, the last person to get baptised before Jesus is Andrew, who, like Jesus, baptises himself. Andrews role is beefed up a bit in this film compared to other Jesus films, so maybe this is part of that.

    Lastly, Mel was struck by how upset Jesus is after his cousin John is beheaded, particularly given that he is seeing miracles happen in his own ministry. In fact, this is made even more poignant given that this film not only has more miracles than the majority, but also by the fact that it is called The Miracle Maker. He saved others, but he himself could not save those near to him.

    Labels:

    Monday, January 14, 2008

    The Eyes Have It
    Demonic Similarities Between The Passion and The Miracle Maker

    Over the years there have been various people who have spotted similarities between Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ and other Jesus films. Some of them are very well known, for example the fact that Gibson shot his film in Matera, Italy - the same place where Passolini shot his Gospel According to St. Matthew. Others were apparent on the film's initial release. For example, Jeffrey Overstreet noticed so much similarity between this soundtrack and that of Last Temptation of Christ that he claimed that composer John Debney "turned in something that sounds like musical plagiarism".

    Visual similarities have also been noted. Last year I had the pleasure of interviewing director Lance Tracy whose 2001 film The Cross had used flashbacks to punctuate the violence, and who claimed that one of GIbson's associates had seen his film. And Peter Chattaway has also noted various similarities with DeMille's 1927 The King of Kings such as the raven on the cross, and the difference between Jesus's cross and those of his disciples.One of the more unusual bits from The Passion is the scene following Judas's return of the money to the high priest (a hot from which is above). As he hides, tormented by his own actions, two Jewish boys stumble across him, and their initially friendly banter, turns into mockery, before the boys' faces distort and it appears that now Judas is being tortured by a demon or some such thing.

    Last week I came across a very similar moment in The Miracle Maker (1999). This time it is Mary Magdalene who is disturbed, and the film is even more explicit, albeit in a later scene, that she is being tormented by demons. And this time rather than it being two Jewish boys, it is two Roman soldiers whose faces distort and terrify her, as shown below.I find this interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly, because Miracle Maker was distributed by Icon, the company founded by Mel Gibson. Whilst he may have had nothing to do with it, it's hard to imagine he's entirely unfamiliar with it.

    Secondly, I have a vague, and quite possibly incorrect, recollection that Gibson claimed he hadn't really paid much attention to the other entries in the Jesus films canon. We know he'd seen a few before as in the run up to the release he mentioned other Jesus films such as Pasolini's and those where Jesus had "bad hair", although that's no reason to doubt that he steered clear of them during filming. What's interesting, though, is that if he didn't directly copy these visual ideas, that they nevertheless appear to have entered his psyche and come out subconsciously.

    Thirdly, it's interesting how this scene changes from one film to another. Obviously the way Mary and Judas are characterised in this film required that particular change, but it's interesting that the later film also changes the perceived persecutors from Roman soldiers (where there would be good reason to be fearful) to Jewish children. I don't think this changes my thoughts on the anti-Semitism question that I outlined in my recent podcast on this film, but it's certainly an interesting observation in that regard.

    Labels: ,

    Monday, May 21, 2007

    Miracle Maker - Special Edition DVD Review

    Back in March, I mentioned the Special Edition DVD release of The Miracle Maker. Having recently worked my way through the extras, and re-reviewed the film in both written and audio form, I thought I should write about the DVD release in particular.

    The weakest aspect of this release is the one that is seen first - the cover. In some ways it's largely irrelevant - it's the content and the look of the film which really matter. Even so, it's a lousy first impression, the cloudy sky background and the bright light seeping through the gaps between the figures in the main still, give the cover a floaty ethereal feel that is very different from the down to earth Jesus the film so excellently portrays.

    Cover art aside, it's a very good DVD. Having had this film on a pan-and-scan VHS for years, the wide-screen aspect ratio and the far crisper print are much appreciated.

    One of the biggest attractions of any special edition DVD is the audio commentary. This one features (executive) director Derek Hayes and producer Naomi Jones. There's plenty of interesting discussion, which centres around the relationship between the Welsh Cartwn Cymru animation company and their Russian counterparts Christmas Films. Having clarified early on in the commentary how the workload was split between the two groups of animators (Cartwn Cymru did the 2D work and some CGI, Christmas Films did the 3D puppetry), there are various anecdotes surrounding how the two companies worked together. I couldn't help feeling that the Russian company came out of those stories looking a bit behind the times.

    There are various other details as well. I've always felt this film was well researched and the commentary provides strong support for that theory. The explanation behind why the story starts in Sepphoris, for example, will be illuminating for many. Technical information is in good supply too with details about how the mouths were animated, and how the voices were recorded both being discussed.

    The other features are good as well. The "Making Of" documentary lasts for about half an hour and covers some of the same material that is discussed in the audio commentary. It's real strength is the footage it gives you. It's part interesting and part spooky to see figures familiar from the film reduced to lifeless, incomplete models.

    There's also a storyboard to film comparison. Rather than playing this next to the final product, or allowing viewers to flick between the two using the "angle" button on their handsets, the pictures changes automatically. This is much easier to watch, and allows us to see more of the detail than we would with the side by side comparison.

    Strangely there are no trailers for the film. The trailers advertised on the box (and on various websites) turn out to be for other programmes aimed at children. It's rather tedious flicking through with them, and it's a shame that the theatrical trailers for The Miracle Maker aren't included.

    Lastly there are two "interactive games". These are essentially quizzes, and I would imagine they are aimed at older children. Since the film is used a lot in educational settings this makes good sense, and is a nice addition.

    A film like this deserved a decent treatment, and it's good to see that it has finally been given it.

    Labels: ,

    Wednesday, May 16, 2007

    My Miracle Maker Review up at ReJesus


    The title says it all really! A review I've written of the Miracle Maker has been posted at rejesus. I'll be posting some comments about the Special Edition DVD shortly.

    Labels:

    Tuesday, May 08, 2007

    The Miracle Maker and the Women at the Tomb

    Following the new special edition DVD release of The Miracle Maker, I've been revisiting that film, notably to listen to the director's commentary. However, I also recently watched the resurrection scenes at Easter with my daughter. She was only 10 months then, so I'm sure she got very little out of the experience, but I was intrigued to notice a detail in those scenes that has previously escaped me.

    I've noted before that this film contains as much post-resurrection footage as practically any film, and that it focusses its attention on the more voluminous accounts in Luke and John. Harmonising the various accounts of the resurrection is a tricky business. Different gospels record different people arriving at the scene and omit the accounts found in the others.

    Watching the resurrection scenes again at Easter I noticed three women who make fleeting appearances on the first Easter. We first encounter them as Mary rushes away from having met Jesus. The shot is so brief that I couldn't even to get a screen shot that wasn't blurred. Mary is rushing to get Peter and John to tell them of her discovery. The film diverts from John at this point, as in his gospel Mary rushes to get the disciples before she has seen the risen Jesus rather than after.

    Peter and John then rush to the tomb, with Mary following a way behind them. When Peter emerges we see this shot. Mary is now talking to the three women she passed earlier. However, it's unclear who these women are meant to be. Matthew's gospel records only two women going to the tomb - Mary Magdalene and "the other Mary": Mark records three - "Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome".

    Since we have already been shown Mary Magdalene going to the tomb alone, then these three women must represent a combination of the other three women recorded as witnessing the resurrection - "Mary the mother of James, the other Mary and Salome". Most scholars would, I imagine, equate "the other Mary" with "Mary the mother of James", so it's unusual that they show three figures here rather than just two. But it's interesting how the film-makers make this visual allusion to the other two resurrection accounts, without going into the details.

    This is probably because whilst the story is primarily seen through the eyes of Jairus's daughter Tamar, it also encourages the viewer to look at the story of Jesus, and, in particular, his resurrection, through the eyes of both Mary, and indeed Peter. Each of the three characters encounter the risen Jesus, and in each case we are shown the moment they see him and begin to realise what has happened through a point of view shot. To tell the story from the perspective of these women (in addition to that of Cleopas and Jairus) would, no doubt, be somewhat overbearing.

    Labels:

    Monday, April 30, 2007

    Podcast: The Miracle Maker

    It's that point in the month again when I post my latest podcast, and boy did it come around quickly this time! This month I'm looking The Miracle Maker which has recently been released in a special edition DVD. (I'll be posting some notes on the new edition of the DVD shortly.)

    The Miracle Maker is the most recent film I've discussed so far, but one of my top ten Jesus films. The five other recordings are still available to download from the podcast. They are Jesus of Nazareth, Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (The Gospel According to St. Matthew), The Greatest Story Ever Told, Jesus of Montreal and Jesus Christ, Superstar.

    Labels: , ,

    Monday, March 19, 2007

    DVD News

    There are a number of Bible films that have recently been released on DVD which I've yet to pass comment on.

    Firstly, episodes 1 and 2 of the children's animated adventure series Friends and Heroes has been released. Friends and Heroes is currently showing at lunchtimes on CBBC. Initially, the DVDs are to be released through the official website. A Friends and Heroes DVD Club has also been set up for those wanting to get the whole series. The site also includes the release schedule for the remaining episodes, the next of which is released on 14th May. Releases of Series 2 will begin on the 21st January 2008.

    Secondly, one of my favourite Jesus films, the animated film The Miracle Maker, was somehow re-released on the 6th March in a special edition without any of my usual sources or me noticing. That is, until my friend Steven D Greydanus of Decent Films found out. Steven also tipped off Peter Chattaway who has posted some interesting comments about the new DVD at FilmChat. The main extra that this disc has is a commentary with Derek Hayes (one of the directors) and one of the producers.

    Last week, Peter also noted that the release of The Final Inquiry appears to have been delayed - a date is no longer given on the FoxFaith website.

    I have also discussed previously the forthcoming releases of a The Gospel According to St. Matthew (colourised version) (26th March) and The Nativity Story (20th March).

    Labels: , , , , , , ,

    Thursday, April 20, 2006

    Miracle Maker Scene Guide

    Having discussed The Miracle Maker before Easter, I thought I would just add this scene guide> I've done it a little differently this time. Firstly I've been able to add approximate times. Secondly, although I'm still broadly following my citation policy, I've also added references to Luke's gospel and have given it preference here over Matthew's.
    [ 0 mins] Non-scriptural episodes
    [ 7 mins] Birth of Jesus – (Luke 2:6-7)
    [ 7 mins] †Shepherds – (Luke 2:16-17)
    [ 8 mins] †Boy Jesus in the temple – (Luke 2:42-50)
    [ 9 mins] Baptism of Jesus – (Mark 1:4-11)
    [11 mins] Temptation of Jesus – (Luke 4:1-13)
    [14 mins] †Mary and Martha – (Luke 10:38-42)
    [18 mins] *House on The Rock – (Matt 7:24-27)
    [21 mins] Miraculous Catch of Fish – (Luke 5:1-11)
    [26 mins] Paralytic Through the Roof – (Mark 2:1-12 / Luke 5:17-26)
    [30 mins] Choosing the 12 Disciples – (Mark 3:1-13 / Luke 6:12-26)
    [36 mins] Bleeding Woman / Jairus’ Daughter – (Mark 5:21-43 / Luke 8:40-56)
    [44 mins] Greatest like a child – (Matt 18:1-5)
    [45 mins] †Good Samaritan – (Luke 10:25-37)
    [48 mins] *Lazarus Raised From the Dead – (John 11:1-46)
    [51 mins] Triumphal Entry – (Mark 11:7-10 / Luke 19:35-38)
    [52 mins] *One Man to Die for all the People – (John 11:47-48)
    [53 mins] Cleansing the Temple – (Mark 11:15-19 / Luke 19:45-48)
    [54 mins] Taxes to Cesar? – (Mark 12:13-17 / Luke 20:20-26)
    [56 mins] Judas' Betrayal – (Mark 14:10-11 / Luke 22:1-6)
    [57 mins] The Last Supper – (Mark 14:17-31 / Luke 22:14-39)
    [59 mins] The Garden of Gethsemene – (Mark 14:32-42 / Luke 22:40-46)
    [63 mins] The Arrest – (Mark 14:43-50 / Luke 22:47-53)
    [65 mins] Peter Denies Jesus – (Luke 22:54-62)
    [66 mins] Sanhedrin Trial - (Mark 14:53-64 / Luke 22:66-71)
    [67 mins] Pilate 1st trial - (Luke 23:1-7)
    [68 mins] Before Herod - (Luke 23:8-12)
    [69 mins] Pilate 2nd trial - (Luke 23:13-25)
    [70 mins] Road to the Cross – (Mark 15:20-22 / Luke 23:26-27)
    [72 mins] Crucifixion and Death – (Mark 5:22-41 / Luke 23:33-49)
    [75 mins] Burial – (Mark 15:42-47 / Luke 15:50-56)
    [76 mins] *Appearance to Mary – (John 20:1, 11-17)
    [77 mins] *Mary Tells Peter – (John 20:18)
    [78 mins] *Peter Goes To the Tomb – (John 20:3-10; ~21:15-19)
    [79 mins] †The Upper Room – (Luke 24:33-35)
    [80 mins] †Road to Emmaus – (Luke 24:13-32)
    [81 mins] Jesus appears to the disciples – (Luke 26-38)
    [82 mins] Jesus and Thomas – (John 20:25, 27-29)
    [83 mins] †The Ascension – (Luke 24:48-53)
    A Few Notes
    The film is essentially a version of Luke's gospel, both in form and function. From a functional point of view it was created by Christians with a view of telling their story to those who don't know it. Luke's gospel is often called the "most evangelistic", and this seems to have been a key motivation for making this version.

    From a form point of view, not only the does the film follow the synoptic order of events, it also prioritises texts from Luke. So prior to the resurrection, all but 3 episodes shown are found in Luke's gospel (indicated by an asterisk*). After the resurrection the script switches to John as the primary source, such that there are a further 3 episodes not found in Luke. However, the shape of the narrative at this point remains Lucan with the discovery by women, Simon seeing Jesus (24:34), the appearance on the Road to Emmaus, and then just a single appearance to the disciples in the upper room. The Johanine inclusions are more flourishes within that broader narrative than the text that defines the text of the narrative. This made it hard to cite the relevant texts for this part of the story!

    Secondly, the story contains 7 episodes that are unique to Luke, with several others (such as the baptism scene) prioritising Luke's version over the other gospels. This is the most for any of the gospels, although a number of incidents are unique to John. Interestingly these are often moulded far more significantly by the screenwriter (Murray Watts - who deserves a great deal of credit for his skilful writing here).

    This film is also the only film that shows the Road to Emmaus episode, although the Genesis Project's extended version of Luke (from which the Jesus film was edited - see scene guide) obviously had to include it.

    The film shows more post-resurrection episodes than any other save perhaps the recent Gospel of John (2003)

    Labels: ,

    Thursday, April 13, 2006

    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.

    Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Monday, April 10, 2006

    The Miracle Maker (1999)

    I watched this again last week, and was reminded how much I liked this version of the Jesus story. It appears that despite it being relatively recent, it is largely unknown, at least outside this country.

    For those not in the know, I'll give a brief overview. The film was the product of a Russian / Welsh collaboration, by the same company who made the Testament: Bible in Animation series of 30 minute films based on stories from the Hebrew Bible. So this was the first (and still the only) feature length animated Jesus film. The majority of the film is shot using "claymation" (animation using plasticine / modelling clay as used by films such as Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the WereRabbit). This style seems to be more popular in Britain than in America.

    I've enjoyed this film many times before. It was actually only the second ever Jesus film I had seen in the cinema (the first was Jesus (1979) years ago). What is remarkable about it is that despite being filmed using plasticine figures, it catches the humanity of Jesus more than any other film. At the same time it also does a good job of catching his divinity. Viewers familiar with a number of Jesus films will know that this is one of the issues that always come up when Jesus films are discussed. The earlier films emphasised his divinity by making him seem s remote and detached. By the time King of Kings came along in 1961, film-makers were beginning to talk about putting more emphasis on his humanity, but seemed unable to free him of this remoteness. Conversely more recent films have continued in the quest to portray a more human Jesus, but seemed to have sailed straight past the target. Last Temptation of Christ portrayed a man wracked by various emotional disorders - as, I think, Lloyd Baugh pointed out, it is not the film's low view of divinity that is the problem, but it's low view of humanity. Other recent films such as the Jesus mini-series that was also released in 1999, and 1996's The Visual Bible Matthew are trying so hard to portray him as someone who liked to laugh that he ends up too much of a clown, and lacking any sense of substance.

    Somehow The Miracle Maker seems to get this just right. Jesus is incredibly good with people, he uses gentle humour in his teaching, and knows how to smile, but never compromised the sense that this is someone significant. Perhaps it's Ralph Fiennes's voice that does the work, or the fact that not using an actor makes it easier. Either way it's an incredible achievement, and one that has moved me to tears in the past. Strangely, I was never that moved by The Passion of the Christ.

    There are other things I have always loved about this film. The use of animation is excellent. For those who have not seen it, whilst most of the film is claymation, there are several scenes shown using 2D hand drawn animation. These scenes are the ones that are either flashbacks (such as the nativity episodes), or more supernatural (such as the deliverance of Mary Magdalene), or for Jesus's parables and teaching. There are numerous results of this. One is that it helps keep younger viewers engaged. Perhaps most significantly though, is that it allows the film to be more emotional and expressionistic at these more imagery-rich moments of the story.

    That said, this time round there were a few things I really only noticed for the first time. Perhaps most significantly I was struck by how historically rooted this version of the Jesus story was. I kept thinking Tom Wright would like that, and thus wasn't surprised when both he, and the now Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams were both named as advisors at the end of the film. For example, there is a scene between Pilate and the centurion long before the crucifixion where they discuss the revolt the centurion has just put down by crucifying 117 rebels. Whilst I believe the timing of this incident is not based on a specific historical incident, it does emphasise what most Jesus films miss - that Jesus's execution was, from a Roman point of view, nothing out of the ordinary.

    Later on there we are shown the post-resurrection appearance to Cleopas and companion on the Road to Emmaus. Whilst the exact quote escapes me, there is also some discussion here of what resurrection actually meant in that period.

    Which brings me on to another thing I like about the film - the attention given to the resurrection. This is probably the section of the gospels filmed with the most variation and creativity of all. Whilst some films have excluded it all together, such as Son of Man (1969), others have taken more creative, but ambiguous, interpretations (Jesus of Montreal, Jesus Christ Superstar, Last Temptation of Christ). Of those that have chosen to show a more literal interpretation, they have either given it relatively short shrift (Jesus of Nazareth) or eschewed the biblical accounts and replaced them with their own interpretations of what happened (The Passion of the Christ).

    In contrast, The Miracle Maker shows Mary finding the empty tomb (John 20:1)and then meeting the risen Jesus (John 20:11-18), Mary telling Peter, and him running to the tomb (John 20:2-7), Peter meeting Jesus (a fictionalised abbreviation of John 21:15-19), The Road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35), And the second appearance to the disciples, including Thomas (John 20:36-41), and the Ascension (Luke 24:48-53).

    I'll post a full scene guide in a few days, but if you fancy watching a Jesus film at some point over the Easter period, and you haven't seen this one yet, then I'd strongly recommend it.

    Edit [5:25pm]
    I've just noticed that Lesa Bellevie over at The Magdalene Review has also just seen this film and posted her comments on it. Obviously she's mainly concerned with Mary Magdalene, so she analyses that part of the film in some depth. There are also some pictures from the deliverance scene. FWIW this is one of the few films that actually depicts Mary along biblical, rather than traditional lines (i.e. she is someone who Jesus casts seven spirits out of and who witnesses his resurrection, but she is NOT a prostitute)

    I've also now written some notes on my Scene Guide.

    Labels: , ,