- Mar 22, 2011
- 8,460
- 5,268
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
I'm five years late to the party, I know, but I just got around to watching this film and am very impressed. Joseph Fiennes gives a magnificent performance as Clavius, a Roman tribune. There’s a lot of focus on his facial expressions, and they're used very effectively. The other acting is mostly very solid. The casting for Jesus is refreshing. He isn’t the first guy you might think of for the part. The cinematography, the set and the costumes are well done.
The movie indulges in a lot of creative license, but I found none of it in significant contradiction to the Gospel accounts.
The story is about a Roman tribune, Pilate’s top man, who is tasked with proving that Jesus’ body was stolen rather than raised. He sets about trying to do so, and there's quite a bit of action. He’s making very little headway in his quest, and then at the moment he anticipates a breakthrough, he gets a breakthrough of a very different kind – he encounters the risen Christ, whom he had personally seen dead on the cross.
The rest of the movie is about him accompanying the disciples to Galilee, where they finally see Jesus for the last time.
I found the movie compelling, and more so on a second viewing. The writing and the dialog were very good.
The reason I’m posting is to suggest that it would make an excellent Resurrection Day film. It's a shame the film did not do well at the box office. It deserved better.
The one problem I had with the film, which kept it from being entirely satisfying, is its denouement. Spoilers are going to ensue, so stop reading if you don’t want a look-see.
The movie indulges in a lot of creative license, but I found none of it in significant contradiction to the Gospel accounts.
The story is about a Roman tribune, Pilate’s top man, who is tasked with proving that Jesus’ body was stolen rather than raised. He sets about trying to do so, and there's quite a bit of action. He’s making very little headway in his quest, and then at the moment he anticipates a breakthrough, he gets a breakthrough of a very different kind – he encounters the risen Christ, whom he had personally seen dead on the cross.
The rest of the movie is about him accompanying the disciples to Galilee, where they finally see Jesus for the last time.
I found the movie compelling, and more so on a second viewing. The writing and the dialog were very good.
The reason I’m posting is to suggest that it would make an excellent Resurrection Day film. It's a shame the film did not do well at the box office. It deserved better.
The one problem I had with the film, which kept it from being entirely satisfying, is its denouement. Spoilers are going to ensue, so stop reading if you don’t want a look-see.
It puzzles me how Clavius the tribune could witness the risen Christ, see miracles, and be with the apostles and with Jesus, and then simply walk away. The state of his soul at the end is left indeterminate. He doesn't go with the apostles. He removes his Roman ring and walks off into the wilderness alone. He never really confesses Christ, though he does kneel to the true God. And at the very end when asked if he believes what he saw, he only replies that he believes he can never be the same.
Maybe Clavius the Roman soldier-machine needed more time to digest what he had been through. Maybe the writer was trying to avoid a ‘they all lived happily ever after’ ending. But it did leave me hanging.
Maybe Clavius the Roman soldier-machine needed more time to digest what he had been through. Maybe the writer was trying to avoid a ‘they all lived happily ever after’ ending. But it did leave me hanging.