We have asked Father Peter Malone, former President of International Catholic Organization for Cinema and Audiovisuals to give his recommendations. Please see our special Peter's Picks category for Father Malone's recommendations.

Father Peter Malone is an Australian priest, member of the religious order, the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. He has taught in secondary school but has spent most of his ministry teaching in adult education and in the Melbourne College of Divinity, especially theology, introduction to the Old Testament, and media. He edited Compass Theology review from 1972-1998.

Since 1968, he has been reviewing films for a number of Catholic magazines and periodicals. He has also written a number of books on religious aspects of cinema, including The Film, Films and Values, Movie Christs and Antichrists, Cinema Down Under, A Movie Lectionary.

In 1989 he was elected president of OCIC (the International Catholic Organization for Cinema) for the Pacific region. He was also elected to the International Directors Board of OCIC and in 1998, he was elected world president. At present he is based in London.

Father Peter Malone has offered a paper on how Jesus is viewed on film. We offer this below as a "free" courtesy to our customers.

THE JESUS-MOVIES: A SURVEY

It is useful to look at the major portrayals of Jesus on screen to see why the millions have responded to the movies and how these movies have interpreted Jesus and the Gospel message.

However, it may also be useful to go back over the hundred years or more of movie portrayals of Jesus. There have been distinctive phases of what could be presented and what was outlawed from the screen. The expectations of a generation that was in its teens in the 40s when there were no Jesus-movies, only memories of Cecil B. De Mille's The King of Kings, is different from those who were in their teens in the 1950s and enjoyed The Robe, The Silver Chalice, The Big Fisherman and Ben Hur.

Teenagers in the 60s saw the remake of King of Kings while those in the 70s saw Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell.

THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY TO INTOLERANCE

Soon after the Lumiere Brothers screened their first short films in Paris on December 28th 1895, the movie phenomenon spread quickly right around the globe. And, one of the earliest focuses of screen presentations was the Bible, especially the New Testament and the Gospels.

The Passion Play in Horwitz, Bohemia, was filmed by 1898 and sold around the world. In 1900, the Salvation Army in Australia had created a program in Melbourne consisting of slides and film segments, explained by lecture, of scenes of the Gospel and the early Church. It was called Soldiers of the Cross. The Salvation Army continued with this kind of program for a decade. Many Church groups did likewise.

For more than twenty years, passion play movies and dramas of the life of Jesus or derived from the Gospel were made with great frequency and were very popular.

A quite comprehensive documentary film produced by Britain's Channel 4 in conjunction with an Anglican group, Jesus Christ Moviestar (1990), traces the history of the Jesus-movie with a generous selection of clips and interviews. It traces the popularity of the biblical films in the early years, showing some scenes from the 1913 From the Manger to the Cross, filmed on location in Egypt. It also quotes from the actor who portrayed Jesus, 'an upper-class Englishman called Henderson Bland' whose writings of memoirs on his playing Jesus were 'in prose which aspired to the biblical'. In 2000, a recently restored Italian movie, Christus, was screened at the Venice Film Festival, an 80 minute movie filmed in Palestine and Egypt from 1914-1916. The movies, of course, were silent.

This means that the early appeal of Jesus on screen was limited to action and a theatrical style of acting, exaggerating by sweeping gesture. Sub-title captions presented the words as well as some description of the action. The interpretation of Jesus was reverent, often over-reverent, like holy cards or plaster statues coming to life. Poses and posturing rather than dramatising the Gospel events.

The best presentation of Jesus at this time was in D.W.Griffith's Intolerance, the Gospel narrative being one of four stories of intolerance over the ages that were intercut throughout the film. While Griffith's film is extraordinarily sophisticated in terms of a three-hour epic made only twenty years after the Lumiere Brothers' screenings, its picture of Jesus is more thematic rather than the depiction of a rounded character, showing him in episodes like the wedding feast at Cana, encountering the woman taken in adultery or the crucifixion.

It was difficult to identify with the Jesus on screen except as a response to a tableau or to a pageant. Jesus was personality-less, going through familiar reverent movements and moments which were aimed at inspiring audiences. Jesus was often piously observed.

DE MILLE, THEN THE ABSENCE OF THE JESUS-MOVIE

It was somewhat similar with Cecil B. De Mille's treatment of Jesus in The King of Kings (1927). However, the year before there was a very successful version, directed by Fred Niblo, of Ben Hur. General Lew Wallace's novel is sub-titled 'A Tale of the Christ'.

The silent version opens with Bethlehem and nativity scenes and intercuts the story of Judah Ben Hur with Gospel references and, finally, some Gospel incidents, especially Jesus' carrying the cross to Calvary. A sign of trends to come and unlike other Gospel movies being made at this time, the actor playing Jesus is not shown directly face on but, rather, he is off-screen except for, principally, a gesturing hand or arm. The rather artificially white and slender arm is seen emerging from the side of the screen in sawing at the carpenter's shop in Nazareth, in giving Ben Hur his cup of water and in healing Ben Hur's mother and sister on the way of the cross. The thematic use of the arm and hand is made clear when a close-up of the hand being nailed to the cross is the main image of the crucifixion. (There is a brief Last Supper sequence, modelled on Da Vinci, where Judas, at the front of the table, obscures the view of Jesus whose halo outline is visible.)

However, Cecil B. De Mille showed the last full movie portrait of Jesus for almost thirty five years. A revealing anecdote from De Mille's autobiography speaks of the director giving his actor portraying Jesus, H.B. Warner, a separate and secluded caravan on the set, even to Warner having his meals alone so that he would not, as De Mille declared, lose the atmosphere of Jesus. This theology of the incarnation seems to overemphasise the divine nature of Jesus.

Perhaps it was this emphasis on the divinity of Jesus that led to the British censor, in the second decade of the century, to state that direct portrayals of Jesus were not desirable on screen. Perhaps it was the consequence of this atmosphere of reverence but, after De Mille's The King of Kings, close-ups of Jesus' face disappeared from the commercial screen in English-language cinema for over three decades (Julien Duvivier's 1935 Golgotha being the exception, but it was cut in Britain).

During the late 40s and early 50s some American church organisations did make feature films of Jesus. In the late 40s, The Lawton Story was filmed in Oklahoma. It showed how the citizens of Lawton prepared for a Passion Play, its effects on their lives and the play itself. (Scenes were later edited for The Prince of Peace which had an international distribution amongst chrch groups.)

In 1939 James K.Friedrich produced The Great Commandment, a story of the early disciples with Jesus offscreen, voiced by director Irving Pichel. In 1952 he produced a 55 minute drama, I Beheld His Glory, using a flashback device for a centurion to tell the story of Jesus. Like Fr Patrick Peyton at this time, he used some Hollywood talent in the film. Robert Wilson, played Jesus, face-on, in a way which would not be commercially acceptable for another ten years. More ambitious was Friedrich's Day of Triumph (1954), directed by Irving Pichel and with Holloywood stars, Lee J.Cobb, Joanne Dru, Lowell Gilmore, Mike Connors.

In the mid 1950s, Friedrich's company produced Frank Borzage's The Big Fisherman, based on a novel by Lloyd C. Douglas, author of The Robe, which told the story of Peter, played by Howard Keel. By this stage of the 1950s, Jesus is once again off-screen with only the suggestion of his presence by his hand or his garments. In the Big Fisherman, Jesus heals Peter's mother-in-law. He also encounters Herod.

Catholic Fr Patrick Peyton produced a number of films in Hollywood with film-star friends using the stories of the decades of the Rosary. He made a feature on Jesus' passion, The Redeemer, in 1959 but he also used the conventions of the time in not showing Jesus in close up, relying on the voiceover technique, with Macdonald Carey speaking the Gospel words.

By the late 50s, a decade in which biblical movies became popular again, especially with the introduction of Cinemascope and other widescreen processes used for all kinds of historical epics, Jesus was becoming more visible. In 1951 came the first of the major Gospel epics, Quo Vadis. The title comes from an episode where Peter wants to leave Rome to avoid the persecution of the Christians. On the Appian way Peter encounters Jesus. Peter asks him where he is going. Jesus replies that he is going into Rome to be crucified. Peter, of course, turns back. Since this is all shown by light and sound, there is no characterisation of Jesus. (During Peter's preaching, there are some flashbacks to the Gospels, amongst them a Last Supper which is a re-creation of Da Vinci's painting.)

There is a crucifixion scene in The Robe (1953), but it focuses on the slave Demetrius (Victor Mature) who kneels at the foot of the cross thus allowing for the audience seeing Jesus' feet and his blood running down on Demetrius and on the centurion, Marcellus (Richard Burton), and the soldiers playing dice for Jesus' seamless robe, Marcellus gazing at the crucified Jesus while the camera cranes from the ground to just behind the crossbeam.

BEN HUR AND JESUS' REAPPEARANCE

The most striking of these films is William Wyler's multi-Oscar-winning film of 1959, Ben Hur, subtitled A Story of the Christ. Jesus is seen from the back, walking in the hills, as well as up on a hill for the sermon on the mount. There are passion sequences and the crucifixion but his face is obscured except for an angle shot of Jesus on the cross. There are no close-ups.

However, Jesus appears in two significant and parallel sequences that emphasise his humanity and thus allow an audience to feel for him as a person and begin an identification process.

When Ben Hur is arrested and sent to Rome, the chained prisoners march through desert landscapes, arriving at Nazareth. We see them through the open workshop window, noticing the arm of Jesus with a carpenter's tool. But it is when the captain refuses water to the parched Ben Hur that Jesus appears, first as a shadow cast on Ben Hur when he has sunk to the ground and groans, 'God help me'. Jesus gives him water and, then, with a close up of his hand, he pours water on Ben Hur's head and brow and gently and soothingly strokes his hair with the water. This sequence has great emotional appeal. When confronted by the captain, Jesus stares him out and the captain withdraws, taking the prisoners on, while Jesus continues to gaze at them (although this is completely dramatised through the reactions of the captain and then of Ben Hur, photographed over Jesus' shoulder, showing only the back of his head.

But the connection is made several times during the film. When Ben Hur rescues the Roman consul, Arrius, during the battle with the pirates, they are rescued and Arrius gives him a cup of water before he drinks it himself. Later, when he meets one of the Magi, Balthasar, on his way to hear Jesus preach, they stop at a stream and Ben Hur recalls the incident at Nazareth but, sad over the fate of his mother and sister, he says that the water should have flowed into the sand. But the fulfilment comes during Jesus walk to Calvary. Falling under the cross and in need of water, he is comforted by Ben Hur who offers him the water and recognises him as the stranger who once comforted him.

This is all part of a conversion experience for Ben Hur who later relates how he heard the Sermon on the Mount, followed Jesus to Calvary, witnessed his death and understood that he had to let go of his bitterness and hatred. The screenplay also has Ben Hur's mother and sister being healed of their leprosy, given life, at the very moment that Jesus dies.

In 1961, the Italian movie, Pontius Pilate, had a moment when Jesus, who had been photographed from the back in his conversation with Caiaphas, is suddenly shown in close-up, but only of his eyes. Not long afterwards when Pilate has been examining Jesus, he washes his hands and, as he looks into the bowl of water, he sees the same piercing eyes of Jesus and the water turns to blood.

The next year, the American film Barabbas, made in Rome with Anthony Quinn in the title role, was released and showed Jesus more distinctly at his trial, with the carrying of the cross and at his the crucifixion. (Barabbas had been filmed in Sweden in 1952.) These two movies, along with Ben Hur, can now be seen as transition movies because, in 1962, Jeffrey Hunter appeared as the King of Kings.

KING OF KINGS

It is interesting that the two movies which begin and end the thirty five year gap between full portrayals of Jesus on screen are the two versions of The King of Kings. In retrospect it is not so surprising that the change came with the 1960s, the decade that saw more social change, especially in western culture, than any other decade of the 20th century.

However, this direct presentation of Jesus on screen received mixed reviews. Time Magazine, taking its cue from a current popular series of horror movies for younger audiences, headed their review with their journalese, 'I Was a Teenage Jesus'. It was also noted that the problems with the humanity and divinity had not yet been resolved: Jeffrey Hunter's armpits were shaved for the crucifixion, a touch of sanitising for one of history's most violent memories.

But, with King of Kings, it was now possible to identify with the Jesus portrayed. Hunter, under the direction of Nicholas Ray, is a fairly straightforward Jesus, a Jesus of the masses, who preaches his good news, goes about speaking and doing good and is crucified for it. The straightforward spectacle of King of Kings could draw on the response of the mass audience.

THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD

The next Hollywood treatment of the Gospel was George Stevens' 1965 The Greatest Story Ever Told. It was a long, star-studded version - the movie in which John Wayne was the centurion who proclaimed that 'This man was truly the Son of God' (drawled 'Gaaad') - but did not gain the popularity that was hoped for. Perhaps it was the central casting. Why would a director want a thirty five year old, tall, somewhat dour blond Swede, Max Von Sydow, to portray a first century Jewish man? And, once again the treatment was dignified, at times stately.

The locations scenery was magnificent, but the Gospel texts as rearranged for Von Sydow's laconic and sombre delivery, gave very little context for their profound meaning and so were lost in rhetorical speeches rather than characterisation. There was little action filling the wide screen, too many static tableaux and Jesus was generally shown with only a few people, something of a religious loner.

IL VANGELO SECONDO MATTEO

In the meantime, in Italy, Marxist novelist and director, Pier Paolo Pasolini found himself waiting in an Assisi hotel during a visit by the popular Pope John XXIII in 1962. He started glancing at his Gideon Bible and, having been urged by a friend to read the New Testament, he began to read Matthew's Gospel and decided to film it, dedicating his movie to John XXIII, Il Vangelo Secondo Mattheo, The Gospel according to Matthew. When it was released in 1964 it received mixed reactions. It was welcomed by many Italian Catholics and it won the International Catholic Film Organisation award at the Venice Film Festival.

The Jesus of this film does not appeal to everyone. But there is a strong appeal to those who identify with a non-Hollywood Jesus. This Jesus appears as strong, intense, thirsty for truth and justice, willing to confront on principles, a man of authority and conviction. It is pointed out that he rarely laughs, let alone smiles, but smile he does, especially with the response of children to him. Pasolini is helped by Matthew's Gospel being the most straightforward of the Gospels. And he uses the text as is, using it as a screenplay. This device, while being powerful, runs the risk of presenting the Gospel events over-literally, even in a fundamentalist way.

However, this is the movie that critics and cinema buffs praise. Its black and white photography, use of classical and contemporary music and its absence of sentimentality (not sentiment - the Southern Italian histrionics and hysterics of Pasolini's mother as Mary at the crucifixion give the lie to that) make many consider it the cinematic biblical masterpiece.

Master director, Roberto Rosselini, filmed The Messiah (1971) but it has been rarely seen in English-speaking countries (though lately available on video).

THE JESUS MUSICALS

During the 1960s and its movements for freedom - especially in the United States where some philosophers and theologians wanted a moratorium on the use of the word, 'God', and some asked, along with a Time Magazine cover, that 'Is God dead?'. However, it was also the era of a charismatic spirituality and a renewal of charismatic prayer in the mainstream churches. It was also the era of 'Jesus Movements'.

But, the cinema freedoms of the 1960s, including the acceptability of showing Jesus on screen, led to Jesus becoming a minor but significant character in a range of movies. In the United States, Dalton Trumbo's anti-war movie Johnny Got His Gun (1971) had Donald Sutherland as Jesus appearing in the hallucinations of Great War amputee, Timothy Bottoms, driving a train engine or sitting guard over him. In The Ruling Class, insane English aristocrat, Peter O'Toole, imagines he is Jesus and stands, arms outstretched, on his mantelpiece (only to be cured back to his name Jack while he assumes the persona of Jack the Ripper).

The most controversial of the directors using this Jesus device was Ken Russell who, in The Devils (1971) dramatised weird religious fantasies when the repressed superior of the convent in Loudon, 1634 (Vanessa Redgrave), saw the parish priest (Oliver Reed) as Jesus, walking towards her on the water and coming down from the cross to passionately embrace her as Mary Magdalene. These films allowed film-makers a greater scope for the portrayals of Jesus like that of Jean Luc Godard's controversial allegory of Mary, Joseph and Jesus as ordinary people today in Je Vous Salut Marie, (Hail Mary). It is still difficult to realise that there is a distance of only nine years between King of Kings and The Devils.

The best Jesus-figure to emerge from this freedom to portray Jesus on screen and to show the humanity as well as the divinity of Jesus appeared on British television in the late 60s. The writer was Dennis Potter whose range of plays and writing for television and movies included the allegory of the devil incarnate in suburban London, Brimstone and Treacle, and The Singing Detective. Potter's television play was later staged in the theatre and there was discussion at the end of the 90s about a possible screen version.

The play was called Son of Man. Colin Blakely portrayed Jesus. The sequence that symbolised the alarm that more fundamentalist viewers experienced but that students of the New Testament and of theology appreciated was the agony in the garden. Potter puts into the mouth of Jesus a desperate questioning of God's will followed by his accepting it. This is what the Gospels tell us of the agony, which continues on the cross when Jesus experiences being abandoned by God and the writers put the opening words of Psalm 22 on his lips, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'. Potter's words were (spoken by Blakely in increasing speed and desperation), 'Is it me? Is it me? Is it me?'. Literalists accused Potter of blasphemy, of denying that Jesus was God and knew that he was divine. The response was that this was a psychological expression of fear and desperation, one that any person who knows their destiny can still express as bewilderment as to how and why they are at this step in their destiny. Twenty years later, this same kind of dramatising of Jesus' agony was to be seen in The Last Temptation of Christ.

But, for Jesus on screen, two products from this Jesus Movement period led to a transition from attempts to portray a 'realistic' Jesus to portraying a 'stylised' Jesus. It should be noted, of course, that most of the alleged 'realistic' Jesus-figures in pictorial art, sculpture, passion play dramas, movies and popular and in kitsch art were not realistic either. Whether it be the fresco Jesus in the medieval Umbrian countryside or Jeffrey Hunter on location, these images are stylised. What some commentators meant when they used the word, realistic, was rather 'naturalistic', that the way Jesus looked, spoke and acted was, generally, as most people acted.

The new portrayal of Jesus was less 'naturalistic'. For one thing, Jesus sang. He sang rock-opera music, even uttered rock-screams. He sang vaudeville tunes and did some burlesque. The stage versions and the records of Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell were enormously popular in the late 60s and early 70s. The word 'superstar' itself, as applied to Jesus, had shock value at the time. But Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice, in their 20s, had a profound impact and influence on how millions of people imagined Jesus. Movie versions of the two plays were released in 1973.

On screen, Jesus Christ Superstar has had the more lasting impact and is also continually revived in concert or theatrical form. Godspell, very engaging on stage and on screen in its day, now seems caught in its time.

Jesus Christ Superstar was less flamboyant on screen than on stage, especially the musical comedy turn with Herod which was a theatre show-stopper. However, it was spectacularly filmed in Israel, highlighting the theatricality of the piece. The lyrics and the score seem to have a universal appeal.

Godspell, on the other hand is a 'feel-good' interpretation of Jesus and the Gospel message. While it has its crucifixion sequence and its grief, it nevertheless, as its title indicates, wants to emphasise the 'good' in 'good news'. But it did open ways to portray Jesus in a stylised way and found ready acceptance in its time from devout and practising Christians.

In the same year, Johnny Cash and his wife, June Carter Cash, produced a documentary, The Gospel Road. It included scenes of Jerusalem as well as commentary about social issues of the time. Intercut were re-creations of the Gospel story with the movie's director, Robert Elfstrom, as Jesus. These sequences were done in the literal style, the baptism of Jesus having a special effects golden dove descending on Jesus.

JESUS OF NAZARETH

The 1970s produced an outstandingly successful portrait of Jesus, Franco Zeffirelli's Jesus of Nazareth (1977). Designed as an eight hour television mini-series, it was also reduced to a two hours plus length for cinema release. Filmed in English with an international star cast, it was dubbed into many languages, possibly having most success in its Spanish dubbing, in Spain but, especially, all over Latin America.

Why did audiences respond so well to Jesus of Nazareth? Robert Powell, his presence and his fine voice? He was certainly a strong reason for its success. The cast and the attractive re-creation of the Gospel era? The screenplay by Zeffirelli and Anthony Burgess which did not use the Gospel texts as mere screenplay but incorporated explanatory material and rearranged Gospel incidents much as the early Christian communities assembled the Gospels as we now have them? The screenplay and direction, with a blend of 'realism' and 'naturalism', meant that any audience would not feel that the material was too much 'above them'. They could identify with the events and with Jesus himself.

A suggestion for the popularity of Jesus of Nazareth is that, overall, the interpretation of Jesus is very congenial. Perhaps it is a dominant presence of episodes from Luke's Gospel, such sequences as the parable of the prodigal son in the context of Matthew's banquet or the episode of the sinful woman coming to Simon's house. Robert Powell personalises his interpretation of Jesus. It is almost the opposite of what Pasolini does with his austere Jesus and the opposite of George Stevens' direction of Max Von Sydow in being a speaking icon in The Greatest Story Ever Told.

JESUS (1979)

In 1979, a movie, simply called Jesus was released. Directed by English director, Peter Sykes, and starring British actor, Brian Deacon, it was backed financially by some evangelical religious groups. It pales in comparison with Zeffirelli's version. Once again, it uses Luke's Gospel and some of John as screenplay, thus often offering the bare bones of the incidents and hurrying from one to another. Jesus is personal and personable but is caught in the narrow framework of the Gospel text. The result is a very straightforward, often literal, sometimes fundamentalist, portrait of Jesus.

The mid-70s also saw a version of Hugh J.Schonfield's book, The Passover Plot, which had caused considerable argument and anger with its theory that Jesus was attempting to fake his death and resurrection to lead an uprising but was actually killed by the lance. Of all actors, Zalman King, now better known for erotic movies and television (Wild Orchid, 9/2 Weeks, The Red Shoes Diaries), portrayed Jesus.

SATIRE

For some audiences interested in Jesus-figures on screen, the 70s did not end peacefully. The Monty Python group released its parody of biblical epics and a whole range of issues from unionism to feminism, The Life of Brian (1979). By offering an alternate Messiah and following the Gospel outline - with the real Jesus somewhere up the street - the Pythons could be accused of irreverence. In fact, they were accused by some, especially in North America where their ironic humour was taken rather literally, of blasphemy. The controversy and debate were useful in clarifying what the Gospel epic could do and where its limitations were. As one director of a religious film office replied when asked what he thought of The Life of Brian, 'I laughed unashamedly'.

Not that the Pythons were the only satirists using biblical material for their movies. Veteran director, Luis Bunuel, had been using religious and Catholic themes as the targets of his critique, Nazarin, El, the Last Supper parody in Viridiana. He made The Milky Way (1969) where his pilgrims on the way to Compostella enter into the Gospel stories: Jesus about to shave and a statue-like Mary urging him to keep his beard, Jesus at Cana and discussions about him laughing. Mel Brooks also parodied the Da Vinci Last Supper with John Hurt as Jesus in History of the World Part One (1981).

One might have thought that with the productions of the 60s and 70s, the transition from suggestions of Jesus to full character portrayals, the introduction of quite stylised Jesus-figures and a controversy over possible screen blasphemy, that there was nowhere to go. And until the late 80s, that seemed to be the case, except for some television interest in the New Testament.

TELEMOVIES

The late 70s saw two movies with Mary, the Mother of Jesus, as their subject: The Nativity (1978) with Madeline Stowe and John Shea, which received good reviews and Mary and Joseph (1979) with Blanche Baker and Jeff East which did not. However, teenage audiences, even in the 90s, responded better to Mary and Joseph than to other New Testament movies precisely because of the soap opera treatment and the portrayal of Mary and Joseph kissing and behaving more like recognisable teenagers, part of their experience.

Robert Foxworth and Anthony Hopkins were Peter and Paul in 1981, a telemovie that has Paul visit Peter after his conversion with Peter speding time with Paul vividly explaining in detail to Paul his experience of Jesus, a powerful verbal portrait. In 1984, Fr Bud Kaiser, producer of the religious Insight programs on television and later producer of Romero and the Dorothy Day movie, Entertaining Angels, made a telemovie about one of the wise men (Martin Sheen) who never got to Bethelem because of caring for others but who finally found Jesus on Calvary, The Fourth Wise Man.

The most ambitious was a Jesus movie based on a popular book by Jim Bishop, The Day Christ Died, focussing on Jesus' passion and the meaning of his ministry. It had several religious advisers and consultants, including expert on Christian-Jewish studies, Eugene Fisher, and the head of the National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures, Jesuit Fr Patrick O'Sullivan. Some thought that the movie did not put enough emphasis on the divinity of Jesus - a touch strange since one of the co-writers was James Lee Barrett who so emphasised the divinity of Jesus in his screenplay for The Greatest Story Ever Told. Chris Sarandon received poor reviews for his portrayal of Jesus.

Sunn Classics in the United States were turning many American classics into telemovies and making a number of documentaries. Their Gospel documentary was In Search of the Historical Jesus (1980) which discussed the historicity of Jesus while John Rubinstein was Jesus in some dramatising of Gospel scenes.

In the late 80s, Franco Rossi, who had made a television mini-series (1985) of Quo Vadis, directed A Child Called Jesus, an imaginative and speculative story of Jesus in his infancy and childhood being separated from his parents who are persecuted by an evil servant of Herod.

THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST

Thirty years before The Last Temptation of Christ, Jules Dassin had filmed one of Nikos Kazantzakis' novels, He Who Must Die, another story of the putting on of a Passion Play, this time in a Greek village, and its effects on the people in the village and the paralleling of characters with those of the Gospels. In 1988, Kazantzakis received not only fame but notoriety.

The Last Temptation of Christ, based on his novel, was released in 1988. However, it had been in pre-production in the early 80s which means that it belongs in conception to the period of Jesus of Nazareth. When, finally, it was made and released, it was a decade later and the times had changed. The hostile reaction to Last Temptation of Christ came before the film's release. Many conservative groups in the United States claimed that the film was blasphemous because it showed Jesus marrying and his sexual activity. Another fear at the time was that it also had homosexual overtones. Reference was made to a first draft of the screenplay, specifically Jesus in his relationship to John the Baptist, and the nature of the kiss at Jesus' Baptism. (It seems that a reference to Isaiah 6 and the burning coal searing the prophet's lips before he could preach was misread in a homosexually suggestive way.) Demonstrations were held around the world and a petition put to Universal Studios to destroy the negative.

On release, the movie did moderate business. There were some initial vociferous protests at cinemas. And then the movie went to video. However, it seemed to be mainstream Christians, as well as director Martin Scorsese's many fans, who appreciated the movie and what it was trying to do. The novelist, Nikolas Kazantszakis, was a member of the Greek Orthodox church. Many of his co-religionists took a dim view of his novel. Kazanszakis said that he was writing a novel based on the Gospels, not a Gospel. This allowed him the literary permission to speculate on Jesus' character, the events of his life life and death and his motivation.

The last temptation itself was not, as many protesters believed, a sexual temptation, but the temptation to ordinariness. In the famous final half-hour of the movie, Jesus is hanging on the cross. The soundtrack fades indicating that Jesus is losing consciousness of what is around him. The angel from the temptations in the desert comes to tell him that he can get down from the cross, that he does not have to die. God thinks that he has done enough. Jesus can now come down and live an ordinary life. He can marry (and a sexual encounter is shown in a brief long shot), have a family and live quietly at Nazareth. But Paul visits and complains to Jesus that he, Paul, is preaching a Christ crucified and that Jesus should have died on the cross. The remaining apostles visit Jesus in his old age and urge him to get back on the cross.

Jesus comes back to consciousness on Calvary. He has been tested and tried, 'tempted' (in the words of the Letter to the Hebrews) as we all are except that he did not turn away from God. He did not sin.

The temptation was to give up his mission in life.

Between King of Kings and The Last Temptation of Christ there was only a quarter of a century, but by the 80s, audiences were not satisfied with a plain presentation of Jesus of the Gospels with the Gospel as screenplay. Audiences were more prepared to think and feel through the experience of Jesus.

The Jesus of the film, played by Willem Dafoe, is a Gospel 'everyman' figure: he is uncertain about himself but knows that he has had an experience of God which demands of him that he go out, preach, teach, mix with ordinary people and offer them deep hope and salvation.

JESUS OF MONTREAL

Jesus of Montreal (1989) takes us back to the earliest Jesus movies, theatrical re-creations of the Gospel (including the 1900 performance of the Passion Play at Oberammagau). The Gospel sequences are a play within a play. Arcand presents Daniel, his central character, as a Christ-figure, a figure closely resembling the Jesus he enacts in the Montreal passion play. This is also a return to earlier Jesus-movies, especially Griffith's Intolerance, where the contemporary 1916 story with its young man caught up with gangs and being condemned in court is juxtaposed with the Jesus story.

Jesus of Montreal is far more complex, using the obvious references to the Gospels as well as more subtle allegorical references (especially with Daniel's death, his being welcome only at a Jewish hospital, the keeping his memory alive by his friends and followers and their theatrical performances). We are in the realm of more intuitive subtleties with Jesus of Montreal. Daniel and Daniel's Jesus are dreamers. In the play, while Jesus heals and tries to save Peter from sinking, he also confronts. His treatment of his followers is compassionate and strong. But there is always an air of mystery and vision.

In 2003, British director Norman Stone released a film which could be called 'Jesus of Glasgow'. The title is Man Dancin', the story of a political prisoner in Northern Ireland who returns home, resists the pressures of the local gangsters thus endangering his life, but who works with a parish priest to put on a passion play involving the locals and some of his friends. Like Daniel in Jesus of Montreal, he undergoes something of a passion himself while bringing the Gospel message to people in a down-to-earth way.

INTO THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

Two Jesus films were in production for the millennium: The Miracle Maker and the television movie, Jesus, with Jeremy Sisto in the title role.

THE MIRACLE MAKER

The Miracle Maker is a different kind of development for the Jesus movie. After the 'realism' of the 60s and 70s, the 'stylisation' of the rock operas and the issues of the 80s like 'Last Temptation', comes a puppet movie with animated flashbacks, a more simple presentation of the Gospel stories but with visual art flair.

The puppet sequences, the major part of the movie, were produced in Russia. The two dimensional sequences were drawn in Wales by companies who had worked on animated short movies of Shakesperian plays. The voices, with the exception of William Hurt as Jairus, are British. The puppets combine touches of realism with a sense of performance. They look Semitic, except for Pilate and the Centurion. The settings are quite lavish and give a feel for the period and the land of Jesus.

The flashbacks (the Nativity, Finding in The Temple) as well as the use of some symbols (the Temptations) and stylised parables make a significant contrast to the three dimensional puppetry. Jesus' words are spoken by Ralph Fiennes who presents him as a strong-minded, genial young man with more than a touch of humour. He speaks the parables and teachings beautifully and clearly and brings emotion to such scenes as the Agony in the Garden.

This is a very accessible and credible Jesus. The decision to put Tamar and her parents to the fore as disciples and recipients of the miracle - and seeing Jesus through Tamar's eyes - pays off dramatically.

JESUS

At first, Jesus (directed for American television by Roger Young) might seem like a throwback to the 1960s, another attempt at 'realism'. However, it benefits from the influence of the stylised images of Jesus during the 1970s. This is immediately evident as the film opens with contemporary battle scenes which startle the viewer. In fact, it is a dream (or vision) that Jesus has, a kind of recurring dream that takes him into the future, showing the sin and evil of the centuries for which he must sacrifice his life. The most striking use of this stylisation is in the sequence of the temptations in the desert. Jeroen Krabbe plays Satan dressed in a suit and, again, offering Jesus tempting modern visions of power that resonate with a contemporary audience. It is an attempt to make the Jesus' story relevant.

The other feature of Jesus is his humanity. Jeremy Sisto plays Jesus as a genial man, prone to emotions including anger, but someone who is able to joke, to laugh heartily and to be good company as well as a charismatic leader. This is a breakthrough from presentations of Jesus which seem afraid to let him be seen smiling, let alone laughing. This film works on the premise that Jesus is consciously aware of his divinity, so the screenplay's ability to combine humanity with divinity should please theologians.

Mary, the mother of Jesus is played by Jacqueline Bissett. The television networks also produced a movie, Mary, for the millennium starring Pernilla August (who had appeared as Annikin's mother in The Phantom Menace). It is a more traditionally reverent treatment of Mary and her relationship with her son.

JUDAS

Originally titled, Judas and Jesus, this film focuses on Judas himself with Jesus a significant presence but in more of a supporting role. It was made by a Catholic television company run by the Paulist congregation who had made the Insight series for television and films such as The Fourth Wise Man and Romero. It was written by Tom Fontana, one of the creators of Homicide: Life on the Streets and Oz.

Johnathon Schaech gives quite an impressive performance as Judas, the angry zealot who believes that Jesus is the man to lead the Jews to revolution against the Romans, but who cannot quite commit himself as a disciple, who betrays Jesus and kills himself, feeling betrayed by Jesus.

On the other hand, television actor Jonathan Scarfe, is a smiling, 'modern' Jesus, a kind of Californian surfie Jesus who does not come across as a sufficiently strong and powerful presence, able to command commitment or loyalty from his followers. The producers were right in taking Jesus' name out of the title and focussing on Judas.

TALES FROM THE MADHOUSE

In Holy Week 2000, the BBC presented a series of short programs that were made for Lenten viewing. Unfortunately they were screened very late in the evening. The public that might have appreciated them found that they were unable to stay up to see them.

The series had what might be an alarming title, 'Tales from the Madhouse'. The basic idea was that in each episode an inmate of an asylum would tell their story to camera. Each of them had encountered Jesus in some way and their lives had been changed because of him. The characters included the serving girl who heard Peter deny Jesus, the rich young man now grown older, Pilate's wife, the widow of Naim. Better known characters included Barabbas and Judas himself.

Each of the stories is about 13 minutes, just enough to watch at a short viewing. The producer is Norman Stone who has worked extensively with the BBC Religion. One of his celebrated productions was the original television version of 'Shadowlands', with Joss Ackland and Claire Bloom. Both these actors are back for 'Tales from the Madhouse'. Joss Ackland is Barabbas. Claire Bloom is Pilate's wife. Other actors in the series include Eileen Atkins as the widow of Naim, Jonathan Pryce and Helen Baxendale.

The style of each story is straightforward. A coach drives into the madhouse grounds. The camera is welcomed indoors. It then picks out the subject of the story who immediately starts to tell us what it was like to have seen and experienced the presence of Jesus. As they move about the asylum, they reflect on what happened to them. Some of the stories are very emotional. The audience, who knows the characters from the Gospels, is able to share their feelings at once. Particularly fascinating is seeing the rich young man tell us why he approached Jesus and wanted to be a disciple but couldn't face it. Now he is a lonely old man surrounded by his wealth and his gourmet table, but full of regrets. Another highlight is the story of Judas. It is written and performed by Tony Robinson, Baldrick of Blackadder fame. He chats confidentially to us as he goes about his business. He seems to be very busy, tidying up, until we realise that he is preparing his noose.

Although the audience never see Jesus, it learns a great deal more about him from the testimonies of these eight people, the impact that Jesus made on each of them, their responses for better and for worse.

VERBAL JESUS FIGURES

While we expect the Jesus movies to portray Jesus visually, there are several films which talk about Jesus, creating a portrait from the verbal descriptions.

One of the most effective was the telemovie Peter and Paul, mentioned previously. Another is Dogma, Kevin Smith's conribution to the millennial films about religion and the Church. Smith had made Clerks, Mallrats and Chasing Amy, full of pop culture. Smith sees himself as a new generation Catholic, not educated in the more dogmatic styles of the past, feeling free to speculate about doctrine and practice, to mock and to use profane and scatological images and language. A critic commented that it was the South Park of religious films.

Smith introduces Rufus, the 13th apostle, who literally falls from the sky, interrupting the mission given to Bethany (Linda Fiorentino) who, it seems is descended from Mary of Nazareth, to stop two fallen angels from being absolved of their sins and so bringing the world to an end. Rufus is played by Chris Rock and is black. This gives rise to a lot of Smith-humour about the early church concealing the fact that Jesus himself was black and the racist omission of Rufus altogether from the Gospels. He speaks of Jesus as a buddy, a good leader, a good friend. (And Smith has his characters refer to God as she, although God is beyond gender - but she finally appears in the form of Alanis Morissette.)

THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

A new but traditional version of the Jesus' story, The Gospel of John, premiered at the 2003 Toronto Film Festival. It was directed by British film-maker, Philip Saville, and narrated by Christopher Plummer. The director says that the film follows the text itself, 'every single word is there'. It was immediately released in the southern states of America, perhaps its natural home with its more literal presentation of the Gospels.

THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST

The more significant movie for 2004 is Mel Gibson's The Passion with Jim Caviezal as Jesus. It focusses on the last 12 hours of Jesus' life and draws both on the Gospel texts as well as the writings of a German mystic favoured by Gibson, Anne Catherine Emmerich, who, from her prayer (her 'visions') gave detailed descriptions of what she saw of the passion. Gibson has opted for Latin and Aramaic dialogue, wanting the audience to focus on the visuals of Jesus' suffering.

The immediate response from some Jewish scholars as well as Catholic (basing their comments on a draft of the screenplay) was that the film was anti-Semitic. This raised issues of how John's Gospel spoke of 'the Jews' and their responsibility for Jesus' death. The long traditions of Christians accusing Jews of being 'Christ-killers' played their part in the debate. While the Catholic Church apologised for the long persecutions and anti-Semitism in a Second Vatican Council document (1965) and Pope John Paul II visited the wailing wall in 2000 and inserted his own prayer in a crevice, questions about Jesus' death as being part of God's plan and how the Jewish religious leaders of the time and the Romans, with Pontius Pilate, fitted into this plan, continue to be raised.

While Gibson continued to work on editing the film during 2003, several of the religious leaders who saw versions of The Passion thought that it was not anti-Semitic but that many audiences would find the visual depictions of Jesus' suffering and death too vivid and disturbing.

A separate article on The Passion of the Christ can be found on the website.

CONCLUSION

In just over 100 years, cinema and television have contributed a wide range of images of Jesus, from literal to imaginative, from realistic to stylised, to traditional to controversial. With the development of video and digital cinematography, anyone can now make their Jesus movie, reinterpreting his message for their religious beliefs or for their cultures.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Roy Kinnard and Tim Davis have done quite a service with their research into these early films and their cataloguing of the Jesus films from the beginning to the 1990s in their book, Divine Images, a History of Jesus on the Screen (A Citadel Press Book, New York, 1992). They list the major Jesus movies in chronological order (and refer to minor movies from each decade) with credits, synopsis and commentary, excerpts from reviews and a generous selection of stills.

Baugh, Lloyd, Imaging the Divine, Sheed and Ward, Kansas City, 1997. Malone, Peter, Movie Christs and Antichrists, Crossroads, New York, 1990 Saviors on the Silver Screen, Paulist Press, Mahwah.