• 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, December 23, 2009

    The Nativity Story Revisited

    It's had been 3 years since I last saw The Nativity Story, indeed, after the hours spent discussing the build up to the film I had only seen it once in its entirety. So this year I decided I really should watch it again in the run up to Christmas.

    After such a long gap I was pleased to see that the film was still largely as I had remembered it. The opening scenes were still striking in their portrayal of 1st century peasant life, the latter section moved far more towards Christmas card piety. The wise men were still irritating and the weak dialogue was still exacerbated by the slightly suspect use of middle-eastern accents. This time around though I even noticed that even in the school scene the children use this exaggerated accents ("steeel small voice").

    There were a few other things I noticed this time that didn't really ring true however. Firstly, the arrival of the tax collectors in one of the early scenes seemed a bit showy. Not only were there a fairly large number of soldiers to carry out what is essentially an administrative duty (albeit one that might cause some trouble, but they all came complete with several standards and so forth. I suppose this may all be in keeping with how these things were generally done, but it didn't really ring true for me.

    But what really stood out this time was once these tax collecting soldiers had actually begun to collect money. The people cue up to offer their excuses and we see the soldiers take a man's daughter as payment. It's a fairly disturbing scene for a PG-rated film. It creates tension, and as the girl is the same age as our heroine we begin to fear for Mary. Thankfully though her father is also unable to pay his full amount, he does at least have a donkey who the soldiers can take instead.

    On seeing this Joseph, who we have already witnessed eyeing Mary up steps in and secretly pays off the soldiers to win back the family's goat. Its function is to establish Joseph as a good man. The thing is that I can't help wondering why Joseph redeems the donkey and not the daughter. It could be argued that he wants to impress Mary, but in all other matters he is happy to do his bidding through her parents. Or that he were trying to impress her father, except that he swears Mary to silence. Surely the actions of a good man with some means would be to save the other girl? This would also impress Mary (who is probably her friend and most certainly knows her), and if he wanted to help Mary's family he can always bring his offer of marriage and dowry forward a little.

    The other two things that stood out for me this time around were more positive. The first concerns the census. Herod, aware of Micah's prophecy, states that he plans to use this to try and smoke out any potential messiah. What struck me is that we only know about the census because Herod tells us about it. There's no arrival of soldiers, or a messenger of any sort, so whilst it's natural to assume that this thing has the backing of the empire, it is an assumption, and this time around there was something about the way that Ciarin Hinds delivered the line that made me suspect that it might have been his fabrication.

    If true this would be an interesting take on this problematic census. The census is recorded only in Luke, but according to non-biblical sources it did not occur until 6AD - at least 10 years after the most likely date for Jesus' birth. Is the film suggesting that Herod invented the census hence why Luke mentions it but the external evidence fails to corroborate it?

    Finally, I also noticed the scene where Mary washes Joseph's bleeding feet. This obviously anticipates Mary's son washing his disciples' feet as an adult. It's a nice detail, particularly as it is one of the few things that Mary actually chooses to do. For most of the film she is acted upon - passive rather than active.

    Labels: ,

    Thursday, December 04, 2008

    Podcast: The Nativity Story (2006)

    Regular listeners to my podcast will have realised that they are only being cast every two months at the moment, and that the end of November "entry" is late. As we're now into December, I thought it would be a good time to revisit 2006's The Nativity Story (see recent posts).

    Podcast: The Nativity Story (2006)

    Speaking of which, I note that director Catherine Hardwicke's latest film - an adaptation of vampire romance novel Twilight - opened last week (20th Nov) at the top of the charts, and, according to Box Office Mojo at least, has now become the highest grossing vampire movie of all time (when not adjusted for inflation). No wonder she's just been signed up to direct the sequel (MTV Movies).

    Edit: It now appears that Hardwicke will not be directing the Twilight sequels.

    Labels: , ,

    Wednesday, March 28, 2007

    Nativity News Vol. 20

    I realised I missed trick on Monday by only including news about the special edition DVD release of The Nativity Story in passing, and not really commenting on the Mark Moring's latest article on the film for Christianity Today.

    The news about the 2nd DVD is not really surprising. I'm amazed by the number of barebones DVDs people buy new even when it's obvious that a special edition will arrive in the not-too-distant future. I'm never sure whether dual release strategies like this are down to cynical industry marketing, or simply the fact that it takes a while to get a decent collection of extras together, and some people want the DVD as soon as possible. That said the official website store only has the single disc edition advertised at the moment.

    Moring's article is primarily about the release strategy for the film. There are comments from both director Catherine Hardwicke and producer Wyck Godfrey. Elsewhere, Christianity Today has been fielding reader's comments on why it performed poorly at the box office. (Thanks to Jeffrey Overstreet for that one).

    Anyway, the story that made me haul out another edition of Nativity News is that Peter Chattaway has produced an audio commentary for the film along with his priest Fr. Justin Hewlett. Chattaway and Hewlett figured that since the current DVD has no audio commentary, and since it's another 6+ months until the special edition will be released, they may as well do their own. It's now available to download (although be aware it's 96MB!). The idea for doing this comes from the great Roger Ebert who way back in 2002 advocated the idea of "Do-it-yourself movie commentary tracks". It's something I'd like to do myself someday, hopefully once I've got used to doing my podcast I can make the transition.

    Finally, back in October, the news broke that the star of The Nativity Story, Keisha Castle-Hughes, was pregnant. Two strange things happened shortly afterwards. Firstly, as the readers comments linked to above verify, a number of Christians decided not to see the film as a result. Secondly, someone commented on my blog that they were a friend of Castle-Hughes, and that she wasn't in fact pregnant.

    Whilst it would have been great to have such a scoop on this blog, it seems fairly certain that the comment was a red herring. As the baby should be due any time now I've done a bit of searching for news, and Celebrity Baby Blog had a picture of her from before Christmas with a very visible bump.

    Labels: ,

    Monday, March 26, 2007

    DVD News - Region 2 DVDs, The Nativity Story, The Prodigal

    One of the monthly highlights of my mail is the MovieMail Catalogue. I know it's main aim is to sell me things, yet I wish that all marketing literature was so well presented and informative. A certain degree of it's appeal is down to it's niche marketing - international and classic cinema. But there's far more to it. It's well written, works hard to be informative, keeps external ads to a minimum, and complements short capsule reviews with the occasional, longer piece on some of cinema's greatest artists. On top of all that it always brings something to my attention that I wasn't aware of previously.

    This month, though, they grabbed my attention even more than usual, devoting a whole page to "The Greatest Stories Ever Told - Films for Easter". There are a 15 DVDs/DVD collections on the page, and I hadn't realised that a number of those titles were about to be released in Region 2 format. In particular, last year I bought region 1 copies of David and Bathsheba (my review), and The Story of Ruth (my review) as they were not available over here at that stage. I was also unaware that the Passion of the Christ: Definitive Edition was due to be released over here as the Director's Edition. All three go on sale today.

    The other thing that caught my eye was The Greatest Stories Ever Told Box Set - an 8 disc set featuring The Song Of Bernadette (1943), The Robe (1953), Demetrius And The Gladiators (1954), The Story Of Ruth (1960), Francis of Assisi (1961), The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965), The Bible (1966) and The Passion Of The Christ* (2004). As this product is also released today, I suspect it's this that has been the driving force behind the article in general. *There does seem to be some confusion as to the films included in the collection. Both MovieMail's in print catalogue, and its website list the films as shown above. Amazon, however, includes The Agony and the Ecstasy instead of The Passion of the Christ.

    The other films mentioned by the feature have all been available on DVD for sometime - The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, Jesus of Nazareth, The Last Temptation of Christ and Jesus of Montreal. You can subscribe to the free MovieMail Film Catalogue by going through the registration procedure on the MovieMail website.

    Elsewhere, Peter Chattaway is once again a valuable source of information. We both predicted that despite last week's DVD release of the "extras lite" version of The Nativity Story, a "special edition" would be released fairly soon. So it was not a huge surprise to find out from an article on the Christianity Today Movies website that they are going "to release a two-disc special edition just before Christmas". Anyone interested in that film should definitely read that article. It's something of a post-mortem on why the film failed at the box office. Hardwicke's disappointment is as tangible as the love she so obviously still feels for the project.

    Peter's other discovery is the release of the 1955 epic The Prodigal. Like Peter, I've never seen this film either. It's never been released on DVD, nor, as far as I'm aware, has it been released in any other format in the UK. All that will change when Warner Home Video release it as part of their Cult Camp Classics 4: Historical Epics collection alongside The Colossus of Rhodes (1961) and Land of the Pharaohs (1955). As Peter notes it's the only film to be produced that is about a parable. There are several films that seek to re-tell a parable without any direct reference to its original source, but this one actually pretends to be telling the story that Jesus was referring to in "The Prodigal Son"/"The Forgiving Father" (Luke 15). It's a highly spurious notion of course. Only the most hard-line literalist would consider that when Jesus begins a story with "There was a man who had two sons" he was recounting an event that actually happened. However, I imagine such a comment is to take the film far more seriously than it actually takes itself.

    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: , , , , , , ,

    Tuesday, February 20, 2007

    More on a New David Film

    Early last month I linked to news that J. Michael Straczynski was writing a film about David. Peter Chattaway thinks he has heard about this film from another source, producer Ralph Winter. Winter is interviewed by Infuze Magazine and drops in this little piece of information
    I've read a couple of scripts lately based on Old Testament stories. One of them is about David, and his rise from a shepherd to becoming the anointed king. And it's gritty. It's brutal. It's reflective of the time. And it's not written by a Christian. But it's a compelling story, and that's the kind of movie I want to make!
    As Peter notes, that sounds very similar to Straczynski's script, the safe bet would be that this is the same film.

    Certainly I'm encouraged by these two soundbites. The story of David is grizzly, and the biblical writers almost seems to revel in the little details here and there like Philistine foreskins and people getting caught by their hair in trees and so on.

    Winter also makes some comments about The Nativity:
    ...it's a straight-ahead retelling of the story, and there's a lack of mystery to it. I think they toned down some of the violence, afraid that some Christians would be turned off by it...Ultimately, it's just not transcendent enough to inspire me. My wife liked it more than I did. And I hope to see it again, so maybe I'll feel differently. It's got all the right production values, but it doesn't have that mysterious missing element that takes it to another level.

    Labels: , , ,

    Tuesday, January 23, 2007

    Nativity News vol.19

    Here's a series I didn't think I'd be resurrecting until much later in the year! Over at FilmChat Peter Chattaway has revealed that The Nativity Story will be released on DVD on the 20th March (which, as he notes, is in time for the Feast of the Annunciation on the 25th).

    I think this must be part of a multi-layered DVD marketing strategy. The obvious time for a DVD release would be around October, so it is in people's minds in the run up to Christmas. The fact that this version of the DVD has no special features (other than one of the two trailers) even though there were 5 featurettes on the official website, suggests a special edition DVD release will be made available later, perhaps even as early as this Christmas (as I originally expected). There will, however, be both widescreen and "full-frame" version of the film on the disc, something which might not be available in later releases.

    Labels: ,

    Wednesday, January 03, 2007

    Book Review - The Nativity Story - Contemplating Mary's Journeys of Faith.

    Whilst the stories about the birth of Jesus are celebrated by Christians of all denominations, the Roman Catholic church has a particular affinity with them due to the special prominence they give to Jesus's mother, Mary. Thus many Roman Catholic believers, particularly women, have spent much time contemplating her story, and, more importantly, her faith. It is fitting then that a collection of essays by different authors outlining some of their own reflections on Mary has been put together to accompany the film The Nativity Story. Such a compilation is hardly novel, I'm sure many similar works have been created celebrating Mary's faith, but this books link to the movie is something new. And for those of a Catholic persuasion, it's a rather good idea, putting a fresh twist on a much loved, time honoured, practice. The Nativity Story will undoubtedly encourage Christians of all persuasions to consider the faith of Mary afresh, and one would expect that this book would be able to facilitate exactly that.

    That said, other than the front cover, the photographs that introduce each chapter and the introduction by Sister Rose Pacatte, the book doesn't have a great deal to do with the actual film. Hardly any of the essayists even mention the film. (It is, of course, fairly well known that the film was rushed through production in less than a year, suggesting that publication dates which would be incredibly tight. It would seem likely then that few of the authors would have even seen the film at the time of their writing). That's not a criticism of the book as such. It had a clear remit, which it fulfils well, but potential buyers should be clear that this book does not really contain any analysis of the film itself.

    The 11 essays look at a number of the different facets of Mary's spiritual journey. Indeed the title of each essay begins "Mary's Journey of/to…" and they take the reader through such topics as faith, love, surrender, fear and doubt, and everyday life. The first page of each chapter has a photo from the film, before giving a brief biography of the author. The essays start with a section of one of the gospel accounts before 10 or so page mix of commentary, story, reflections on the author's own life, and relevant anecdotes. Each chapter concludes with a number of questions "To Ponder".

    Overall the various chapters make fairly interesting reading for a lay audience, with some insightful comments about the story and what we can learn about life through reflecting on it. Judith Ann Zielinski's essay "Mary's Journey to Elizabeth" was a personal highlight. Rose Pacatte's introduction also contains a couple of interesting points such as a quote from André Bazin. That said, much of it is common to her other Pauline Books and Media publication on The Nativity Story, "A Film Study Guide for Catholics".

    One of the difficulties about compiling a book like this is avoiding too much common material. Overall the book does this reasonably well, although there are a few times that it repeats particular details that ideally should have been edited out. It becomes a little tiresome, for example, to be informed a number of times that Mary could possibly faced being stoned.

    Those who found The Nativity Story inspired them to find out more about Mary will enjoy this book. The relatively brief chapters (approx. 10 pages), and simple language will mean even reasonably young teens will find it readable. As teenagers are perhaps the age group most likely to be inspired by this film's portrayal in particular, then this is certainly a good thing. It is, of course, difficult for a male, 30-something, British, non-Catholic male reviewer to really know the impact a particular book could have on the average teenage Catholic girl. Perhaps what we would have in common would be our relative inexperience at learning from Mary. This book and the film helped me in that respect, and I at least suspect that it will help many others too.

    Labels: , ,

    Tuesday, January 02, 2007

    Similarities Between The Nativity Story and Joseph of Nazareth

    I saw The Nativity Story back in November. The night before I watched the Bible Collection's Joseph of Nazareth from the "Close to Jesus" series. Watching the two films in such close proximity I was struck by a number of similarities between the two films and I've been meaning to post something on this ever since.

    It is of course only natural that there will be some similarities between the two films as the cover the same incidents (the birth of Jesus) using the same narrative strategy (harmonising the two differing accounts), setting (first century Palestine), and approach (attempting to be historically accurate). But there are also a number of similarities which were quite striking watching the two films in such close proximity. I'll summarise these as a list first of all, and then add a few comments.


    • Both films depict Herod as a builder, taking a hands on approach to his building projects.
    • Both films note how Herod killed two of his sons for plotting against him (even though these events occurred well before the birth of Jesus)
    • Mary's parents (Joaquim and Anna) feature fairly prominently in both films.
    • Both films make a point of stressing that Mary and Joseph will not be able to consummate their relationship for a year after their initial betrothal. Both times it's inserted into the dialogue quite awkwardly.
    • In Joseph of Nazareth Elizabeth knows that Mary is pregnant without being told, and Mary responds by saying "how did you know"? The Nativity Story this is repeated and Mary's response is almost identical "how could you know"?
    • In both films Joseph finds out that Mary is pregnant after her visit to Elizabeth.
    • Both films have Joseph carefully checking with Mary that a soldier hasn't raped her.
    • Neither film has Mary gaining any assistance from other women during the birth
    • In Matthew, Herod only becomes aware of, and concerned by, the birth of a messiah from Bethlehem after the visit of the Magi. Both films show it as a known concern well before the Magi visit.
    • Both films prefigure Jesus clearing the temple. In Joseph of Nazareth, Joseph and Jesus are both equally disappointed by the state of the money changers etc. they find in the temple when Jesus visits at the age of 12. In The Nativity Story the comment is made by Joseph alone.
    • Neither film shows the host of heaven appearing to the Shepherds. In The Nativity Story there is only a solitary angel. In Joseph of Nazareth we see only their reaction.
    • Neither film includes Jesus's circumcision in Jerusalem, nor the presence of Simeon and Anna.


    Now, as mentioned above, a number of these similarities would be expected, particularly as there is a great deal of tradition about Mary's parents, or the "three wise men". The attempts at historical accuracy might even go someway to explaining why the same additional details about Herod are included, even though they require the true timescale to be compressed to accommodate this.

    Yet there are also a number of similarities which would be far less expected. Mary's almost identical response to Elizabeth, the awkward explanatory insertion regarding the "year's wait" before marriage is completed, questions about being attacked, or forced, and the comments about the temple (and these are gained from a single viewing of The Nativity Story.

    Furthermore, the characterisations in the two films are all very similar. Herod and his son, Joaquim, Elizabeth, Joseph, the magi. Interestingly, it is the character of Mary, where there is actually the most biblical material, where the divergence is greatest. That said consider how similarly Joseph's discovery of the pregnancy is played. Mary and Joseph are reunited after a long time apart, Joseph finds out through someone else's reaction. Mary says very little whilst Joseph cross-examines her, raises the possibility of rape, and the options for divorce are laid out. Joseph goes off to gain advice, but finds himself accused. Mary remains steadfast about her innocence. Once he has had his dream, however, he is then overjoyed when God explains to him in a dream.

    Yet consider the potential variations even given the self-imposed restriction of sticking to the biblical text. Mary could have told Joseph before she went away, or she could have outlined clearly what happened more actively, or her father could have (and no doubt would have) been the one to do the explaining. Joseph may not have needed to have options laid out for him by a Rabbi. Mary's assurance could have been shaken by this incident, Joseph may have been less than happy with his own role.

    Some scriptwriters like to examine other version of the story they are about to write, others avoid them like the plague lest they interfere with their creative vision. I never had the chance to interview Mike Rich, but I would love to have asked him what his approach is, and if he had seen Joseph of Nazareth. Some of the similarities are quite striking.

    Labels: , , ,

    Friday, December 22, 2006

    Nativity News vol.18

    This could well be the last piece of 'Nativity News' for a while (although I will be interested to see how it performs over Christmas). Firstly, the film has now opened pretty much worldwide, and has had its second and third weekends on general release in the States. The news in terms of Box Office income is not good. Off the back of a fairly bad opening first weekend, it came in 8th for its second weekend, taking just $5.7 million (in the US) to bring it's total up to $15.9 million. Then this last weekend it took just $4.7 million. So it's total gross to date is $25.6 million with an added $6.1 million from worldwide sales(Box Office Mojo). This is still less than it's initial budget (given as $35 million, although some reports think it may be much higher once marketing and publicity are taken into account). I'm still hoping that word spreads and as Christmas draws near people will see it in greater numbers. The worry at this stage is that theatres will start dumping it before Christmas comes. Perhaps nostalgia and/or sentimental Christmas spirit will prevail. Whilst there are no major films still to be released before Christmas (Charlotte's Web and Rocky Balboa are small fry compared to previous years' offerings such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy Harry Potter and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe), it's poor performance thus far might signal an untimely demise.

    If so, who should take the blame? Mike Rich, for writing a screenplay that lacks the controversy to create a media storm? New Line for going after those Passion dollars? Grace Hill Media, and the other publicity organisations for assuming that they could pull off the same stunts that worked for The Passion and get away with it? No doubt some Christian movie commentators will blame anti-Christian bias in the media, but at the end of the day it's the churches that have failed to come out in support so far. Phil Cooke summed it up nicely.
    I don't understand this at all. Christians complain that Hollywood isn't making good family films anymore - and we REALLY complain that they don't make films with Christian content, but when they do, we don't show up.
    As a side note we organised a screening of the film as a Christmas Event at our church. Our previous plans had to be cancelled at short notice, and our church is young and fairly media savvy, so we decided to go for it, and the event went very well. Lots of people turned up, and most that I've spoken to thought the film was good (most rated it more higly than I did). The problem though is typified by the fact that most of them hadn't heard of it until we told them about it, and few churches seem to be getting behind it in a similar way. I'm not saying that every church should do what we did - far from it - but it seems strange to me that so many churches embraced Gibson's gore-fest, but have ignored this one. Something, somewhere, doesn't seem right about that.

    Anyway, I've got a few more reviews to post. Having posted reviews from some of the more major media outlets last week, I'm going to look at more of the reviewers that I find interesting, so there are a few more biblical scholars here this time as well as a couple of other notables.

    First up there's Jeffrey Overstreet. Jeffrey was the person I learnt about this movie from, and his enthusiasm for Catherine Hardwicke's appointment stoked my own. He'd already posted his interview with Mike Rich, but whilst he found that "few (writers) have been as eloquent as Rich " he did think much of his movie. I think I agree with most of the problems Jeffrey finds in the film, but I don't think they bothered me as much as they did him, and I think I was more impressed by the positives. I'm pleased though that he's dared to question the quality of a film that is "faithful to scripture".

    A more positive review come from Nativity Story blogger Queen Spoo. Her blog has been an invaluable source of information over the last year, and it's nice to read a review by someone who knows her subject so well. She gives it a B+ and makes a couple of interesting observations such as linking the double quotation of 1 Kings 19:11-12 to the change in the wind that occurs at the Annunciation.

    Elsewhere biblical scholars Ben Witherington III and Scott McKnight have posted their reviews. McKnight's opening seems very positive, but then he seems to get somewhat distracted by the absence of the Magnificat. Witherington goes a step further and suggests the film will become a classic. He mentions one of the things I appreciated about the film, but haven't had time to comment on yet - the portrayal of Joseph as a teknis (craftsmen), rather than more specifically a carpenter. Whilst I'm on that aspect of the film, I liked how the film portrayed Joseph as being more affluent than Mary's family, and how that influenced her family's decision to marry her off for a much needed dowry. This harsh reality seems far removed from our society which is so affluent it is unthinkable of marrying for the money and not for love (apart from one or two famous names).

    Then we also have Mark Goodacre's review which has evolved from his few initial thoughts into its present format. He found a few historical anachronisms, and hated the angelic appearances, but was otherwise pretty impressed.

    No word yet from Tyler Williams, if he does post a review, I'll probably add it on here rather than start a new post.

    You can read all my posts on this film from my Nativity Story Central Page.

    Labels: ,

    Wednesday, December 13, 2006

    Peter Chattaway on Ethnicity in Jesus Films

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

    Labels: , , , ,

    Tuesday, December 12, 2006

    Book Review: "The Nativity Story", A Film Study Guide for Catholics.

    I wanted to look at some of the official resources for The Nativity Story. Since there is such an abundance of different books about the film, going back to even before it opened ten days ago, I obviously won't be able to discuss them all, but I thought I'd like to look at one or two in some detail.

    As I mentioned back in October, there are two resources for this film produced by Pauline Books and Media, written by Rose Pacette. Pacette has written a number of books on Faith and Film, including the three part "movie lectionary" series "Lights, Camera, Faith!" which she co-wrote with Peter Malone. She was also one of the advisors for The Nativity Story (her report on the film is available online).

    As the title "study guide" suggests the book is relatively short (28 pages), and divides into four sections. The first section is a general introduction to the film, sub-divided in two - one part introducing the study guide, and one introducing the film. Each of the remaining three sections forms a study guide for different settings - one for personal use, one for (small) group study, and one for a whole community. Each of these latter three sections is nicely tailored to suit the appropriate group, and the final section breaks down into sections for each of the significant dates over the Advent / Christmas period. For each dates there are questions for adults, teens and children.

    The book is unashamedly Catholic, even specifying in its subtitle that it is a "study guide for Catholics". That said, it's ecumenical enough to be very easy to adapt for individuals, groups and communities from other traditions. Whilst it mentions specifically Catholic things such as the Rosary, the Hail Mary, the Imaculate Conception and the Catechesis, they are largely incidental to the book's thrust, and could easily be passed over if so desired. Furthermore, non-Catholic groups may benefit from some of the explanation around the more Marian aspects included here. I personally found the perspective on the Hail Mary quite informative.

    At 28 pages, the book feels about the right length for most church-goers who aren't specialists in film. It doesn't introduce a lot of technical film words and phrases, and provides a good basis in theory for using film to deepen understanding. It also benefits from being written by someone who has had such close access to the film during production. In particular, Pacette has obviously had the time to fully contemplate the film and weigh its various strengths without having to rush that part of the process(critical for a work such as this) in order to meet a deadline.

    Whilst this study guide is ideally suited to Roman Catholics, it is a useful tool for anyone that wants to use The Nativity Story as a way of thinking deeply about the events of the first Christmas.

    Labels: , ,

    Thursday, December 07, 2006

    The Nativity Story - Scene Analysis

    As promised earlier in the week here is my scene guide for The Nativity Story (my review). This might contain some spoilers, though obviously the story is pretty well known. You can read all my posts on the film at this link.
    Screen Quote - (Jer 23:5-6)
    Slaughter of the infants - (Matt 2:16)
    Zecariah's vision - (Luke 1:5-22)
    Nazareth School - (1 Ki 19:11-12)
    [extra-biblical episode - Tax collection]
    Magi see the star - (Matt 2:1)
    Mary and Joseph Engaged - (Luke 1:27)
    Annunciation - (Luke 1:26-38)
    [extra-biblical episode - Journey to Elizabeth]
    Elizabeth's greeting - (Luke 1:39-56)
    [extra-biblical episode - Magi]
    Birth of John - (Luke 1:57-66)
    John's circumcision - (1 Ki 19:11-12)
    [extra-biblical episodes - Mary returns, Herod and son]
    Joseph plans to divorce her quietly - (Matt 1:18-19)
    Joseph's dream - (Matt 1:20-24; Is 7:14?)
    [extra-biblical episode - Herod and son II]
    Journey to Bethlehem - (Luke 2:1-5, Zech 9:9?)
    [extra-biblical episodes - Journey to Bethlehem]
    Magi and Herod - (Luke 2:1-8)
    [extra-biblical episode - Meeting the Shepherds]
    Birth - (Luke 2:6-7)
    Shepherds and the Angels - (Luke 2:8-16)
    Visit of the Magi - (Matt 2:9-11)
    Magi return - (Matt 2:12 (sort of))
    Escape to Egypt/Death of Infants - (Matt 2:13-18)
    Closing Voiceover - (Luke 1:51-53)
    Notes
    This is obviously a harmonised version of the two birth narratives from the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Most of the text from the gospel birth narratives are included here, and, as Mark Goodacre points out, the omissions are generally justified in order to combine the two different versions into a single, smoothly flowing narrative. The main omissions are the full text of the Magnificat, Zechariah's prayer, a host of angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus's presentation in the temple, and the magi's dream is replaced by them deciding for themselves that visiting Herod might not be the best plan. Only one of these items is really an episode - that of the temple appearance, and as Mark points out this has to be sacrificed in order to get the shepherds and the wise men there at the same time. Personally, I wish they had included this scene as I find it quite inspiring, and had decided not to have the shepherds and wise men arrive together. That is not supported by either text, and the contrast between stable (Luke) and house (Matt) and Herod's decision to kill all males in Bethlehem under the age of 2 (having learned when the star first appeared) suggest to me that if the gospel accounts are to be harmonised then the wise men should arrive some time later.

    Steven D Greydanus of Decent Films notes in his review how the film seems to chop the inspiring and beloved words of the Magnificat and Zechariah's prayer. He notes how "these omissions are all the more curious precisely because the whole challenge with these scenes is the paucity of source material". I can see both sides on this one, particular as I found the added dialogue quite poor in places. But I have also seen various people try and act out the words from the Magnificat and it is always poorly executed, and feels very forced and static.

    Two omissions that neither Steven nor Mark mention relate to the effect that these two miraculous births had on those who witnessed them. Following the birth of John Luke 1:65 notes how " All their neighbours were filled with awe and the whole affair was talked about throughout the hill country of Judaea". Likewise, once the shepherds have seen Jesus Luke records how "when they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child". This emphasis on not just hearing the news about what God was doing, but telling is others is something of a Lucan theme, and leaving it out does, to a degree, make it easier to relegate the story to "just a story". These verses are nearly always omitted from filmed versions of the nativity stories. I'd love to see them covered one day.

    As with the source material, there are a few Old Testament verses used as well. As I noted in my review the account of Elijah hearing God's after the earthquake wind and fire is referred to twice. There is also the opening quotation from Jeremiah 23:5-6, something that sounds like it might be based on Zech 9:9, and some quotation from Joseph''s dream that I missed completely, but I think is probably Is 7:14. That's one to check next time I see this.

    I have a few more points to make about this film before I'm done, but I'll save those for future posts.

    Labels: , ,

    Monday, December 04, 2006

    Nativity News vol.17

    There are a huge number of reviews floating around for The Nativity Story - Rotten Tomatoes alone has 102 (which doesn't even include mine!). Interestingly, whilst their general rating seems to be settling down around 41%, the Cream of the Crop reviewers are on 57%. (Scoring higher for the cream of the crop than the normal reviewers is practically is almost the definition of an art house movie). Elsewhere, Metacritic.com currently has moved up to a rating of 53%. The film did fairly poorly at the box office though. Box Office Mojo reports that it made just over $8 million, coming in 4th overall, in what is traditionally a poorly attended weekend. That said the claim of New Line exec. David Tuckerman that the film did badly at the box office because of poor weather seems to be him clutching at straws. The weekend as a whole was up by about $2 million on the same weekend last year. Here's a bit form Box Office Mojo's weekend summary
    This year, though, saw the super-wide launch of The Nativity Story, but the birth of Christ proved far less popular than the death of Christ.

    The Nativity Story bore an estimated $8 million at 3,183 theaters, crumbs compared to The Passion of Christ's $83.8 million not that it was ever expected to replicate that unique phenomenon. New Line Cinema's $35 million re-telling of the Biblical yarn, positioned for the Christmas holiday like The Passion was for Lent and Easter, was Hollywood's first explicitly Christian movie to come in the wake of The Passion, but performed more in line with the independent Christian pictures, like One Night with the King. Against a raft of Nativity displays and festive secular Christmas fare, The Nativity Story lacked the oomph to be a theatrical must.
    I do think that this one will do a bit better as Christmas draws nearer. In many ways, it feels too early to watch a film about the Nativity just yet. My suspicion is that the marketing strategy is to get a few people to see this film early and hope that they will spread the word to others so as to get bigger audiences as Christmas draws nearer.

    Anyway here are a pick of reviews from a mix of film dedicated publications, major news outlets, and a few other interesting commentators. Readers will be pleased to know I'm not going to comment on each one individually...
    Entertainment Weekly
    Slant
    Variety
    filmcritic.com
    Hollywood Reporter
    Shadows on the Wall
    IGN.com
    CNN
    Los Angeles Times [Kenneth Turan]
    Washington Post
    New York Times
    San Francisco Chronicle [Mick LaSalle]
    The New York Times
    The Globe and Mail (Toronto)
    Boston Globe
    Decent Films - faith on film [Steven D. Greydanus]
    Eric D. Snider
    Christianity Today [Peter T. Chattaway]
    Christianity Today [David Neff]
    Looking Closer [Jeffrey Overstreet]
    Darrel Manson
    Frederica Mathewes-Green
    There are a few other pieces I'd like to mention. Over at NT Gateway, Mark Goodacre posts his initial thoughts, as does Mark Roberts.

    Elsewhere, the UK's
    The Guardian
    has a nice preview piece by Hannah Patterson.

    There are also stacks of interviews with a number of the major players. I don't have time to list them all, but thankfully, Queen Spoo is a great deal more on the ball than I am. Peter Chattaway (who has now collected his all his posts on this film together) has got a number of articles up, Mary in the Movies for Christianity Today, plus previews at Christian News, and ChristianWeek, plus of course his review as noted above. He has also posted additional excerpts from his various interviews with Oscar Isaac (Joseph), Shohreh Aghdashloo (Elizabeth and director Catherine Hardwicke. Speaking of Hardwicke, CT's Mark Moring has also interviewed her.

    In other Nativity News Queen Spoo has various new video bits including footage from the premiere (as well as an audio file and PowerPoint), and a behind the scenes promotional video.

    Well I think that's all for now(!). I'll be posting a scene guide later this week to complement my review

    Labels: ,

    Friday, December 01, 2006

    The Nativity Story Review

    No sooner had Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ had its massive opening weekend, than it became inevitable that biblical epics would soon be back on our screens. Hollywood may not be religious as it once was, but it can still smell a buck. So, hot on the heels of the critical acclaim for the independently released Mary (by Abel Ferrara), and Mark Dornford-May’s Jezile (Son of Man) comes New Line’s The Nativity Story.

    The Nativity Story is actually the first bible film produced by a major Hollywood studio since Richard Gere donned a dodgy wig for King David 20 years ago. Eager to avoid the box office failure of that film, New Line have been pretty canny in their choice. In Mike Rich, they have a writer whose mainstream Christianity will be popular with US evangelicals, and in Catherine Hardwicke they have a director with such critical acclaim for her previous work that even the most ardent Christian-sceptic film critics have been prepared to suspend judgement. The film's one marketing glitch is that it is far less controversial than The Passion potentially losing hours of free publicity as a result. A few uninspired journalists have tried to whip up a bit of controversy over lead actress Keisha Castle-Hughes' unexpected pregnancy, but otherwise there is not much to report.

    The story of the nativity is one that it is so well known, and so central to western culture, that it is hard to believe that so few films have been made about it. Just one theatrically released, English language, feature film has been made about Jesus' birth since 1914. True, a few films have used it as a prologue to the adult life of Jesus, but its comparative absence amongst the super-abundance of Christmas films is staggering.

    Yet despite its uniqueness, it can't quite decide what kind of bible film it wants to be. The title suggests a mythic retelling, perhaps aimed at the family, yet the early scenes have a gritty, realistic feel to them. Later on though the film morphs into a sort of road movie as Mary and Joseph get acquainted and start to appreciate one another. Then it changes gear yet again once the holy couple reaches Bethlehem. The last remaining vestiges of realism are swiftly ditched and out comes a touch of the Christmas magic. The light from the star shines through a hole in the roof and makes the coldest and dampest of caves seem warm and lovely. Finally, the film ends with the new family fleeing from Herod, ending the film as if it's the close of part 1 of an action trilogy.

    It's not that there is anything particularly wrong with any of these different styles; it just leads to a very uneven film. It would have been far better to choose one style and stick with it throughout. For me, it's the gritty realistic style that the movie opens with that serves the film best. Catherine Hardwicke has made a name for herself both as a production designer and as a director of realistic films about teenagers from poor families. Here both talents blend together marvellously in the opening scenes. Nazareth is recreated more believably here than in any other Jesus film to date, save possibly Pier Paolo Pasolini's Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo. Arguably late-twentieth-century scholarship's greatest contribution to our understanding of Jesus is the additional insights it has given us into the peasant world that Jesus was born into. Writers, such as John Dominic Crossan, have emphasised how ordinary people in first century Galilee existed barely a whisker above poverty and destitution. The first half-hour of this movie captures this brilliantly. As the camera weaves between the crumbling dwellings it takes in the dirt of peasant life. It's a world where people sell on their small surpluses to neighbours, and are nearly always working at one small task or another, children as well as adults. Where pre-mature tax collection or failed harvests mean catastrophe. The fields are not full of post-agricultural revolution golden grain, but straggling plants seeking to work their way out of the mud. It's easy to see that this world would incubate a revolutionist dream, a fact underlined by the failed, crucified zealots that are shockingly encountered, not as something extraordinary, but just as part of every day life.

    Yet the film not only emphasises the hopes for a military messiah, but also indicates that this is not the way God works. Twice 1 Kings 19:11 is recited as people recall how Elijah hears God not in the wind, fire and earthquake but in the still small voice. Jesus would come from small and humble beginnings not Herod's grand and imposing palace. Herod's fear of a king not of his line is nicely portrayed by Ciarin Hinds who has managed to play both Herod and Caesar within the space of a year or two. He is one of four fathers in the film, all of which are performed very well. Stanley Townsend as Zechariah creates one of the film's most touching scenes despite being mute for the majority of his screen time. As Mary's father, Shaun Toub, encapsulates the toll his way of life takes. There's a heaviness to his every move, and his drawn face speaks of a life that has felt long and hard.

    Toub is one of a number of non-white members of the cast, another factor which adds to the authenticity of the film. Keisha Castle Hughes is Maori, Shoreh Agadashoo, who plays Elizabeth is Iranian, Hiam Abbas (Mary's mother Anna) was actually born in Nazareth, whilst Oscar Isaac (Joseph) has his roots in Guatemala. As the fourth father, Isaac's performance is probably the best of the lot. Whilst the screenplay harmonises the emphasis on Joseph from Matthew's gospel, with the emphasis on Mary from Luke, the film is marginally more concerned with her story than his. Yet Isaac's performance makes Joseph the most interesting and compelling character. This becomes his story and his journey. It's often been noted how difficult it is to portray good characters in an interesting manner, and Isaac has only the single personality trait, "righteous", to go by. Yet he manages to not only embody this characteristic at the start of the film, but also to improve upon it as the picture progresses. Whilst his evident desire for the teenage Mary is initially uncomfortable for us, there is never any suggestion that it is untoward. One of the best scenes in the film is when he has a dream about stoning Mary only to be prevented from doing so by an angel.

    But the writing often fails to live up to this scene's promise. All too often the dialogue seems forced, awkward or clunky. The use of middle eastern accents works in many ways but only serves to highlight the weaknesses in the script. Elsewhere it labours to present unnecessary, overly earnest factual background information, taking the viewer right out of the narrative flow with such passages far more suited to an educational movie. Would a star gazing magi really talk to his colleague about the planet that "the Romans call Jupiter" as if it was the first time they had discussed it? Similarly, Joseph's description of a shepherd's lifestyle is all very interesting, but he may as well have directly addressed the camera as painfully try to pass it off as the kind of thing one would actually say to the daughter of a goat owner just before she gives birth?

    It's also highly debatable whether substituting the three stooges for the magi really works. It gives the film more of that Twenty First century Christmas schmaltz and undoes so much of the good work in making the film realistic. There are moments of genuine humour, but it detracts from the flow of the film, rather than enhances it.

    All of which is a shame, because overall the film is more good than bad, just. Sadly the film betrays the fact that it was a rush-job. Keen to cash in on The Passion of the Christ, New Line forced this project through within a year of writer Mike Rich sitting down to start the screenplay. It's a shame that they didn't give the film another year in order to re-work its bad parts, build on the good and create a film truly worthy of the subject matter.

    Labels: ,

    Thursday, November 23, 2006

    Nativity News vol.16

    I finally get to see The Nativity Story this afternoon, and so thought I would have a last minute hunt for extra information.

    Over at FilmChat there are a number of different pieces on the film since I last blogged about the film.

    Firstly, he notes how there seems to be a move in some quarters to stir up controversy over Kaisha Castle-Hughes' alleged pregnancy. I say alleged because on Saturday I got an anonymous comment from someone claiming both that they were a friend of Castle-Hughes and that she is not pregnant. Make of that what you will. It's unclear from the interview snippets that Peter includes whether or not producers Marty Bowen and Wyck Godfrey are simply going on media reports, or direct information from Castle-Hughes herself. I have no idea how much contact they would have with each other after the film has wrapped, particularly if Castle-Hughes is not contractually obliged to be part of the film's promotional material.

    Secondly, he finds that both Time and Variety are desperately in need of fact checkers. Variety's error actually comes in their (early posted) review of the film, by Todd McCarthy who finds The Nativity Story as disappointing as he found Color of the Cross. Time's article is more of a standard preview affair

    Peter also looks at the age difference between Joseph and Mary in comparison to Marianne and Col. Brandon in Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility.

    Elsewhere Mark Moring has interviewed Oscar Isaac (who plays Joseph) for Christianity Today Movies. As I mentioned a week or two back, prior to this interview there have been very few interviews with the cast for this film, so it's good to her one with one of the two leads.

    There is also an article on the film at the LA Times.

    Labels: ,

    Monday, November 20, 2006

    Nativity News vol.15

    Four brief pieces of news on The Nativity Story all of which are distinctly lukewarm-off-the-press, but worth mentioning for completeness if nothing else.

    Firstly, the premiere is to be staged at The Vatican, which I guess is a far greater seal of approval than the film-makers could possibly have hoped for. Certainly it's a far greater show of enthusiasm than the undignified hushing up of the last pope's alleged statement on The Passion of the Christ "it is as it was".

    Secondly, some Christian reviewers have ignored the usual standard of waiting until a day or two before a film's release before publishing reviews of it. Jeffrey Overstreet is particularly amusing  regarding one of those reviews, (primarily because of one or two bizarre comments). It's better if you read it for yourself than have me hack it down to size. The other has been posted at the In the Open Space blog. I'm not sure what to make of this. Personally I plan to hold my review until the film opens, but at the same time I can't see why church leaders are being invited to watch the film unless they are meant to share their opinions with their congregations and whip up a bit of interest before it is released.

    Then there's another preview piece in Newsweek.

    Finally, Queen Spoo points out that the Moviefone site has 7 clips of the film to view. 

    (By the way, if you're wondering why there aren't any pictures, it's because I'm on holiday for a few days and I'm emailing it in)

    Labels: ,

    Thursday, November 09, 2006

    Nativity News vol.14

    Queen Spoo is doing a bang up job of keeping on top of all the various interviews and articles that are being written on The Nativity Story. I guess it will be pretty crazy on this front between now and the middle of December.

    Leading the charge is Christianity Today Magazine, who have an impressively large online film section. They have another interview with writer Mike Rich (Holy Family Man)and a look at the Music and Marketing for "Nativity" which reveals that the score for the film will be available on Dec. 5. There's also an interview with producer Wyck Godfrey called For Unto us a Film is Born. I'm not quite sure what to make of this part of the interview with Godfrey

    CT: That sounds like one of a number of "God things" you could point to along the way.
    Godfrey: Yes. The probability of being able to pull this off in such a short amount of time is so small that you just start to say, "It's ordained. There's a power behind getting this thing done. And it's not ours."
    At first I was really cynical about this answer, when someone making a film targeted at a Christian audience starts making claims like this I get a bit nervous. I remembered having similar misgivings about some of Mel Gibson's claims in the run up to The Passion of the Christ like his claim that "the Holy Ghost was working through me on this film".1 If film-makers claim that God is behind their film it makes it difficult for anyone to criticise it, particularly those within the church. But then I realised that Godfrey is really only responding to a very leading question from CT, almost as if they desperately want to hear that God is behind the film (Please see the edited note regarding this comment). In that context, Godfrey's answer actually plays things down a little. CT are specific about who is doing what in the film. Godfrey isn't placing any bets.

    There's also a piece on Shohreh Aghdashloo called Getting Biblical: Shohreh Aghdashloo's New Epic Drama in Payvand (a free press Iranian news site). It does make me wonder though at how few interviews etc. there seem to be with the actors in this film. Queen Spoo posted one with Alexander Siddig (Gabriel) 6 weeks ago, but other than this short piece with Keisha Castle-Hughes which was part of a larger piece by Christianity Today (again!) there's been very little. Obviously Castle-Hughes is pregnant now, and presumably is still trying to do her best at school, but it seems strange that, say, Oscar Isaac who plays Joseph hasn't been interviewed, he's hardly a major name, but then who had heard of Mike Rich a year ago?

    There are also a few other overviews of this film. The New York Times gives it a fairly detailed write up in a piece called They Have Seen the Light, and it is Green which includes interviews with Hardwicke, Rich, and producers Wyck Godfrey and Marty Bowen. CNN also mentions as part of a preview of forthcoming Christmas movies Claus. Santa Claus. (And other holiday film stars). There are a few more articles in the Christian press as well. Oscar Isaac is on the front page of Catholic Digest, and there's a brief overview in Christian Post Reporter called "Nativity Story" to hit the big holiday screen.

    There are a couple of marketing developments as well. The poster for the movie has now been released, which is surprisingly different from the promotional images that have been used thus far. The iconic silhouette of Mary, Joseph and donkey up against the skyline is part of the image, but the poster manages to draw attention to various aspects of it without over-emphasising one. Queen Spoo also has a
    link to the German trailer and a few more pictures from the film.

    You can read all my posts on this film from my Nativity Story Central Page.

    EDIT: Having written this post on Thursday I began to regret this part of this post, in particular the phrase "they desperately want to hear that God is behind the film". My regret was solidified when Mark Moring who conducted this interview emailed me to clarify the actual situation as below
      "this is an edited interview, a 10,000-word, 90-minute interview knocked down to about 20% of that. Wyck Godfrey had been discussing a number of "God things" along the way; he had initiated the talk about seeing how God had worked through a number of things."
    For me, that puts the phrase in a very different context, and given that this is a conversation between two Christians, primarily for a Christian publication it's certainly a fair question. So apologies to Mark, and Christianity Today for my hasty appraisal. I usually try to be measured and balanced, and I missed the mark on this occasion.



    1 - Kamon Simpson; The Gazette (Colorado Springs); Jun 27, 2003; pg. A.1

    Labels: ,

    Tuesday, October 31, 2006

    Nativity News vol.13

    Queen Spoo has the latest on the abundance of outreach tools that are being churned out as marketing material, er, material to help Christians engage with the film, as well as a number of youth resources. The most interesting thing here is the list of free, pastor screenings organised by Grace Hill Media as follows:
    * November 2 — Nashville, TN
    * November 2 — Oklahoma City, OK
    * November 2 — Albuquerque, NM
    * November 5 — San Antonia, TX
    * November 6 — Portland, OR
    * November 6 — Charlotte, NC
    I've no idea whether there will be similar screenings in the UK. I'm hoping to find out in the next few days.

    One thing that did catch my eye is the Youthlink session on unplanned pregnancy. From the title I thought it was going to be a fairly bold youth session that used the film as a springboard to discuss the issue of unwanted teenage pregnancy which, as much as many try to deny it, is fairly prevalent at the moment. Sadly no, it's just another look at the material encouraging youth groups to look at the story through Mary's eyes. This is good as far as it goes, but I can't help but wonder which is the more likely scenario for the average church youth group member to find themself in.

    My Nativity Story Central Page has links to all the other posts I've made on the film.

    Labels: ,

    Monday, October 23, 2006

    Nativity News vol.12

    It's probably about time to give a couple of updates on The Nativity Story.

    Firstly, a few more details have been released about some of the books that are being released to tie in with the film. As I mentioned in the last bulletin, Pauline Press are amongst the companies releasing books related to the film. (Pauline Press are a Catholic organisation, seeking to "proclaim Christ in a media world"). They are releasing two books, "The Nativity Story: A Film Study Guide for Catholics", by Rose Pacatte, and "The Nativity Story: Contemplating Mary’s Journeys of Faith", edited by the same. Here are the blurbs for the two films:
    The Nativity Story invites us to explore our faith and to listen for God’s Word in our daily lives, and this film study guide is a wonderful roadmap for the journey. Complete with sections for personal study, for group study, and for whole community catechesis, "The Nativity Story: A Film Study Guide for Catholics" is a practical guide for delving prayerfully into the mystery of our Savior’s birth.

    KEY FEATURES
    • Personal study includes questions on Scripture passages and the movie.
    • Group study features questions focusing on themes including: Journeying; Seeking; Prayer; Values and Virtues; and Story and Symbols.
    • Works as a springboard for weekly gatherings from the first Sunday of Advent through Epiphany, including questions that integrate the weekly Gospel reading and the movie.
    It's also keen to stress that the study guide will be useful for both children and adults. The book also contains a few photos from the film, which isn't bad for a 32 page pamphlet at a cost of on $5. The second book is a little more meaty at 160 pages (and a cost of $17)
    Although she is the Mother of God, Mary was a woman who experienced the full range of human emotions: amazement and confusion, fear and exhaustion, tenderness and wonder, tranquility and joy. In this inspiring book, contemporary women ponder Mary’s journeys—both spiritual and physical—and contemplate her growth as a person, a woman, a wife, a mother, a child of God.

    Each of these authors has made a journey of faith that has been enriched or guided by Mary’s example, and they show us how—through our roles and women and men, daughters and sons, wives and husbands, mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, professionals and religious—we can find in Mary both a role model and source of insight and encouragement for our own "journeys of faith."
    Both books are released next month (November 1st according to Amazon) and will be available direct form the Pauline store.

    Secondly, Queen Spoo has news that whilst those attending Heartland Film Festival will get to see a few clips of the movie, those keen to see the whole thing, will have to wait until the 9th November when the whole film will be screened at the National Outreach Convention. Screenplay author Mike Rich will be "speaking to the NOC attendees giving insights into the outreach opportunity that the film presents, as well as fascinating, "behind the scenes" stories from the movie and it's[sic] production." There are also rumours of advance screenings for church leaders, journalists etc., although I'm yet to be invited to one myself.

    Finally, Queen Spoo has also noticed that the film's official website is saying the film has been classified as a PG (in the US at least). I can't say that's a big surprise. The film-makers have been keen to stress the family nature of this film from the start. Whilst Jeffrey Overstreet will no doubt be disappointed that the slaughter of the innocents will therefore lack realism, I'm not sure that holds true. Son of Man shot the violence of that scene at a distance, yet it was one of the most chilling treatments of the story I can recall.

    The scene I'm most interested in, in respect of realism, is the actual birth itself. Having recently been through that experience in real life, very few films of any kind have really given it any kind of realism. Even the recent Children of Men which shows the birth, from the, business end (so to speak - I assume this was CGI!) still don't really capture it.

    Labels: , ,