Simply A Masterpiece

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Each film about the Savior is a challenge. because it propose the vision of director against your vision. and all is only a problem of faith. in this case, the situation is little different. because "Jesus" propose a simple thing - accuracy to the Gospel according to Saint Luke. the right atmosphere. good performances. not a show. but the confession of faith . sure, in Romania , it has the fame to be the film of neo-protestants from the early "90 period of conversions. but it has a virtue - the honesty. and a kind of simplicity who is more than moving. a film about the Lord. not a demonstration. only one of useful films reminding the word of an old message out of desire to convince. and it works in admirable way.

The costumes, settings and sets are good attempts at period authenticity, giving the film an initially promising look. The actor playing Jesus, however, is unable to bring off the challenging role that has to make or break the picture, although supporting actors such as the one in the role of Peter are better.Making a movie based on a single gospel--in this case, Luke--is a good idea, in my opinion, because blending the four canonical gospels into a composite story, as is done more often, leads to inauthentic interpretation. By focusing on one gospel, you at least have the chance of presenting the story as it is presented in that gospel. Having said that, I must say that this movie's inconstancy had me rolling my eyes. It opens and ends with quotations from the Gospel of John. The viewer is thereby led to assume that Luke's view of Jesus is exactly the same as John's, which it is not. Meanwhile, some speeches have been shortened here and there. The filmmakers have said so often that this movie is an authentic presentation of the Gospel of Luke that viewer comments often reflect the opinion that the filmmakers have prompted, but that does not make it true. This is not an exactly faithful presentation of Luke. And I am not requiring that every word of the text be used, which I know would be way too much verbiage. I think this movie betrays Luke's account, often unnecessarily, though it is also often understandable because of the difficulties involved in adapting a well known text like this to the screen. The New Testament texts often can be so static that they can be dramatized only by risking interpreting them. The use in this movie of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount (actually more on a plain in the Gospel of Luke) while having Jesus walk around interacting with his listeners is dramatic but it gives the filmmakers plenty of opportunities to interpret Jesus' sayings in ways that might not have been intended by Luke. Also, as the plot moves along in this way, additional dialog is actually added to stitch scenes together. Additional dialog is unavoidable in some scenes because there is often indirect rather than direct dialog in the gospels that nevertheless needs to be conveyed, but the filmmakers unwittingly interpret the text in this way.Early in the film, when Jesus gives the sermon from the boat at Lake Gennesaret, the drama in the situation is actually missed by the filmmakers. The crowd should be clamoring and pressing on him at the shore, which is his motivation for getting into the boat to deliver his sermon. Here, it seems more as if Jesus could have made his speech on the beach but gets in the boat as a pointless stunt.In the movie, the Gennesaret scene, which corresponds to Luke chapter 5, includes the parable of the pharisee and tax collector, but Luke does not tell what Jesus said in this sermon. That parable comes from chapter 18 in Luke. Then there follows the miracle of the catch of fish, which, indeed, belongs to Luke at this point in the narrative (chapter 5). In Luke there follows a series of healings performed in various towns (Luke arguably gives too many miracles piled on each other, and this would be a longer movie if these were all presented), but then the movie presents the raising of Jairus' daughter, which, in Luke actually belongs in chapter 8, not 5. Where did this come from? It turns out that Mark puts Jairus' daughter in the next chapter after the sermon from the boat and much sooner than Luke. So The filmmakers are again resorting to another gospel instead of Luke!If I am saying that I could do better, I am also saying that the task of adapting the gospels is obviously very difficult and any alternative attempt to dramatize the Gospel of Luke or any other gospel would displease someone else as much as this one displeases me.

I learned of this movie when I was in college. It was the best discovery of my life. If memory is serving me correctly, it was sent in the mail throughout Alabama for a short time for people to have for free. It is well-made and biblically correct. It gives a message of hope and reaffirms one's belief in Christ. If you do not know Christ, he is definitely worth meeting and learning about. Once you have accepted him your life will change for the better! This is a movie to watch alone, with friends or family. Watch it with your enemies..:) Watch it multiple times and you will learn something new every time! I give this movie a 10!

I had heard that this film was being used as a missionary tool throughout the world, and was therefore one of the most watched films in history. While it does present a Biblically accurate account, it does so with very poor and lifeless acting and production values. Jesus was the most important person ever to walk the earth. He deserves better than this... It's time for an updated version.