![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.235.201.95
'); } // End --> |
I don't know what frame of mind I was in three years ago to have panned this film.
Incredible.
Anyhow, here is the life of Jesus beautifully told in a simple, cine verité, and very poetic way. The first scene, the quietness and the beauty of the face of Mary as Joseph first comes to her, incredulous that she is pregnant, profoundly begins what is as great a film as ever I've seen.
How the man that made "Salo" and "Querelle" could make this, the most sacred and moving of religious films... truly amazing.
The faces of the characters--- since this is an almost silent film except for a long sequence towards the end when Jesus repeats many of his most famous aphorisms--- are the true story, framed with the eye of a Renaissance painter, and placed in well-imagined settings. For those familiar with the New Testament, you will now have unforgettable visual memories of what previously had been imaginings.
I don't know why this film doesn't appear on ALL ten or twenty-five best films of all time lists. This is art, without artifice.
![]()
Follow Ups:
One of my favourit.
I re-saw it lately, and one thing did not pleased me.
The setting and the actor look TOO Italian, in a dated way like his " tales ". ( Decameron and so on )
Still touch with grace.
Highly recommended by the Vatican....
![]()
a
![]()
or Protestant?
Why but why always pointing out " The Jews ".
Why?
Tell me...Now the whole setting still look TOO Italian*.
Still.* Of course it does not remove the power of this film, but just annoying...At least for me.
** From Spain
You said he looked too Italian. I pointed out he's Jewish. I doubt you could pick the Italians from the Jews in a line-up.
Must you see prejudice everywhere you look? You're like a more sophisticated version of Jazz Inmate.
Have a glass of riesling, take a few deep breaths, and look out at the beautiful German countryside. Life is good. Relax. No one's out to get you.
![]()
I reread my post....ActorS was meant...So...
a
![]()
"ActorS" may have been MEANT but what you wrote, what we saw, and what he was respondfing to, was "Actor". I would have responded the same way.
![]()
Weird.
No. I would have responded to the word "actor" if I were responding, which I didn't choose to.
![]()
didn't look correct for the part.
Since Jesus was Jewish, I responded that the actor similarly is Jewish so...
This ain't rocket science so I presume you and Patrick have some hidden agenda here..
![]()
I never meant that " Jesus " was not correct for the part!
In fact this actor made a very good job under the fathering of Pasolini.
Again, what I meant WAS that the scenery and most comparse LOOKED too Italian for my taste.
![]()
of either making scintillating unimpeachable points or not reading very carefully before responding.;-)
a large capacity :--)
![]()
YEs. Of course!
![]()
a
![]()
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: