In 2003, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints*, produced a film called "Finding Faith in Christ." Not only is it free on YouTube (click here), but it is much better than "Son of God," a 20th Century Fox production that costs about $9.00 in theatres.It must be difficult to make an adaptation of someone's life from the Bible. Most of what is known of Christ's life come from a long list of stories and parables. Since they have been edited and translated so much over the centuries, there is a lot left out, which makes it hard to make a coherent plot. In order to do so, there has to be a lot of creative liberties.
That is where "Son of God" suffers the most. It focuses way too much on showing as many stories as it can from the New Testament. The writers apparently had a checklist of Bible stories to get through. It does this by attempting to create a chronology of what must have happened including a forced subplot dealing with Jewish leaders conspiring against the threat of an uprising from Jesus's followers. The story is very disjointed and feels like a bunch of scenes were just thrown in there.
This is why I personally like the storytelling of "Finding Faith in Christ" so much better. It is set during the forty days that Christ was in Jerusalem after he was resurrected. The apostle Thomas doubts that he did resurrect, and his friends try to convince him that it happened through various stories about Christ's life. The film makes no attempt at trying to make sense of any chronology. It simply tells the stories that are known without deviating from the Bible.
In "Son of God," there are deviations that do not work. An example is the story of the adulterer who is presented in front of Christ. The Pharisees expect Him to condemn her to death, but He says "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
This film attempts to take a more dramatic approach to this story. Everyone in the crowd already has a stone to throw at her. He picks up a stone and takes aim at her. Instead of following through, he holds the stone out and says that he will give it to the person who is without sin. The crowd immediately drops the stones. However, what he said never implied that they should do so. Had the writers stuck with the dialogue from the original text, this scene would have been so much more powerful, which is how "Finding Faith in Christ" handled it.
That is not to say all of the artistic liberties fell short. I personally like the way the film portrays Jesus Christ more so than even "Finding Faith in Christ." The Christ I usually see on-screen is almost robotic in that he always stands up straight and speaks softly. The reason for this is to show how majestic, peaceful and loving he is. While it works, it seems unnatural. Yes, he was perfect, but he must have also been charismatic for so many people to like him.
In this film, Christ is more charismatic. The first scene with him is when he first meets Peter on the fishing boat. It is funny because he pretty much invites himself on the boat without explanation. There is a sort of playfulness about him but also a sense of mystery in that he knows Peter's name without having been told.
In other scenes, he actually reacts to what is being done. When people are yelling at him, his face shows that it affects him. When his hands and feet are nailed to the cross, he wails. These are natural human reactions. As Godly as Christ is and was, he was still human. He felt physical pain. In other adaptations of his life, there is a sort of "Superman" approach to him. Whenever something happens, he seems to ignore the pain.
This film had a production budget of $22 million. That is not a ton of money to spend on a movie, especially when attempting to do special effects. Whenever something happens in the city of Jerusalem, it shows a very fuzzy computer model of it. It was very distracting and made me wonder about the choices in the direction. Another bad choice was making the holes in Christ's hands see-through. If done right, this could have been good, but it was distracting and kind of creepy. The film could have definitely been done without any special effects at all.
I give this film two and a half out of five stars. It really is a mess when it comes to story-telling and production value. However, I really like the way Christ is portrayed, and it does add some new insight to stories I grew up with. To those who are religious, I would recommend seeing it when it comes out if you really want to. However, there are better productions -- such as the one cited above -- that can be seen for free.
Rating: Rated PG-13. There are a few scenes of blood, violence and torture. In one scene, there is silhouette of a stabbing followed by some blood splatters.
*I am a member of that church. Though I do not intend to shove my religion down anyone's throat, this review reflects my own views.
For more details on how I rate films, visit http://criticalchristopher.blogspot.com/2014/01/defining-rating-criteria.html
Follow me on Twitter:
No comments:
Post a Comment