You mean the guy who's played Passolini, Van Gogh, Jesus, Bobby Peru, The Green Goblin and still makes his own stunts over sixty years old? The Oscar is beneath him, he deserves much more...
Interesting that Jesus was mislabeled a false prophet in his day by those who hadn't seen his works. And his film, 2000 years later, is mislabeled as blasphemy by those who haven't seen it. Guess humanity hasn't changed much after all
I watched this movie expecting to see the name of Jesus Christ dragged through the mud, with all manner of perverse sexuality and degradation, but found myself being challenged, captivated, and ultimately enriched by it. I second all the points Siskel and Ebert hit on too. Anyone who can't take a sincere look at their faith or consider different perspectives, is no believer at all. Funny how a movie that is decades old can be more effective than anything else
@@johnsambo9379 Did you not see the ending where he rejected the last temptation and gave up having a life of his own to be sacrificed on the cross for our sins?
Completely agree. It challenges everything you may have previously learned about Christ, yet you draw closer to him by seeing this film. Portraying Jesus in any film is very difficult: we don't even know what he looked like (the Bible does not describe his physical appearance). But Willem Dafoe's performance here provides great balance between strength and self-doubt; he's a very human Messiah. I don't know why there was so much protest over this movie - I'll bet most of the protesters never even saw it.
I think people need to look at this film from a different lens, because obviously how Jesus is portrayed in this movie is completely heretical and blasphemous and it’s just inaccurate, it’s also based on the novel so it’s a different interpretation of Jesus altogether, if people are going into this from looking for a biblically accurate interpretation of Jesus they’re not gonna get it, but for what this film is I think it’s great.
It harrases our faith.. The devil dared to temp Jesus but Jesus in Himself was never tempted. Jesus is the beginning of creation on the right hand side of God, nothing that was made was made without Him, pick up a stone and He is there. He is the Alpha and the Omega the beginning and the end, the mirror revelation of God the father. In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. And the Word was God..and the Word became flesh.. He dwelt among us...read the beginning of the 'book of John' in the bible
@@pleaseenteraname1103 its not great.. Because people who have not read the Bible can misinterpret the truth of the Word of God.. And can get all mixed up and confused making God, Jesus, the beginning of creation for whom everything was made, a mirror image of the perfect blameless Father in heaven.. into a mere man with sinful desires.. Our holy perfect God.. Our Creator.. Into a mere sinful man..
It’s funny how the things that make this movie “blasphemous” are what make it so good and arguably the best portrayal of Jesus I’ve seen. Jesus’ sacrifice is way more impactful in this movie because he is depicted like an actual human being who has been tasked with being the saviour of humanity. His death feels like a triumph because he could’ve saved himself and lived the life he wanted but he overcomes all of those inner desires and accepts God’s plan, which is something only Jesus could do.
@@sandyscuba6101It seems to me you are expressing the heresy of Appolinarianism which is all too common in modern Christianity (often due to a reading of the synoptic gospels in the light of John’s gospel), and which this movie explicitly seeks to counteract. As they say in the video, the solely divine Jesus which you describe is completely unrelatable to the human heart, and this movie reminds us that He was also fully human and so suffered with the same doubts and fears with which we suffer. In this way it serves to brings Jesus closer to us.
Love it. It's truly one of the most powerful films about Christ that I've ever seen. God and man, exactly. Very inspiring to see Jesus struggle with His humanity, and overcome His own flaws to fulfill the will of God...
@@johnsambo9379 Actually The Temptation of Christ is a well known Biblical narrative detailed in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The only difference here is that the film (and the book it was based upon) give us a very visceral, humanistic portrayal of Jesus with which we can examine our own temptations. The entire concept of Jesus as savior is that he is both fully man and fully divine. The film (and book) simply wish to take a closer examination of the human side of that equation, in order for us to more fully connect with Jesus. The beauty of the story is that Jesus's great "temptation" is not one of lust or greed, but simply to enjoy the everyday beauty that we as human beings are able to enjoy. To have a wife, a family, an ordinary life. But just because he feels this temptation does not mean he gives into it. He actively *rejects* the temptation (just as in the Gospels) in order to remain on the cross and die for us. The director Scorsese studied to be a Catholic priest before becoming a filmmaker and is incredibly well-versed on the Gospels. He's also a historian who has studied with meticulous attention to detail about that time period, and a man who has studied the various artistic renderings of Jesus. I point this all out just to make it clear that Scorsese's intent was not heresy, but instead to give audiences a chance to connect on a truly empathetic level to our Lord. Or, as Scorsese himself said when asked why he wanted to make this, "I want to get to know Jesus better"
@@matthewrocca4197 It was certainly AEONS better than that horrid "Passion" movie. "TLTOC" made me feel closer to the concept of Jesus. It is an overlooked masterpiece.
The human side of Jesus must have looked at the cross and went, I know I was destined to die for the sins of the world, but did I sign up for THIS? That's the side of Jesus who is my hero. He knew he would suffer incredibly and go through incredible pain and die, but he had the courage and humanity to do it anyway. He was tempted to quit on us, but he didn't. That must have been hugely hard for him as the first real humanitarian and feminist. He could have had a human life with Mary M. He gave all that shit up because he gave that much of a damn about us. That's the message of this movie.
The fact that so many Christians are the least humble most arrogant on earth is just complete insanity. Like god do you even know the first thing about Jesus or what he taught
I loved this movie and couldn't put it out of my mind for days. Scorcese's direction on this film and Defoe's portrayal of Jesus moved me to tears... truly a brilliant film adaptation of one of the most important events in human history.
One of my five favorite movies of all-time. A film that's less about structure and more about emotion and ideas. A film that, for me, really hit on the struggle we all face between humanity and godliness, and how that struggle can make us stronger.
By focusing on Jesus's humanity the movie helps underscore just how much Jesus actually had to sacrifice. This is the only movie about Jesus that matches up with the Jesus in the Bible why he has been forsaken. He knows exactly what is going to happen and orders Judas to betray him. The plan was always to sacrifice himself for man, but he still fears what exactly his death will entail.
The Law only governs the flesh, not the spirit. And the flesh passes away .. Intent, love, matters. "Did you not read the sign? No Palestinians allowed".
the casting and more contemporary dialogue was a choice by the director which doesn't work for everyone. The rest if the film though I think is just sublime, the acting, music, locations, cotumes really put me into that world of 1st century Palestine. The director found a way to make every key moment real and new, like the raising of Lazurus and the water turned go wine. You get a real sense of inner turmoil at times too.
Great movie with an amazing performance from Willem Dafoe, an under-appreciated film from the excellent Martin Scorsese. It’s a way better movie than Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ.
Marcel Körner for me it’s. The last temptation of Christ. Then silence and finally kundun. But they are all great films and better than most films dealing with religion and spirituality.
I became a Martin Scorsese fan a long time ago after I saw Casino when I was 16 and afterwards I wanted to see other movies that he made. I went on IMDB, went to 1988 and found "The Last Temptation of Christ." I was amazed. The same guy who directed a violent, profane movie about greed made a movie about Jesus? Then I read that it was not biblical. That turned me off. Often, Biblically inaccurate movies are not that good and turn out confusing, frustrating, or even boring. But I did some research on the movie anyways. On You Tube, I found a 13 minute interview with Martin Scorsese which stated why he made it. He noticed from his Catholic upbringing that Jesus was God AND He was a man. He was a human-like us! Since that is the case, what is it that makes Him human like us? That is the point of this movie. It's not biblical, but rather a thought provoking portrayal of Jesus' struggle with being human and His destiny to suffer and die by crucifixion. I also saw that Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel both adored it. Roger gave it 4/4 stars and in 2008 he wrote a review for his "Great Movies" series of reviews. And despite giving it 3.5 stars, Gene called it the best movie of the year! Additionally, I discovered that the un biblical nature of the movie gained controversy upon release. There were protests, death threats to Martin Scorsese, attacked film goers, etc. over the movie. And most of the protesters did not even see it! Then I decided it was time to check out this movie for myself. My 18th birthday was coming up, so I asked a friend who was once my babysitter to get it for me. I got it a month early. You will not be able to imagine how excited I was! I watched it that night to check it out. A part of me wants to analyze the movie scene by scene. But you probably don't want to read a review that long.Therefore I will discuss 2 main inaccuracies that made an uproar over 3 decades ago: 2 Corinthians 5:21 says of Jesus: "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." So Jesus was sinless. Got it. There is a scene in which Jesus talks with someone on a hill and he says that He sins. This ticked off many people-and it was even debated on Oprah. But the scene does not end here. "We all sin." The person responds. "Well, not my sins." Jesus continues. Look at my verse quote again. Jesus knew no sin, but took our sins upon Himself. That's what He is saying-at least that's how I look at it. The biggest controversy involves Christ on the cross, and an angel comes and tells Him that God wants Him to live a normal life-and not die for mankind. Jesus has struggled with this fate for the whole movie, and is relieved to hear this. He comes down, marries Mary Magdalene, and has kids with her. This includes a half-minute scene in which they have sex. This angered the protesters the most. However, the movie is a work of fiction-and so this is not meant to be taken seriously. Later, He grows old and learns that His "angel" is actually Satan-who has deceived Him so He would not achieve victory over death. He asks God for another chance to die on the cross-and He gets it. He goes back on the cross and-relieved that He has achieved God's will, smiles and screams: "It is accomplished!" This is followed by joyous music that I have to dance to every time! :) As a result, the movie ended up making me appreciate Jesus's sacrifice more than any other moment in my life! I was very uplifted by the movie for the next few days, and I still have an emotional attachment now-after seeing it 7 or 8 times in 3 years! I even shared that with my senior year English class when I had to discuss my favorite movie for a minute as a class assignment! There is so much more that I could say about The Last Temptation of Christ, but this gives you a general idea on why I cherish this movie so much! I apologize that this review is so long(this may be the longest review that I ever write) but this is to give you a general idea on how spiritual, and not blasphemous, it is. The movie was based on a novel by an agnostic. In the prologue, he writes, in paraphrase: "I hope this story will let any free man more than before, and better than before, love Christ." And that is where The Last Temptation of Christ undeniably succeeds! 4/14/20 Edit: I re-watched the movie on the day before Easter, among a few other Biblical movies that weekend. While it still makes my top 10, I consider The Prince of Egypt to be my favorite movie now. My IMDB review here: www.imdb.com/review/rw5199013/?ref_=ur_urv
You did a good job reviewing the movie while I respect the movie and there's still questions I have about it I wish you could talk to this one weirdo I was talking to online about and he really thinks the movie was telling the truth and I'm like are you crazy it's a dream sequence not supposed to be real but he thought it was.Personally I think it was the Biblical version of It's a Wonderful Life almost.
@@zacharysiple629 I hope you do make a analysis video on the movie especially with these weird agnostic people on UA-cam and Facebook comments about it thinking it's supposed to be serious.Its just a Hollywood movie it's not the truth.
@@Thespeedrap They pretty much covered that in the review. Had it just followed the gospels then it would have been like every other movie about Jesus instead of something unique
Whether they recognized it or not, or could say it publicly, the trial scene before David Bowie as Pilate was not masterful by Scorsese and Bowie, it was also far more plausible than the trial in the Gospels, which are clearly fiction and polemic and propaganda. It was actually the best and most important scene in the movie, and absolutely brilliant by Scorsese. One thing in the Gospels that’s believable is that Jesus was publicly hailed as “King” and messiah by his followers, which is something the movie takes seriously. And is the very reason why both an honest historical Pilate would have summarily crucified Jesus, and the very reason that Bowie’s Pilate did.
I heard Noah incorporated more elements from Kabbalah Judaism than Christianity, as well as drawing from the Book of Enoch, which is likely why people protested. Yet critics loved it apparently.
I remember people making a big deal about how the word G-d was never used. It's just that the Torah is where Noah originates. The Torah is part of the Jewish faith. And to use the name outside of prayer and religious ceremonies is to use his name in vain in Judaism.
Wonderful film. Difficult to watch for many, but undeniably a wonderful one. I can't believe Scorsese had to get all that shit for having done, yet again, another masterpiece.
I find it hard to imagine being both God and Man simultaneously and him as a man praying to himself as a God...this film explores the paradox of being both God and Man
This is an amazing review. While I have my disagreements with the film, I did like the film. I also think Defoe is one of the great actors of all time.
Well, Siskel and Ebert haven't a clue here. There is not a shred of evidence in the Gospels that Jesus ever doubted who he was or his mission. Tempted, yes, but never for a second unsure what to do. In fact, from the Finding in the Temple to the Crucifixion, he is a person wholly aware of who he is. So, this was the major objection to the movie for Christians, and rightfully so. The reasons some may feel otherwise is perhaps to feel better about themselves ("Hey, if Christ was not perfect, maybe I'm not so bad after all !"). But, that doesn't wash with the historical Jesus.
You make a fair point that Jesus never doubts Himself in the Gospels. But as humans, we all have doubts. Why wouldn't Jesus? While Jesus never doubts His mission, He still begs God before His arrest: "Let this cup pass from me." That's what Scorsese is exploring. It's not intended to be "historical Jesus", but a "What If" story. I've heard someone perfectly describe this as "It's A Wonderful Christ." That's all Scorsese is doing.
I’m sure it’s easier for an audience to identify with and better understand the figure of Christ in both an historical or a spiritual sense by seeing him possessing qualities that we all do and not by seeing an infallible messiah through whom the unstoppable power of god perpetually flows. I sense you’ve deliberately obviated the central theme of the film.
@backwhenarmyoftwofirstcam = Willem Dafoe play Jesus(capital "J") ... not heard before since the film was made before you were born. Any other rhetorical questions?
This movie is well-played, well-directed etc, but it is made by non-Christians who have no idea of the New Testament. the movie is based on a book, not a bible and in the eyes of Christians it is heresy because it denies all that is divine in Jesus
Yes but he is not practice Catholicism. He thinks about it but not practice so he's point of view is more from non believer side. That's why no believe person will see this movie as accurate vision of Christ. Christ was no sinner and in few first minute he deny who was Christ really was. So this movie is wrong on many ways
@@christodobko181 Yeah, he does consider himself a "lapsed" Catholic, but his faith does seem to be a part of his life. Did you happen to see Silence? Also, it's not meant to be an accurate version of Jesus's life. It opens with a disclaimer that it's not based on the Gospels. Jesus never sins directly in the movie. He resists temptation numerous times, and I don't just mean the last half hour. Mary Magdalene (let's set aside that she wasn't a prostitute Biblically speaking) tries to get Jesus to touch her naked body, and he runs out the door, to which Mary says: "Are you sure you're even a man?" He ignores the snake that has Mary's voice, the lion with Judas's voice, and the flame of Satan in the desert, and manages to fast, save for that one fruit. I know you're probably thinking of the scene where Jesus tells that guy that he sins and that he lies and all, and at face value, that's pretty blasphemous, sure. (2 Corinthians 5:21.) However, Jesus's struggle in the movie is that He has to take on the burden of our sins, so I personally take it as He's bearing our sin even before He is on the cross, emotionally. That would explain the opening, where He fears God is attacking Him. Again, this isn't based on the Gospels, and it's not trying to be, or to replace it. It's just a what-if of what it would be like for Jesus to not die for our sins. I've heard someone perfectly describe it as "It's A Wonderful Christ." This movie shows that Jesus's sacrifice would be a burden, and I think that in that goal, the movie succeeds. It's not theologically perfect, I'll give you that, but it works in the way it intends to.
I find it very difficult to understand and grasp a being who is both God and Man simultaneously , both creator and creation. When Jesus is praying, he is just a man praying to God otherwise isn’t he praying to his own divine self? When Jesus does miracles , he is a God and not Man as no man can do what he does . Jesus is both subject to all the temptations of being a Man but yet has the omnipotence of God . If Jesus can considered in every way, to be a fully ordinary Man, who sets an example for other men, then isn’t this saying that it’s possible for Man to achieve salvation on his own? If Jesus can overcome as an ordinary man and not as a God-man so can other men, then his example is enough, why the need for his sacrifice? If Jesus is a God-Man with attributes of both, then he is a superhuman and ordinary men cannot hope to achieve salvation on their own. This film fleshes out the paradox inherent in this fusion of God and Man, this God-Man who is both completely human as well as completely God but appearing more human than divine in both the Gospels as well as in this great film.
There already has been a movie about him, but it sucks because you can't show him onscreen. At least, not without a building or train getting blown up.
@@adamatomic41 I know and have seen the movie more than once and it’s actually a good thing that his face isn’t shown just goes to show how big his impact was on us I know that you’re gonna disagree with me on some stuff but I get it and I respect your opinion But if you’re gonna hate me just because of my beliefs like some people do just know that I couldn’t care less what you think you have what you believe in and I have mine
The movie took the story of Jesus more seriously than any of the films that presented him as a perfect being with no weaknesses or temptations, who knew what was going to happen to him from the beginning and faced his death without fear as a predestined occurrence. That presentation which Christians demand has always completely undermined the Jesus mythology to me, and Christians seem determined to miss the point; that Jesus didn't just suffer like a regular person, but had all the weaknesses as well; but still followed his path until the end despite the cost. Thank God I'm an atheist.
I think Ebert was wrong, though. Pier Paolo Pasolini's 1964 film _Gospel According to Matthew_ takes the gospel story just as seriously and is equally as good. Ebert gave it four stars in 2004, but I can't believe that he hadn't seen it when he did this review of Scorsese's film. I think he let himself get carried away here.
Well, if you do not like this movie, on the grounds that it did not happen as depicted, then I guess you would have to take offense with all those other bible-based movies too. And how long after that before they begin to censor children's Christmas plays in public schools? "Sally, the wise men did not chew gum .. Ok people, from the top.." Million Dollar Baby (Clint Eastwood) - a movie about Euthanasia. .. It is written that one is not to compare the glory of God with that of corruptible man, (see, ro 1:22-25, kjv) but this movie basically uses a mathematical technique called, Proof by Contradiction to affirm His INCorruptible nature. If not tempted by the flesh, then how was he tempted? I think, He was tempted to walk away from the Crucifixion, which is confirmed by the fact that He prayed in the garden of gethsemene, saying, May this cup of sufferring be taken away, but not my will Father, yours be done.. That was his temptation, and his passion, to rescue, claim, The Bride. .. If you were paralyzed and in pain, would you desire that sufferring to end, or would you continue? Did He not "commit suicide" on the Cross, having "had enough"? Or was it a case of seeing how dying could be victory? For sin itself would become guilty, and have to die, if an innocent being were to die. As it is written, The wages of sin is death. But by rising again, death was swallowed up in victory. The goldfish that swallowed a whale... The point being, I found this movie interesting for all the thoughts it provoked about His True Nature, by showing not how things happened. .. It is written, If we partake of his sufferrings, then we will also partake of his glory. .. So, if you find yourself in pain, contemplating "falling upon a sword", consider how you might feel, seeing Him, knowing his power to heal and resurrect... how quick would you be to have those nails removed in that light, that Truth? ... Both man and God ... umm, well, man is corruptible, but He is not. He is son of man, and son of God. God is invisible. God is Love. The Word of God is Truth. The Word WAS God ; The Word was made flesh. See, John 10:30, kjv. .. A sealed box may have a cat and a flashlight inside, but who would look at that box and say, "That, is a cat" ? ... having said that, I understand that my commentary, and this movie, may offend someone's "Christian sensibilities", but I also think that this movie, and my review might help another too, to see better. .. finally, what do you expect from Jewish Hollywood?
I'm a Christian and as far as movies go, this is a masterpiece. It's one of my favorite Biblical era films. In fact, it was my favorite movie for a couple of years. It made me appreciate Jesus more than any other film has.
I think it was ok.Sure the dialogue a little put off and have that infamous dream sequence but it does ask questions about what if.And how if we want to follow Christ we need to take whatever cross we have to bare.
@@Thespeedrapyes the casting and more contemporary dialogue was a choice by the director which doesn't work for everyone. The rest if the film though I think is just sublime, the acting, music, locations, cotumes really put me into that world of 1st century Palestine. The director found a way to make every key moment real and new, like the raising of Lazurus and the water turned go wine. You get a real sense of inner turmoil at times too.
@@lw3646 True I need to see this movie again and analyze what's right with it and wrong with parts of it.All I know is whenever a Biblical epic is made there's always some issue and controversy surrounding it.
Both Siskel and Ebert were way off. This movie was an objectively bad movie. The blasphemy was the least of the movie's problems: the schizophrenic casting; the acting that was either wooden and lifeless, or Tommy Wiseau-levels of bad; the garish and unpleasant cinematography; and the hack scriptwriting; among other factors, so distracted me from the blasphemous aspect of the film that I spent three hours asking myself, "What even am I watching?" "Why does Judas come from the Bronx?" "Why is the Devil trying to tempt Jesus with Darth Vader's 'Luke, Join Me' speech from the Empire Strikes Back?" Speaking of Star Wars, "Why did Willem Dafoe play a Jesus that could give Anakin Skywalker whining lessons?" And now I have a final question: "What movie were Siskel and Ebert watching?" The ending was also shallow and unconvincing. It was all a dream at the end? Really? This was the best ending they could come up with? And to think this was done by Martin Scorsese, who had given us Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, and Goodfellas! This movie was three hours of my life I'll never get back. Martin, you could have done so much better. In fact, you have done so much better before! What was this cinematic crap? Anyway, I'm done.
Subversive Reality Jesus doesnt really have a personality in the bible but in this, he's angry and anxious but still gentle and kind in the bible he is meant to be flawed and human but almost never does anything relatable or real in this Dafoe makes him a tortured reluctant savior and it's pretty damn hard to forget his role or Scorseses direction
![Martin Scorsese on The Last Temptation of Christ [deutsch untertitelt]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5wzPks3JDYs/mqdefault.jpg)
Dafoe should be an Oscar winner.
HAAAAAAAARRRRRRRK!!!!
gaae2000 the lighthouse was literally HIS OSCAR! You took it from him Brad Pitt. Give it back
@@friendlypup5650 And all for Brad Pitt's most mediocre performance so far, the Oscar are a fucking joke.
You mean the guy who's played Passolini, Van Gogh, Jesus, Bobby Peru, The Green Goblin and still makes his own stunts over sixty years old? The Oscar is beneath him, he deserves much more...
Interesting that Jesus was mislabeled a false prophet in his day by those who hadn't seen his works.
And his film, 2000 years later, is mislabeled as blasphemy by those who haven't seen it.
Guess humanity hasn't changed much after all
well that's the truth, we humans will never change.
I miss these two.
I am not religious, but Amen.
Yup, irreplaceable
Great movie indeed. Dafoe's performance is epic.
You would never hear film critics talking like this today. What happened?
they didn't aspire to become movie critics
DejaVoodooDoll love your comment. The Last Jedi took risks and apparently that’s no longer appreciated
Steve Jones the only really critic that I still think is great is Peter Travers
Islam happened
There are a lot of great insightful critics working today.
This one of favorite Siskel moment, I'll say a prayer for him
I watched this movie expecting to see the name of Jesus Christ dragged through the mud, with all manner of perverse sexuality and degradation, but found myself being challenged, captivated, and ultimately enriched by it. I second all the points Siskel and Ebert hit on too. Anyone who can't take a sincere look at their faith or consider different perspectives, is no believer at all. Funny how a movie that is decades old can be more effective than anything else
As an atheist I thought the film was brilliant. Those protesters don't understand their own faith
It's not a biblical movie at all. It asserts Jesus was not God.
@@johnsambo9379 Did you not see the ending where he rejected the last temptation and gave up having a life of his own to be sacrificed on the cross for our sins?
Peter Gabriel soundtrack is ace as well, a big part of it
Completely agree. It challenges everything you may have previously learned about Christ, yet you draw closer to him by seeing this film. Portraying Jesus in any film is very difficult: we don't even know what he looked like (the Bible does not describe his physical appearance). But Willem Dafoe's performance here provides great balance between strength and self-doubt; he's a very human Messiah. I don't know why there was so much protest over this movie - I'll bet most of the protesters never even saw it.
I think people need to look at this film from a different lens, because obviously how Jesus is portrayed in this movie is completely heretical and blasphemous and it’s just inaccurate, it’s also based on the novel so it’s a different interpretation of Jesus altogether, if people are going into this from looking for a biblically accurate interpretation of Jesus they’re not gonna get it, but for what this film is I think it’s great.
It harrases our faith.. The devil dared to temp Jesus but Jesus in Himself was never tempted. Jesus is the beginning of creation on the right hand side of God, nothing that was made was made without Him, pick up a stone and He is there. He is the Alpha and the Omega the beginning and the end, the mirror revelation of God the father. In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. And the Word was God..and the Word became flesh.. He dwelt among us...read the beginning of the 'book of John' in the bible
@@pleaseenteraname1103 its not great.. Because people who have not read the Bible can misinterpret the truth of the Word of God.. And can get all mixed up and confused making God, Jesus, the beginning of creation for whom everything was made, a mirror image of the perfect blameless Father in heaven.. into a mere man with sinful desires.. Our holy perfect God.. Our Creator.. Into a mere sinful man..
It’s funny how the things that make this movie “blasphemous” are what make it so good and arguably the best portrayal of Jesus I’ve seen. Jesus’ sacrifice is way more impactful in this movie because he is depicted like an actual human being who has been tasked with being the saviour of humanity. His death feels like a triumph because he could’ve saved himself and lived the life he wanted but he overcomes all of those inner desires and accepts God’s plan, which is something only Jesus could do.
@@sandyscuba6101It seems to me you are expressing the heresy of Appolinarianism which is all too common in modern Christianity (often due to a reading of the synoptic gospels in the light of John’s gospel), and which this movie explicitly seeks to counteract. As they say in the video, the solely divine Jesus which you describe is completely unrelatable to the human heart, and this movie reminds us that He was also fully human and so suffered with the same doubts and fears with which we suffer. In this way it serves to brings Jesus closer to us.
Love it. It's truly one of the most powerful films about Christ that I've ever seen. God and man, exactly. Very inspiring to see Jesus struggle with His humanity, and overcome His own flaws to fulfill the will of God...
R rs true. Wdgguhhdhg. No
You are right, it was very strong story with great performances.
Jesus was never tempted. The whole movie is heresy.
@@johnsambo9379 Actually The Temptation of Christ is a well known Biblical narrative detailed in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The only difference here is that the film (and the book it was based upon) give us a very visceral, humanistic portrayal of Jesus with which we can examine our own temptations. The entire concept of Jesus as savior is that he is both fully man and fully divine. The film (and book) simply wish to take a closer examination of the human side of that equation, in order for us to more fully connect with Jesus. The beauty of the story is that Jesus's great "temptation" is not one of lust or greed, but simply to enjoy the everyday beauty that we as human beings are able to enjoy. To have a wife, a family, an ordinary life. But just because he feels this temptation does not mean he gives into it. He actively *rejects* the temptation (just as in the Gospels) in order to remain on the cross and die for us. The director Scorsese studied to be a Catholic priest before becoming a filmmaker and is incredibly well-versed on the Gospels. He's also a historian who has studied with meticulous attention to detail about that time period, and a man who has studied the various artistic renderings of Jesus. I point this all out just to make it clear that Scorsese's intent was not heresy, but instead to give audiences a chance to connect on a truly empathetic level to our Lord. Or, as Scorsese himself said when asked why he wanted to make this, "I want to get to know Jesus better"
@@matthewrocca4197 It was certainly AEONS better than that horrid "Passion" movie. "TLTOC" made me feel closer to the concept of Jesus. It is an overlooked masterpiece.
The great Greek writer Nikos Kazantzakis wrote this book and Scorsese made a great movie out of it!
The human side of Jesus must have looked at the cross and went, I know I was destined to die for the sins of the world, but did I sign up for THIS? That's the side of Jesus who is my hero. He knew he would suffer incredibly and go through incredible pain and die, but he had the courage and humanity to do it anyway. He was tempted to quit on us, but he didn't. That must have been hugely hard for him as the first real humanitarian and feminist. He could have had a human life with Mary M. He gave all that shit up because he gave that much of a damn about us. That's the message of this movie.
The best movie ever made about Jesus Christ. Fiction or not, it is still THE best.
I assume you've never seen "Jesus Christ - Vampire Hunter".
it's my favorite movie.
Willem Dafoe playing the lead in this film AND Mississippi Burning the same year. He must have been on fire back in 1988.
He was also in ‘Saigon’ in 1988 and ‘Triumph of the Spirit’ and ‘Born on the Fourth of July’ soon after
Dafoe is still kicking ass well into the 2020s.
The fact that so many Christians are the least humble most arrogant on earth is just complete insanity. Like god do you even know the first thing about Jesus or what he taught
Better movie and better message than Passion of the Christ in my opinion.
Couldn't agree with you more!
Easily better and much more fulfilling than Passion, agreed.👍
Best Jesus movies are Color of the Cross and Greatest Story Ever Told.
I agree. This is far superior.
Passion is on a different level, it showed the true pain and suffering of Jesus.
I saw this movie 7 years ago and I agree with Siskel. It really was an experience.
I loved this movie and couldn't put it out of my mind for days. Scorcese's direction on this film and Defoe's portrayal of Jesus moved me to tears... truly a brilliant film adaptation of one of the most important events in human history.
I use to hate this movie, but I came to love it. I own it on DVD.
Cool! I also have it on DVD. :)
this film was a masterpiece whether you are religious or not you need to see this film
Yeah, WIllem Dafoe is absolutely brilliant. His humility bleeds into his portrayal and his delivery is heartfelt. I like Marty's interpretation a lot.
One of my five favorite movies of all-time. A film that's less about structure and more about emotion and ideas. A film that, for me, really hit on the struggle we all face between humanity and godliness, and how that struggle can make us stronger.
Dafoe is Striking in his performance. I mean natural with these surges of human emotion - extraordinary actor.
How does one stay alive without stepping on someone?
Bro Martin Scorsese got Roger Ebert to preach the gospel in a movie review. Wow.
The most understandable Scorsese movie and that’s a fact. Masterpiece
God should strike down the filthy rich mega pastors of today.
They strike themselves down. Think of Siskel’s comment on the shot of the coins flying into the air.
By focusing on Jesus's humanity the movie helps underscore just how much Jesus actually had to sacrifice. This is the only movie about Jesus that matches up with the Jesus in the Bible why he has been forsaken. He knows exactly what is going to happen and orders Judas to betray him. The plan was always to sacrifice himself for man, but he still fears what exactly his death will entail.
They are completely right about this film. Superb.
Bowie was underrated in this film, too.💝
Harvey Keitel is the only bad performance
@@kdizzle901 I thought his calm and disinterested Pilate worked well.
It is very important that Siskel who was Jewish described brilliantly how this film effected him spiritually
The Law only governs the flesh, not the spirit. And the flesh passes away .. Intent, love, matters. "Did you not read the sign? No Palestinians allowed".
the casting and more contemporary dialogue was a choice by the director which doesn't work for everyone. The rest if the film though I think is just sublime, the acting, music, locations, cotumes really put me into that world of 1st century Palestine. The director found a way to make every key moment real and new, like the raising of Lazurus and the water turned go wine. You get a real sense of inner turmoil at times too.
There aren't many artists in our current time, if any at all, who have spoken about religion and faith more, or better, than Martin Scorsese.
The controversy was wild in retrospect. This is one of the best Christian movies ever made.
Great movie with an amazing performance from Willem Dafoe, an under-appreciated film from the excellent Martin Scorsese. It’s a way better movie than Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ.
I love both movies, but I agree. :)
Thanks for the upload!!!
Last Temptation of Christ
Kundun
Silence
Which is the best?
Marcel Körner for me it’s. The last temptation of Christ. Then silence and finally kundun.
But they are all great films and better than most films dealing with religion and spirituality.
Three masterpieces. Actually I'd take his Religion Trilogy over his Greed Trilogy (Goodfellas/Casino/Wolf) any day. Only Marty S.
All so good!
Last Temptation. Silence was overrated
Undercover Brother
I became a Martin Scorsese fan a long time ago after I saw Casino when I was 16 and afterwards I wanted to see other movies that he made. I went on IMDB, went to 1988 and found "The Last Temptation of Christ." I was amazed. The same guy who directed a violent, profane movie about greed made a movie about Jesus?
Then I read that it was not biblical. That turned me off. Often, Biblically inaccurate movies are not that good and turn out confusing, frustrating, or even boring.
But I did some research on the movie anyways. On You Tube, I found a 13 minute interview with Martin Scorsese which stated why he made it. He noticed from his Catholic upbringing that Jesus was God AND He was a man. He was a human-like us! Since that is the case, what is it that makes Him human like us?
That is the point of this movie. It's not biblical, but rather a thought provoking portrayal of Jesus' struggle with being human and His destiny to suffer and die by crucifixion.
I also saw that Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel both adored it. Roger gave it 4/4 stars and in 2008 he wrote a review for his "Great Movies" series of reviews. And despite giving it 3.5 stars, Gene called it the best movie of the year!
Additionally, I discovered that the un biblical nature of the movie gained controversy upon release. There were protests, death threats to Martin Scorsese, attacked film goers, etc. over the movie. And most of the protesters did not even see it!
Then I decided it was time to check out this movie for myself. My 18th birthday was coming up, so I asked a friend who was once my babysitter to get it for me. I got it a month early. You will not be able to imagine how excited I was! I watched it that night to check it out.
A part of me wants to analyze the movie scene by scene. But you probably don't want to read a review that long.Therefore I will discuss 2 main inaccuracies that made an uproar over 3 decades ago:
2 Corinthians 5:21 says of Jesus: "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." So Jesus was sinless. Got it.
There is a scene in which Jesus talks with someone on a hill and he says that He sins. This ticked off many people-and it was even debated on Oprah. But the scene does not end here.
"We all sin." The person responds. "Well, not my sins." Jesus continues.
Look at my verse quote again. Jesus knew no sin, but took our sins upon Himself. That's what He is saying-at least that's how I look at it.
The biggest controversy involves Christ on the cross, and an angel comes and tells Him that God wants Him to live a normal life-and not die for mankind. Jesus has struggled with this fate for the whole movie, and is relieved to hear this. He comes down, marries Mary Magdalene, and has kids with her. This includes a half-minute scene in which they have sex. This angered the protesters the most.
However, the movie is a work of fiction-and so this is not meant to be taken seriously.
Later, He grows old and learns that His "angel" is actually Satan-who has deceived Him so He would not achieve victory over death. He asks God for another chance to die on the cross-and He gets it.
He goes back on the cross and-relieved that He has achieved God's will, smiles and screams: "It is accomplished!" This is followed by joyous music that I have to dance to every time! :)
As a result, the movie ended up making me appreciate Jesus's sacrifice more than any other moment in my life! I was very uplifted by the movie for the next few days, and I still have an emotional attachment now-after seeing it 7 or 8 times in 3 years! I even shared that with my senior year English class when I had to discuss my favorite movie for a minute as a class assignment!
There is so much more that I could say about The Last Temptation of Christ, but this gives you a general idea on why I cherish this movie so much! I apologize that this review is so long(this may be the longest review that I ever write) but this is to give you a general idea on how spiritual, and not blasphemous, it is.
The movie was based on a novel by an agnostic. In the prologue, he writes, in paraphrase: "I hope this story will let any free man more than before, and better than before, love Christ." And that is where The Last Temptation of Christ undeniably succeeds!
4/14/20 Edit: I re-watched the movie on the day before Easter, among a few other Biblical movies that weekend. While it still makes my top 10, I consider The Prince of Egypt to be my favorite movie now.
My IMDB review here: www.imdb.com/review/rw5199013/?ref_=ur_urv
@zacharysiple629 - are you as long winded in daily life, as here ?!?
@@warriormanmaxx8991 Depends I guess- LOL. I write IMDB reviews, this is my review of The Last Temptation of Christ.
You did a good job reviewing the movie while I respect the movie and there's still questions I have about it I wish you could talk to this one weirdo I was talking to online about and he really thinks the movie was telling the truth and I'm like are you crazy it's a dream sequence not supposed to be real but he thought it was.Personally I think it was the Biblical version of It's a Wonderful Life almost.
@@Thespeedrap Personally I think it was the Biblical version of It's a Wonderful Life almost.
Agreed.
@@zacharysiple629 I hope you do make a analysis video on the movie especially with these weird agnostic people on UA-cam and Facebook comments about it thinking it's supposed to be serious.Its just a Hollywood movie it's not the truth.
One of my favorite movies of all time
4:09 Michelle Pfeiffer is an unhappy Mafia's wife!
Is the Mafia unhappy? Or is the wife unhappy?
What’s the difference?
@wrightsong - have you done any personal research, or is asking questions easier ?!?
THe scene where he says "Mother, i"m sorry for being a bad son" is so gripping and ties the god man duality of Christ.
agreed
Ken Havens the duality is not a contrast. He was a perfect son and a divinely wise child
I like the movie just wish they have written the script better and followed the Bible instead.Where's the resurrection and ascension at end.
@@Thespeedrap They pretty much covered that in the review. Had it just followed the gospels then it would have been like every other movie about Jesus instead of something unique
@@adamatomic41 But I'm saying it could have been better if they showed the resurrection instead of him just dead on the cross at the end.
Whether they recognized it or not, or could say it publicly, the trial scene before David Bowie as Pilate was not masterful by Scorsese and Bowie, it was also far more plausible than the trial in the Gospels, which are clearly fiction and polemic and propaganda. It was actually the best and most important scene in the movie, and absolutely brilliant by Scorsese.
One thing in the Gospels that’s believable is that Jesus was publicly hailed as “King” and messiah by his followers, which is something the movie takes seriously. And is the very reason why both an honest historical Pilate would have summarily crucified Jesus, and the very reason that Bowie’s Pilate did.
The religious went crazy for Noah too. Yet this was another movie that made these stories fresh. It was good for this religion!
I heard Noah incorporated more elements from Kabbalah Judaism than Christianity, as well as drawing from the Book of Enoch, which is likely why people protested.
Yet critics loved it apparently.
I remember people making a big deal about how the word G-d was never used. It's just that the Torah is where Noah originates. The Torah is part of the Jewish faith. And to use the name outside of prayer and religious ceremonies is to use his name in vain in Judaism.
They can never get that story right because it's relevant to today's standards with the world we live in.
Wonderful film. Difficult to watch for many, but undeniably a wonderful one.
I can't believe Scorsese had to get all that shit for having done, yet again, another masterpiece.
I find it hard to imagine being both God and Man simultaneously and him as a man praying to himself as a God...this film explores the paradox of being both God and Man
I need to see this again
I grew up with Willem Dafoe. So now I can say I played kickball with Jesus.
Two guys missing the boat. I hope they reassessed the movie, which was an affront to a Holy God.
Siskel & Ebert Review Martin Scorsese's THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST (1988)
This is an amazing review. While I have my disagreements with the film, I did like the film. I also think Defoe is one of the great actors of all time.
just finished the movie for the first time and damn....what a film
is Scorsese's [jesus] a good man or a [rich man]?
Well, Siskel and Ebert haven't a clue here. There is not a shred of evidence in the Gospels that Jesus ever doubted who he was or his mission. Tempted, yes, but never for a second unsure what to do. In fact, from the Finding in the Temple to the Crucifixion, he is a person wholly aware of who he is. So, this was the major objection to the movie for Christians, and rightfully so. The reasons some may feel otherwise is perhaps to feel better about themselves ("Hey, if Christ was not perfect, maybe I'm not so bad after all !"). But, that doesn't wash with the historical Jesus.
You make a fair point that Jesus never doubts Himself in the Gospels. But as humans, we all have doubts. Why wouldn't Jesus? While Jesus never doubts His mission, He still begs God before His arrest: "Let this cup pass from me."
That's what Scorsese is exploring. It's not intended to be "historical Jesus", but a "What If" story. I've heard someone perfectly describe this as "It's A Wonderful Christ." That's all Scorsese is doing.
I’m sure it’s easier for an audience to identify with and better understand the figure of Christ in both an historical or a spiritual sense by seeing him possessing qualities that we all do and not by seeing an infallible messiah through whom the unstoppable power of god perpetually flows. I sense you’ve deliberately obviated the central theme of the film.
@@georgemorley1029 Not really. Why do we admire "heroes?" - because they have superior qualities that we do not have. Often moral qualities.
There is no historical Jesus. It's Mythology.
@@PhilipPedro2112 But only because you say so.
I'm not the most religious person in tu the world but the way they adapted judas betrayal in this didn't work for me
Willem Dafoe plays jesus? WHAT? Why have I never seen this movie?
@backwhenarmyoftwofirstcam = Willem Dafoe play Jesus(capital "J") ... not heard before since the film was made before you were born. Any other rhetorical questions?
These guys got it.
This movie is well-played, well-directed etc, but it is made by non-Christians who have no idea of the New Testament. the movie is based on a book, not a bible and in the eyes of Christians it is heresy because it denies all that is divine in Jesus
Martin Scorsese was raised Catholic.
Yes but he is not practice Catholicism. He thinks about it but not practice so he's point of view is more from non believer side. That's why no believe person will see this movie as accurate vision of Christ. Christ was no sinner and in few first minute he deny who was Christ really was. So this movie is wrong on many ways
@@christodobko181 Yeah, he does consider himself a "lapsed" Catholic, but his faith does seem to be a part of his life. Did you happen to see Silence?
Also, it's not meant to be an accurate version of Jesus's life. It opens with a disclaimer that it's not based on the Gospels.
Jesus never sins directly in the movie. He resists temptation numerous times, and I don't just mean the last half hour. Mary Magdalene (let's set aside that she wasn't a prostitute Biblically speaking) tries to get Jesus to touch her naked body, and he runs out the door, to which Mary says: "Are you sure you're even a man?"
He ignores the snake that has Mary's voice, the lion with Judas's voice, and the flame of Satan in the desert, and manages to fast, save for that one fruit.
I know you're probably thinking of the scene where Jesus tells that guy that he sins and that he lies and all, and at face value, that's pretty blasphemous, sure. (2 Corinthians 5:21.)
However, Jesus's struggle in the movie is that He has to take on the burden of our sins, so I personally take it as He's bearing our sin even before He is on the cross, emotionally. That would explain the opening, where He fears God is attacking Him.
Again, this isn't based on the Gospels, and it's not trying to be, or to replace it. It's just a what-if of what it would be like for Jesus to not die for our sins. I've heard someone perfectly describe it as "It's A Wonderful Christ."
This movie shows that Jesus's sacrifice would be a burden, and I think that in that goal, the movie succeeds. It's not theologically perfect, I'll give you that, but it works in the way it intends to.
Pure mythology.
Hmmm...this review makes me want to see this movie!
Doooo it.
It's definetly worth watching
Best biblical movie ever made imo
It's still not Ten Commandments and Ben Hur better and the TNT series in the 90s.
I find it very difficult to understand and grasp a being who is both God and Man simultaneously , both creator and creation. When Jesus is praying, he is just a man praying to God otherwise isn’t he praying to his own divine self? When Jesus does miracles , he is a God and not Man as no man can do what he does . Jesus is both subject to all the temptations of being a Man but yet has the omnipotence of God . If Jesus can considered in every way, to be a fully ordinary Man, who sets an example for other men, then isn’t this saying that it’s possible for Man to achieve salvation on his own? If Jesus can overcome as an ordinary man and not as a God-man so can other men, then his example is enough, why the need for his sacrifice? If Jesus is a God-Man with attributes of both, then he is a superhuman and ordinary men cannot hope to achieve salvation on their own. This film fleshes out the paradox inherent in this fusion of God and Man, this God-Man who is both completely human as well as completely God but appearing more human than divine in both the Gospels as well as in this great film.
boo kian Khan
Maybe we are all praying to ourselves when we pray?
‘That of god in everyone’
Boo Khian Khan
All you have to do is Love Jesus . Then everything is understood.🌹
it's very difficult because your cognitive dissonance is kicking in and telling you that's it's not true.
What did Ted and Dougal think about it?
They gave a way the plot!
Now make a movie like this about Muhammad
There already has been a movie about him, but it sucks because you can't show him onscreen. At least, not without a building or train getting blown up.
@@adamatomic41 I know and have seen the movie more than once and it’s actually a good thing that his face isn’t shown just goes to show how big his impact was on us
I know that you’re gonna disagree with me on some stuff but I get it and I respect your opinion
But if you’re gonna hate me just because of my beliefs like some people do just know that I couldn’t care less what you think you have what you believe in and I have mine
@cristerowarrior1450 - Make your own movie about the false god "Muhammad!" Ehhh?
It would be a real blockbuster.
Are Muhammad teachings strong as Jesus is NO its not
Great Movie 🍿
The movie took the story of Jesus more seriously than any of the films that presented him as a perfect being with no weaknesses or temptations, who knew what was going to happen to him from the beginning and faced his death without fear as a predestined occurrence.
That presentation which Christians demand has always completely undermined the Jesus mythology to me, and Christians seem determined to miss the point; that Jesus didn't just suffer like a regular person, but had all the weaknesses as well; but still followed his path until the end despite the cost.
Thank God I'm an atheist.
I think Ebert was wrong, though. Pier Paolo Pasolini's 1964 film _Gospel According to Matthew_ takes the gospel story just as seriously and is equally as good. Ebert gave it four stars in 2004, but I can't believe that he hadn't seen it when he did this review of Scorsese's film. I think he let himself get carried away here.
Well, if you do not like this movie, on
the grounds that it did not happen as
depicted, then I guess you would have to
take offense with all those other bible-based
movies too. And how long after that
before they begin to censor children's
Christmas plays in public schools?
"Sally, the wise men did not chew gum ..
Ok people, from the top.." Million Dollar
Baby (Clint Eastwood) - a movie about
Euthanasia. .. It is written that one is not
to compare the glory of God with that of
corruptible man, (see, ro 1:22-25, kjv)
but this movie basically
uses a mathematical technique called,
Proof by Contradiction to affirm His
INCorruptible nature. If not tempted by the
flesh, then how was he tempted? I think, He was
tempted to walk away from the Crucifixion,
which is confirmed by the fact that
He prayed in the garden of gethsemene,
saying, May this cup of sufferring be taken
away, but not my will Father, yours be done..
That was his temptation, and his passion, to
rescue, claim, The Bride. .. If you were paralyzed
and in pain, would you desire that sufferring
to end, or would you continue? Did He not
"commit suicide" on the Cross, having "had
enough"? Or was it a case of seeing how dying
could be victory? For sin itself would become
guilty, and have to die, if an innocent being
were to die. As it is written, The wages of sin is
death. But by rising again, death was swallowed
up in victory. The goldfish that swallowed a whale...
The point being, I found this movie
interesting for all the thoughts it provoked
about His True Nature, by showing not how
things happened. .. It is written, If we partake of
his sufferrings, then we will also partake of his
glory. .. So, if you find yourself in pain,
contemplating "falling upon a sword", consider
how you might feel, seeing Him, knowing his
power to heal and resurrect... how quick would
you be to have those nails removed in that
light, that Truth? ... Both man and God ... umm,
well, man is corruptible, but He is not. He is
son of man, and son of God. God is invisible.
God is Love. The Word of God is Truth.
The Word WAS God ; The Word was made flesh.
See, John 10:30, kjv. .. A sealed box may have
a cat and a flashlight inside, but who would
look at that box and say, "That, is a cat" ?
... having said that, I understand that my commentary,
and this movie, may offend someone's
"Christian sensibilities", but I also think that this movie,
and my review might help another too, to see better.
.. finally, what do you expect from Jewish Hollywood?
“We”? Count me out.
Why?
Philip Moore
Who was I quoting?
Siskel s o what are you saying your not religious thats fine but did you enjoy the movie
Philip Moore
Nope, not Siskel.
@@adamtzsch stop fuckin stalling and just tell me what you were trying to say
Burgess made more sense of this senselessness than Scorsese did.
Such a shame that so many Jesus worshippers have not watched this.
I'm a Christian and as far as movies go, this is a masterpiece. It's one of my favorite Biblical era films. In fact, it was my favorite movie for a couple of years. It made me appreciate Jesus more than any other film has.
I think it was ok.Sure the dialogue a little put off and have that infamous dream sequence but it does ask questions about what if.And how if we want to follow Christ we need to take whatever cross we have to bare.
@@Thespeedrapyes the casting and more contemporary dialogue was a choice by the director which doesn't work for everyone. The rest if the film though I think is just sublime, the acting, music, locations, cotumes really put me into that world of 1st century Palestine. The director found a way to make every key moment real and new, like the raising of Lazurus and the water turned go wine. You get a real sense of inner turmoil at times too.
@@lw3646 True I need to see this movie again and analyze what's right with it and wrong with parts of it.All I know is whenever a Biblical epic is made there's always some issue and controversy surrounding it.
I wanna see this
It's my favorite movie, I think it's fascinating! :)
www.imdb.com/review/rw5199013/?ref_=ur_urv
@tickedoffnow - re: "I wanna see this" = Go Ahead!! Do you tend to tell others what you "wanna do" before DOING ?!?
It’s a crap movie...the controversy was unnecessary but it doesn’t change that the movie wasn’t good.
Why didn't you like it?
harder to be a man than a good man??? gee
Interesting film but it's definitely not the Jesus from the Bible.
If you look it up you’ll see that it’s not meant to be from the Bible or a gospel it’s based on a controversial novel
Well, I thought Defoe was terrible, but I liked the scenes on the cross a lot.
Roger Ebert is Kim Jung Un! Finkle if Einhorn, Einhorn is Finkle... oh my god!!!
Too soon
Both Siskel and Ebert were way off. This movie was an objectively bad movie. The blasphemy was the least of the movie's problems: the schizophrenic casting; the acting that was either wooden and lifeless, or Tommy Wiseau-levels of bad; the garish and unpleasant cinematography; and the hack scriptwriting; among other factors, so distracted me from the blasphemous aspect of the film that I spent three hours asking myself, "What even am I watching?" "Why does Judas come from the Bronx?" "Why is the Devil trying to tempt Jesus with Darth Vader's 'Luke, Join Me' speech from the Empire Strikes Back?" Speaking of Star Wars, "Why did Willem Dafoe play a Jesus that could give Anakin Skywalker whining lessons?" And now I have a final question: "What movie were Siskel and Ebert watching?" The ending was also shallow and unconvincing. It was all a dream at the end? Really? This was the best ending they could come up with? And to think this was done by Martin Scorsese, who had given us Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, and Goodfellas! This movie was three hours of my life I'll never get back. Martin, you could have done so much better. In fact, you have done so much better before! What was this cinematic crap? Anyway, I'm done.
Blasphemy period ,scorcesses great but he fucked up here
Watched it?
God praise the Blasphemer!
I have seen it because I do not believe in judging a film i haven't seen and it's pure unadulterated blasphemous garbage!
Nowhere even close to the Biblical Christ... Not a memorable movie.
Subversive Reality Jesus doesnt really have a personality in the bible but in this, he's angry and anxious but still gentle and kind in the bible he is meant to be flawed and human but almost never does anything relatable or real in this Dafoe makes him a tortured reluctant savior and it's pretty damn hard to forget his role or Scorseses direction
Man, Buddhism would really fucking enrage some of you Christian fundamentalists if y'all could read lmao.
Worst.Jesus.Ever.
Great movie indeed. Dafoe's performance is epic.