The Bible Collection: Jesus

Film Jesus

Plot Summary

Jesus was and is the most significant figure in history. As God in the flesh, He lived among humanity for three years, establishing His earthly ministry with the least likely people. However, Jesus always knew that His ultimate purpose would be fulfilled in His sacrifice on the cross, paying the sin debt for all humanity. Nonetheless, it wouldn’t end there since He would rise again victorious.

Production Quality (1.5 points)

Like over Lux Vide offerings, Jesus sports a fine production, including good sets, locations, and props. Camera work and video quality are also professional save for some wild action shots. Audio quality is okay, even if the soundtrack is a bit generic. However, generic special effects and poor editing drag this score down to the middle line. At times, cuts and transitions are very abrupt, creating a confusing experience for the viewer. Therefore, this is the best rating that can be awarded in this category.

Plot and Storyline Quality (-1.5 points)

Throughout the movie, Jesus is portrayed as having a strange attitude, as if He’s unsure of what’s happening or even surprised at events. This assumption seems to rise out of an odd theological implication that Jesus only became God after His baptism. It also impacts the temptation sequence as Satan appears to know more about the future than Christ does during this experience. Because there’s too much content to cover in this narrative, expository dialogue poorly bridges the gaps as precious time is wasted on unnecessary extra-biblical asides, such as a pointless romantic suggestion between Jesus and the sister of Lazarus. These tangents are included while more pertinent points are glossed over, and most scenes are generally disjointed as they typically end in abrupt ways. Besides these obvious concerns, the sheer amount of information that’s thrown at the audience in less than two hours is overwhelming. There are simply too many subplots and characters to keep up with, which predictably leads to low quality. Overall, due to the gross alterations of historical record, a negative rating is warranted in this section.

Acting Quality (1.5 points)

In keeping with many other biblical entertainment options, the acting of Jesus tends to be theatrical and dramatic. However, it’s not always bad as emotional and line delivery is inconsistently acceptable. Nonetheless, the casting isn’t always culturally authentic, which is another common misstep in films based on the Scriptures. In the end, despite its faults, this section still keeps the overall rating from being zero.

Conclusion

Why are movies about Jesus usually among the worst? What’s the point of fielding such bizarre portrayals of the Christian faith’s central figure? It’s clear that such failed attempts at capturing the true essence of a historical figure Who changed the course of history are based on faulty information. Screenplays like this one only further turn people off to Christian entertainment, but hopefully, things will continue looking up in the future.

Final Rating: 1.5 out of 10 points

Paul the Apostle {St. Paul} [2000] (Movie Review)

Creepy Paul…….

Plot Summary

Saul of Tarsus was a ruthless man bent on destroying the church of Jesus Christ, until he had an unforgettable encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus.  From there, his life was never the same as he became Paul and effectively switched sides and became zealous for sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Though many were still skeptical of him, God was with him all of his life and used him to turn the world upside down.  His work as an Apostle of Jesus Christ is still affecting the world today.

 

Production Quality (1 point)

It’s clear that there was money behind this film—you don’t get the opportunity to make a more than two hour film every day.  For the most part, this production is average, with okay camera work and historically authentic sets and locations.  However, some of the video quality is blurry and some of the lighting in outside scenes is poor.  There is also an unusual use of weird special effects throughout, including an annoying use of negative video quality in an attempt to be dramatic.  We also are provided with unnecessary location subtitles as a crutch for bad editing.  With a such a large idea, editing is key, as it is in any epic.  Yet the editing of this film is totally off and allows the plot to focus on all the wrong things.  In short, a lot of wasted money was thrown at this production.

Plot and Storyline Quality (0 points)

Paul the Apostle gets caught up in the all-too-common trap of Bible films: using a movie named after a well-known Biblical character to focus on all kinds of useless side issues and peripheral characters.  It’s fine to make a movie about a character or group of characters who shadowed a well-known Biblical figure, but don’t pretend like the movie is actually about that figure.  Though there is a substantial amount of content in this film about Paul, this movie is not about Paul’s life, but about things that happened around Paul during random parts of his life.  It’s not like Paul has a small story—there is tons of content about him that would make an awesome movie.  Yet we are left with half-measures and allusions to what could have been.  As extra-Biblical events take up the time of this story, pointless time jumps are taken and tons of off-screen content is alluded to.  Dialogue is designed to move the plot along and only crafts characters who seem lofty and inaccessible rather than like real people.  Alas, what could have been with this very important and engaging historical account.

Acting Quality (0 points)

Once again, another Bible movie commits the cardinal sin of casting: British people trying to portray Middle Eastern people.  Thus, there is a lack of cultural authenticity that is not helped by the partially unrealistic costuming, the creepy makeup jobs, and the obviously fake beards.  This is not to mention the overly theatrical, dramatic, and breathy delivery of lines and emotions.  Unfortunately, there is not much good to mention here.

Conclusion

So you have over two hours of runtime and virtually only a third of your content actually pertains to the Biblical historical account of the Apostle Paul.  Very few film makers have the luxury of having this much time on their hands to craft a movie, yet this team decided to waste it on tons of non-Biblical and quasi-historical content, complete with large time jumps and completely unnecessary characters.  Besides this, the characters don’t even feel like realistic or authentic Jewish people, which is not helped by the fact that they are played by British people.  It’s no wonder so many people are weary of films that have the “Bible” stamp on them.  We eagerly await the day when Biblical movies are honest about what they are depicting and create historically realistic and culturally authentic portrayals of people in the Scriptures.

 

Final Rating: 1 out of 10 points