Nativity Scenes Revisited - Part 1:Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo

I thought a good way to resurrect this blog would be to revisit some of the film portrayals of the Nativity story in the run up to Christmas. It's a good way to attempt to ensure that the kids don't get so focussed on the fat guy in the red suit that they forget about why we celebrate Christmas in the first place.

In many ways Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (The Gospel According to St. Matthew) is not an obvious place to start with a 3 year old and a 5 year old, but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed like an interesting idea. Firstly I occasionally hear some of my friends complain that all their kids ever watch is cartoons. That's always seemed a shame to me, so we've always tried to give them a mix of cartoons/CGI with films with people. The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) and Singin' in the Rain (1952) have long been favourites and there are plenty of others.

Secondly, I also want to broaden their horizons so they are not just limited to Anglo-American fare. Studio Ghibli is a great place to start, and the more I thought about it the more I could see Pasolini's film as being another easy access point. After all they are already familiar with the Nativity story, and this part of the film has relatively little dialogue. As it happens Nina has all kinds of snippets of language under her belt that are unknown to me: just the other day she was saying hello in Romanian or Albanian (she wasn't quite sure which) that she had picked up from a Romanian/ Albanian friend at school.

There's a third reason as well that Il Vangelo is good place to start. Most images of the nativity picture it rather laviously. Mary wears royal blue and salmon pink robes, the wise men are dressed as kings, even the shepherds are relatively handsome. Pasolini cuts his images from a more basic fabric. His wise men - clearly rich due to their substantial entourages - are ordinary looking. They have time weathered faces and their dress is - compared to their rivals from other films - relatively threadbare. When they bring their gifts they are not conveniently smelted lumps of gold nicely packaged in a decorative case, they are a selection of jugs and goblets held in a blanket (I have Nina to thank for drawing my attention to that).

Whilst there are many anachronisms in Pasolini's images, clothes and backgrounds, his locating of the story primarily in a peasant culture, in a poorer, less luxurious age is quite striking, and a nice antidote to the typical religious Christmas card image.

Aside from the educational advantages that Pasolini's film provides, it's also just a great piece of filmmaking. One of my favourite moments in all cinema is the silent arrival of the magi accompanied by the haunting sounds of Odetta's "Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child". It's remarkably moving and poignant and captures the holiness and spirituality of the moment, whilst simultaneously highlighting the relative loneliness of Jesus' birth and calling compared to most these days.

The other major segment of this part of the film is, of course, the annunciation. This is also simply wonderful. The opening dialogue-free scenes convey far more in their close-ups and images than most films with dialogue. Mary has, presumably, just told Joseph of her pregnancy and is at a loss for any further explanation. Joseph is similarly speechless. When the angel appears in a dream there are no flashing lights, just a girl in a white dress against a toned down background sound. The reconciliation is similarly wordless. In a sense little has changed - neither can find the words to express what is going on. Yet clearly, in another sense everything has changed. Margherita Caruso (Mary) allows the corners of her mouth to flicker the smallest bit at Joseph's return, and then Pasolini makes us wait for what feels like an age before allowing her a proper smile. The delay triggers a far greater emotional response than such a flicker of happiness would normally provide.

Around these two scenes we get Herod and his cronies, again ordinary looking, but with a nicely underplayed hint of the sinister, and the girl angel appearing again to Joseph and the magi to warn them of the impending attack from Herod. The later is again wordless. The angel stands in their path, looks in one direction and then leas them in another.

The gamble worked. The kids enjoyed it, even the three year old Digory managed sat relatively engrossed, and Nina declared at the end "I like watching Italian film". As a lover of Pasolini and Rossellini's neo-realist cinema I can't wait until she can read well enough to be able to introduce her to some more.

Pasolini the Wheat and the Chaff

I've just been writing a piece for The Reader magazine on the political aspects of Pasolini's Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo. I'll hopefully post that article here in time, but for now just one observation that I picked up watching bits of it tonight.

The observation comes in part from thinking about Pasolini's politics and part from reading Mark Goodacre's thoughts on Matthean phrases that occur in the double tradition. Anyway, throughout Matthew the harvesting imagery is fairly prevalent. So it was interesting to notice that as Jesus leaves the wilderness, the first people he encounters (albeit passing them in the field) are a group of men with winnowing forks separating the wheat from the chaff (c.f. 3:12). This is to be a key theme in the ministry of Jesus the film portrays.

On a related note, last month the Guardian did a number of Top 25 film lists, and this film ranked number 10 in the Top 25 Arthouse Films and, as a result, got a new write up by Andrew Pulver. It's a good summary though I must admit I prefer Derek Malcolm's review for the same paper from ten years ago.

The Times Interview with Irazoqui

As is probably fairly obvious, I'm studying Matthew's gospel at the moment so apologies to any regular readers who don't have much interest in that.

Anyway, I just came across a 2004 article from The Times (London) about Enrique Irazoqui, about his experiences playing Jesus in Pasolini's version of Matthew, Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo. It tells a few interesting stories and it's interesting, if not surprising, how much Pasolini's attitude to his Jesus actor contrasts with that of other Jesus film directors, DeMille in particular.

There's also a bit more on Irazoqui's life after the film here, including a number of links.

Thoughts on Pasolini's Matthew

I've been working my way through the Visual Bible Version of Matthew's Gospel, but onSunday I sat down to watch the superior, if not exactly word for word, version of The Gospel According to St. Matthew by Pier Paolo Pasolini in 1964. You can read my previous comments on this film here and listen to my review of the film at my Jesus Films Podcast. Here, I want to record a few new observations that I made in watching it on Sunday, which I don't recall being made by others anywhere else aside from some of the elements this film incorporates from the Gospel of John. Some of those (I now recall) are also mentioned in Jeffrey Staley and Richard Walsh's "Jesus, the Gospels, and Cinematic Imagination: A Handbook to Jesus on DVD". Apologies if I have inadvertently borrowed from anyone else.

It's often said that one of the primary views of Jesus that we see in this film is of the back of his head as he marches round the Holy Land shouting his words of wisdom over his shoulder. So it's interesting that early on the film gives us a similar shot of Joseph. Having been visited by and angel who tells him to marry Mary, he heads back to her house to let her know and the camera follows behind him up the path.

Speaking of this path its used a few times quite effectively. Not only do we see Joseph initially leave Mary via it, and then return, but later on the adult Jesus will leave Mary by the same road, shot from the same angle, only he will not return. Pasolini rearranges the gospel order here so that this scene follows straight after Jesus claims that those who follow him are his mother and brothers. In fact the cut happens after a close up of Mary. We then see Jesus leaving and then realise that the location has also changed. Initially it appears to be from the mother and brothers scene, but then it emerges that it is a prelude to his rejection at Nazareth.

This sequence also parallels Joseph's opening actions. Joseph leaves Mary, goes to a spot in Nazareth and observes the children playing before hearing God speak through the angel. Jesus also leaves Mary in the same manner and ends up in the same distinctive part of Nazareth. There's an interlude whilst Jesus is rejected by the villagers, and instructs the Rich Young Man, but then we get the "let the little children come to me" scene. Jesus has also seen the children play.

One of the things that is usually mentioned when discussing this film is, of course, the music, but I'd not noticed before that several of the pieces of music used repeat two or three times throughout the film. One of my friends had some great observations on this, but I didn't fully get it, so I'm going to wait until he's finished his dissertation and see if he'll write something down on it. Watch this space.

Whilst Matthew's Gospel never mentions that Jesus is the cousin of John the Baptist, the film implies it. Having met with John's disciples once, he encounters them in the same place and is informed of his death. Both John's disciples and Jesus have tears on their faces at this point, which is perhaps not that visible on the small screen. Again Pasolini tweaks the order here so that Jesus' "Let the dead bury their own dead" occurs at the end of this scene. In a similar fashion Matthew's Gospel gives no indication that John son of Zebedee used to be a follower of the Baptist, but whilst the Baptist is shown preaching we see the other John by his side, as in the fourth gospel.

It also struck me, perhaps for the first time, just how Jewish the 7 woes directed at the Pharisees are. Whilst many of the things Jesus says are illustrating the wider point (that they are hypocrites) some of the examples are particularly obscure - swearing by the temple/gold of the temple, cleaning the outside of cups, and so on. The way the film abridges this section tends to emphasise the point I think.

As Jesus' death draws near, he is anointed by the woman, and it's interesting that it's Judas who voices the objection to her actions. Again this is as in John, rather than the more general "disciples" we find in Matthew, but whereas John focuses on Judas to besmirch him, here it could be read as the thing that drives Judas to betray him. Unhappy with Jesus' actions he heads straight to the Jewish leaders, who he watched very closely during their debate in Chapter 21. That said it could also be read as supporting the Johannine position, not least because of Judas' smile when he hears how much he will be paid for his work.

Lastly, again as with John's Gospel, we also see John the disciple at he foot of the cross comforting Jesus' mother. We're also given Jesus' trial before Pilate in a series of shots taken from John's point of view, intercut with extreme close ups of John's eyes.

Why Pasolini Chose Matthew

Just came across an interesting piece on Pasolini's Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (Gospel According to St. Matthew). Not only did it include the above photo from the set, which is one I've not seen before, but it also includes a lengthy excerpt from Maurizio Viano's "A Certain Realism: Making Use of Pasolini’s Film Theory and Practice" which discusses some of the reasons that Pasolini chose Matthew's Gospel, rather than one of the other three. I was particularly struck by this part:

Furthermore, Matthew’s Gospel is most concerned with the problem of the relationship to the Law and tradition and, much to Pasolini’s liking, suggests an ambivalent attitude towards both. Any reader of Matthew’s text is bound to be struck by the recurrence of the formula, “You have heard that it was said . . . but I tell you . . .” Tradition is invoked and corrected, accepted and refused. As a result, Matthew’s Christ is the embodiment of a destructive reverence, of an oxymoronic love/hate relationship with the Law. Such a gesture of simultaneous affirmation/negation is cleverly emphasized by a recurrent image in Pasolini’s film: Christ’s most often-repeated posture shows him walking decisely ahead, with his back to the camera and his face turned towards it. An image which stresses leadership but also conveys the sense of going ahead while looking back.

The blog's author, Michael J. Bayly, also include a quote from Martin Luther King which is also new to me. He seems to have been put off watching the film however by reports of poor quality DVDs for this film. As I've said in his comments section there are good versions of the film available on DVD. I have the Region 2 Tartan release but DVDBeaver compares a number of others. I hope that helps him. He's clearly a man with impressive aesthetic taste. Just take a look at his blog's colour scheme...

Arts and Faith Top 100 Reviews

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

As I mentioned back then, most of the Bible films on the list have been culled leaving only four (three of which are modernisations), but you can view their reviews at the following links:

#10 - The Gospel According to St. Matthew (Il vangelo secondo Matteo) - Steven D. Greydanus

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

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

#92 - Son of Man (Jezile) - Tyler Petty

Thanks to the Image staff for putting the list together, and to the authors named above for their contributions.

Nathan Schneider on Pasolini's Gospel According to St. Matthew

Over at his Killing the Buddha blog, Nathan Schneider has written up some interesting thoughts on a recent viewing of Pasolini's Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (The Gospel According to St. Matthew). Schneider watched the film with a friend - a non-believer brought up in a "pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic community" - and has written up both his own reactions and that of his friend. It's a fascinating contrast.

As it happens this film has been in my thoughts this week: my Through the Bible in Five and a Half Years course starts the New Testament in September (after a summer recess) and so I'm thinking of showing this to my film night group. Strangely we've never seen it at Film Night, save perhaps a very early gathering of many of the same people who still come 10+ years later.

One of the things I plan to discuss at the Matthew session of Through the Bible is the way in which our own pre-suppositions can shape how we read the text. Whilst I plan to contrast a passage from Pasolini's film with the same passage from the Visual Bible's 1994 Gospel of Matthew, the contrast between Schneider's take on the film and that of his friend essentially raise the same point.

I've left a comment on Schneider's blog basically saying that whilst I think my view of Jesus more naturally align with his, the value of the film, to me, is that it confronts me with a portrayal of Jesus which I find uncomfortable, but cannot really shake off using the gospels. It rubs up against my presuppositions about Jesus and in so doing exposes them as simply that - presuppositions.

Incidentally, I also plan to watch the Visual Bible film over the next couple of months so I'll hopefully be blogging about both films a little bit during that time too.

Reflections on OH Workshop

On Friday, I mentioned my plans to run a Jesus Films workshop at Open Heaven yesterday, so I thought I'd offer a few reflections. I was a somewhat beset by technical difficulties. Not the major kind like not being able to watch any of the clips, just very minor things, but on each clip. It's all DVD's fault. In the old days you just had a pile of pre-cued videos which you slotted in and then ejected out. DVD offers more possibilities and, in theory, better picture quality but it's harder to pull it off 100% right.

I was trying a new approach, ripping the clips using some free software called Handbrake and then burning them onto a DVD using Cyberlink Power Director and then just flicking through them as if I was using a conventional DVD. Unfortunately, there was no sound facilities in the room (as I'd thought there would be) and using the projector's speakers, which had been the back up plan, produced a feeble sound. This meant I ended up playing the DVD on my laptop, using VLC. It's a great piece of software normally, but it wasn't to happy with skipping tracks, DVD menus etc. and so it lead to a lot of those awkward wait an see moments. There were a couple of faults on the disk anyway (no subtitles for the Pasolini clip for example), so it was a bit of a struggle, and meant I didn't fully relax so I could really enjoy the session.

Other than that I think it went OK. I had a good group, nearly all of whom chipped in something, and every film had a reasonable amount of discussion with some interesting perspectives coming through. It's always nice to hear a new perspective or observation and there were a few of these - the use of wedding bells used at the end of Last Temptation.

I also noticed how the ending of Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo links the response to the resurrection to the Great Commission. The joy that erupts as the door flies off the tomb (pictured above) carries through to the end of the film. When we see the disciples running with the same sense of joy, our first impression is that this is in response to the resurrection. Yet it turns out that this is actually the precursor to the ascension. Having watched this again last night, I think this ambiguity is a deliberate way of linking the two scenes. It's significant that this sequence has the same song throughout even though the text implies that there is a reasonably significant gap here.

From a Christian perspective (which was not the director's own) it's a useful reminder that it's the good news about Jesus defeating death which should be the motivating factor in us going out to tell people about him. Quite what Pasolini intended this sequence to convey I'm not entirely sure.

One of the things that was interesting in running this session was just how much of a new area this was for the majority that were there. A large proportion of Open Heaven are students, and of the 20 or so that came along, only 2 were older than me, 1 was a couple of years younger than me and the rest were in the 18-23 age bracket. So many of them were born after the release of Last Temptation of Christ in 1988, and most of them were under 18 when The Passion of the Christ was released five and a half years ago (has it really been so long). There was also relatively low awareness about last year's BBC mini-series The Passion. I was aware that Last Temptation would probably be largely unknown, but I was surprised about those other two. I suppose I'm not only showing my age, but forgetting that most people don't have anything like the level of interest in this subject that I do. (That said, there was at least one other Jesus Christ, Superstar fan in attendance).

On the other hand, it was encouraging to see how switched on many of the group were to the way the variety of methods these films use to communicate. This, I imagine, is also due in part to the age of the majority of participants most of whom have grown up in a world saturated with visual media.

So whilst I wish I'd brought a set of powered speakers so that I could run the session from the DVD player rather than the laptop, I did, ultimately, enjoy it and hopefully those that came all got something from it. I think some did at least.

Elizabeth Fletcher's Top Bible Films

I've just come across a top ten list of Bible films by someone called Elizabeth Fletcher whose Top Ten Bible site lists top tens of everything from bad women to young people. Curious Fletcher only lists 9 films, but they are all fairly good choices. with a nice mix of Jesus films (Gospel According to St. Matthew, Greatest Story Ever Told, Passion of the Christ, Jesus of Montreal), Hebrew Bible films (The Bible, The Ten Commandments) and Jesus Cameo films (The Robe, Ben Hur, Life of Brian).

I've not had a chance to read the text yet (I'll save that for later), but there are some good images, some of which are publicity shots that I've not seen before. There are also some images from the colourised version of Pasolini's Gospel According to St. Matthew) which only serves to confirm my misgivings about that particular project. I can't help but look at them though, not least perhaps because of their oddness.

If anyone's interested, you can view my own top ten list of Jesus films.

La Ricotta (Soft Cheese - 1962 from RoGoPaG)

This article contains spoilers

La Ricotta is the second of four short films that were released together under the title of RoGoPaG - an abbreviation of each of the four film's directors, Roberto Rossellini (Illibatezza - my review), Jean-Luc Goddard, Pier Paolo Pasolini and Ugo Gregoretti. It was deemed so offensive that Pasolini was actually prosecuted for it.

Unsurprisingly, then, La Ricotta starts with a disclaimer. It's unclear whether this was added before to court case – to try and avoid prosecution – or as a result of it. Either way, the fuss is hard to understand today, and its clear to most that the film is satirising a sanctimonious form of Christianity, rather than the faith itself – let alone its founder.

The story takes place on the set of a Jesus film. Despite the inspirational nature of the story that is being filmed, no-one seems to be particularly excited to be there. The director (played by Orson Welles) looks on dispassionately, even reading a book in-between takes. The crowd of actors make their own entertainment – dancing, joking and even getting one of the cast to perform a striptease to taunt those pinned to the cross.

Not all of the cast are able to behave so frivolously. Stracci, the extra who is playing the good thief, is desperately poor – so much so that when he is handed his lunch for the day he runs off to give it to his starving family. In some way the scene functions as the Last Supper as Stracci, the film's hero, enjoys the fellowship of those he loves for the last time before his death on a cross.

Indeed much of what happens during Stracci's final few hours parallels Christ's passion. Some of these elements are supplied by his role in the film (being taken away to be crucified), and some occur because of his real life situation (being mocked and deserted and then left to die). However, this is not a straightforward Christ figure – some of Stracci's actions (his lying and stealing in order to procure more food) would be seen by many as somewhat un-Christ like.

Given Pasolini's famous Marxism, and the film's subversive tone, I can't help wondering if he is looking to explore some ethical issues here. Is it acceptable for the poor and starving to steal, or impersonate others in order to feed themselves? It's a question posed later, and somewhat inadvertently, by Stracci himself. As he hangs on the cross waiting for his big moment he rehearses what seems to be his only line "Lord remember me when you come into your kingdom". If Stracci is meant to deliver the goof thief's other words from the cross he is notably not practising them.

Stracci's death is somewhat confusing. Have given away his first meal to his family he then dons a wig and a dress in order to get another lunch which he temporarily stashes away whilst he returns the items that make up his disguise. In the meantime, the leading actresses's dog escapes, discovers Stracci's hidden treasure and eats it for himself.

It's far from clear why he died. If Stracci has died because he has overeaten then Welles' final line "poor Stracci he had to die before we knew he really lived" seems overblown. Is it just an extension of the pious pompusness which he has so far exhibited – a grandstanding gesture even as one of his casts lies dead? Or does it indicate that Stracci has died of starvation and that the scenes in which he buys the cheese and stuffs his face with it is actually Stracci's daydreams as is tied to the cross? There are certainly plenty of unreal elements in these sequences – the fast forwarded action, the sudden appearance of the entire crew in he cave, the abundance of food he is suddenly surrounded by – to suggest this as a viable reading.

The film's major theme is the contrast between the story of Jesus and those who represent him. The cast's treatment of this poor man is shown as the ultimate indicator of their impiety. Does he suggest that the real representatives and re-enactors of Christ's story (i.e. the church) also fail in this respect? It certainly seems more likely that he is primarily castigating kitsch, yet technically irreverent, religion rather than the makers of religious films. The tacky colours of the crucifixion scenes – the only colour scenes in the four films that comprise RoGoPaG - are far more akin to those from pious Christianity than anything Hollywood has produced.

Thankfully, Pasolini also seems to be aware that he is no better. Whenever a film features a film director it is likely to be self-referential. But in case anyone misses the link the part is played by one of the most well known film directors of all time, and Pasolini further strengthens the association by having him read Pasolini's own book "Mamma Roma".

It would not be long until Pasolini returned to these themes. Having pointed out the weaknesses in the human (and celluloid) conveyors of Jesus's message Pasolini filmed his version of The Gospel According to St. Matthew two years later. The portrayal Jesus as a crusader for social justice picks up from where La Ricotta leaves off.

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).

ARGGHH! The Gospel According to Matthew..."Colorized Version"?

Someone tell me this is a hoax. "Genius Products", who appear to be part of the Weinstein Company are about to release Pasolini's classic Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo...in colour. It's due to be released on the 26th March, and whilst it's skinny on the extras it does included the black and white version of the film as well.

I have to admit I'm lost for words. Pasolini is probably spinning in his grave. The use of black and white was a deliberate choice by Pasolini; it was part of his aesthetic. Review after review of this film comments on the grainy black and white film stock, the impressive use of chiaroscuro.

"But hey black and white is boring. Why don't we jazz it up with some colour?". Part of me is curious to see this, but only in the same way that people can't help looking on when they drive past the site of a car crash.

The worst thing is that another release of this film on DVD means that it has further shrunk the potential market for a decent, Criterion-esque release of this film which includes the option to remove the subtitles, as well as his related films La Ricotta and Seeking Locations in Palestine for The Gospel According to St. Matthew.

Meanwhile my podcast on Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo is still available to download.

RoGoPaG Coming to DVD

I've been meaning to catch RoGoPaG ever since my friend Peter Chattaway reviewed it a while ago. It's actually a collection of four short films and it takes its name from Robert Rossellini, Jean-Luc Godard, Pier Paolo Pasolini and Ugo Gregoretti who each directed one of the films.

The film that is of most relevance to this site is Pasolini's La Ricotta in which a movie director makes a film about Jesus's death. The film was deemed so irreverent that Pasolini was initially sentenced to some time in jail. Shortly afterwards he released the far more reverent Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (1964).

La Ricotta, with out the other three sections I believe, has been available on DVD since 2004 when it was released as an extra on the Criterion Collection version of Pasolini's Mamma Roma. (The director character - played by Orson Welles - reads passages of Pasolini's book "Mamma Roma" during La Ricotta).

However, the entire anthology is to be included in a boxed set of Pasolini's films which is to be released on 26th February 2007. The set will also include Accattone and Comizi d'amore (Love Meetings). Sadly, Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo is not included in the set. I long for the day that film gets the full treatment and not only gets released with the option to remove the subtitles, but also with La Ricotta and Seeking Locations in Palestine for The Gospel According to St. Matthew (which Peter Chattaway also makes some comments on). This set is actually only volume 1. A second box set will be released on the 23rd April featuring Hawks and Sparrows (1966), Oedipus Rex (1967), and Pigsty (1969).

Podcast: Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo

It's a little later than I'd hoped, but November's Jesus Films Podcast is finally up. This month I'm looking at Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (The Gospel According to St. Matthew - 1964) by Italian director Pier Paolo Pasolini.

My first podcast on Jesus of Nazareth is still available to download.

Top 100 Spiritually Significant Films (2006)

Members of the Arts and Faith Discussion Forum have just announced our third incarnation of their list of the Top 100 Spiritually Significant Films.

Many thanks to Alan Thomas of Movies Matter for collating nominations, devising and executing the voting procedure, determining final positions, and creating the excellent webpage version of the list, replete with a myriad of images and links.

Sadly the number of films I've seen on the list drops each year, such that I've only seen 47 of the films thus far. There are a number I have lined up to see, which should at least see me into the fifties, but until I sign up for online DVD rental I'm going to struggle to make much headway.

There are a number of Bible Films on the list. Surprisingly, The Miracle Maker turned in at number three closely followed by Pasolini's Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo. One of the interesting things about re-doing the list annually is that it churns it over bringing fresh and surprising films to the surface, which then gain a wider audience amongst the group, often resulting in a particular film taking a number of years to stabilise. For example last year's number 1, the excellent Dardenne brothers' film Rosetta has slipped to number 33, which is perhaps a little more realistic. I suspect The Miracle Maker will fare similarly next year. As much as I love it, it didn't really deserve quite such a lofty position, and it is unlikely to achieve it again.

Other bible films on the list are Jesus of Nazareth (#18), Jesus of Montreal (#19), The Passion of the Christ (#20), Last Temptation of Christ (#63), The Gospel of John (#64) and Peter and Paul (#80). It's noticeable that there are no Old Testament Films (not even The Ten Commandments!), and that Peter and Paul is the only Roman Christian / Later New Testament film, and the lowest placed of all the bible films. That makes a total of 8 Bible films, and strangely there are 3 places where there are two bible films next to each other. The number one film on the list is Carl Dreyer's Ordet (pictured at the top), which is listed in Kinnard and Davis's "Divine Images", but is not really a Jesus film per se.

It's good to see Peter Weir re-appear on the list as well. He had more films on the 2004 list than practically any other director, but then none of his films made the cut last year. The film I would love to see on the list that hasn't made it is Field of Dreams. I reviewed it last year in a bid to get it on their, but alas, my colleagues don't seem to share my high opinion of it!

Pasolini's Matthew for Just £5.99

Just found out that Movie Mail Online, an excellent web / mail order based DVD company specialising in foreign, classic and lesser known movies are selling Pasolini's classic 1964 film Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo (Gospel According to St Matthew) for just £5.99 (about $10) for one week only. Such a bargain I feel duty bound to pass it on!

Pasolini's film is probably the best Bible film ever made, and DVD Beaver rated it highly in their 5-way comparison of the various editions of this film on DVD (including French and German versions, although they missed out this one which is horrifically dubbed).

Postage is free in the UK, and £1.50 ($2.50) to the rest of the world.

Entertainment Weekly's Top 12 Film Jesuses (Jesi?)

Firstly apologies for the lack of a post yesterday. There were problems with Blogger which seemed to have sorted themselves out. I'm amazed at how angry some people get on the Blogger Help Forum. Whilst not being able to post is a bit annoying, Blogger does give us web space and blogging software for free. Perhaps I'm just being naïve.

Anyway, anyone who has read FilmChat recently will know this old news already, but as I wasn't able to post anything it before Easter, I thought I would do so now. In addition to Peter Chattaway's top ten Jesus films at Christianity Today, and my top ten Jesus films, there is now a list of the top 12 film Jesuses (or Jesi as Clayton Slaughter suggests) up at Entertainment Weekly. Their list is as follows (in chronological order:

Jim Caviezel (The Passion of the Christ)
Christian Bale (Mary, the Mother of Jesus)
Will Ferrell (Superstar)
Jeremy Sisto (Jesus)
Martin Donovan (Book of Life)
Willem Dafoe (Last Temptation of Christ)
Chris Sarandon (The Day Christ Died)
Robert Powell (Jesus of Nazareth)
Victor Garber (Godspell)
Ted Neely (Jesus Christ Superstar)
Max von Sydow (The Greatest Story Ever Told)
Jeffrey Hunter (King of Kings)

I always wonder with things like this how they devised them. For a start it is strange that they have done a top 12 rather than top 10. I can only assume that this is because they felt they had to include the major film Jesi down to Hunter and von Sydow, but also wanted to include lesser known portrayals such as Bale, Ferrell, Donovan and Sarandon.

There are two films on the list that I have yet to see. Like Peter, I'd not heard of Ferrell's turn in Superstar (1980), and will have to see if I can dig it out. On the other hand I've known about The Day Christ Died (1980) for a long time, but sadly it's not available to buy.

The limitations of the list are not to hard to spot. Firstly, all these films are American. Whilst I can understand that Entertainment Weekly is a popular magazine, and trying to write for as wider readership as possible, would it really have hurt them to have included Enrique Irazoqui from Pasolini's Gospel According to St. Matthew (1964)? Similarly the list only covers the last 45 years. Whilst going back this far is, in itself, a positive step, it would have been nice to choose a film from the silent era. Personally, I'd include Robert Henderson-Bland's performance in From the Manger to the Cross (1912). Thirdly they seem to have deliberately excluded all church sponsored projects like the Visual Bible's Gospel of John (2003). Whilst some of these church films are awful, Henry Ian Cusick's performance at least deserves a nod. The final flaw is that by so limiting the available selection, the list really becomes a no-brainer. It's hard to think of a portrayal that fits the presumed criteria that isn't included.

Anyway, it's easy to criticise, without offering anything in return, so here's my list.

Jim Caviezel (The Passion of the Christ)
Henry Ian Cusick (Gospel of John)
Christian Bale (Mary, the Mother of Jesus)
Jeremy Sisto (Jesus)
Martin Donovan (Book of Life)
Bruce Marchiano (Visual Bible: Matthew)
Willem Dafoe (Last Temptation of Christ)
Pier Maria Rossi (Il Messia)
Colin Blakely (Son of Man)
Max von Sydow (The Greatest Story Ever Told)
Enrique Irazoqui (Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo)
Robert Henderson Bland (From the Manger to the Cross)

I should add that I was mainly voting on the basis of the actor's performance given what they were asked to do. Admittedly there's some guess work as to where the actor's performance starts and teh direction ends, but even so that seemed to be the best way to do it. So, take Bruce Marchiano, in places some of the things he has clearly been asked to do are crass (e.g. emptying a jar of water on a disciple's head during the Sermon on the Mount), but a lot of his work is very good in my opinion.

Finally, a while back there was a discussion on Arts and Faith called "Who's Your Favourite Film Jesus?" which was also discussed at NT Gateway and Codex. For what it's worth I voted for Jim Caviezel, although I regret that now. Predictably, he and Robert Powell were way ahead of the rest. There's also another top ten Bible Films list at my favourite everything.

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.