Own the rights?
24 out of 26 people found the following review useful: To thine own self be true..., 8 January 2001 Author: bluedragoncafe from Sydney, Australia
Daniel Coulombe is recruited by Father LeClerc to jazz up the traditional Passion play (a dramatic representation of the events leading to the passion and Crucifixion of Jesus) staged in Montreal's Catholic Sanctuary. Coulombe, in turn, gathers a group of actors/apostles, ranging from unemployed actor Remy (now overdubbing dialogue on porn movies) to ambitious commercial actress Mireille. Together, they workshop a controversial and moving Passion play which leaves audiences awestruck and the priests reeling, as the production challenges the dogma and hipocrisy of the Catholic church.Director Denys Arcand weaves a remarkably deep tale which comments on commercialism, selling out, spirituality, theological scholarship, fidelity, loyalty and more- but in a manner that is relatively subtle and humorous, so the film never feels didactic. The somewhat magical effects of the theatre come across beautifully; in fact, "Jesus Of Montreal" is a must for anyone involved with the Theatre. For those interested in film trivia, you'll notice that there are veiled biblical/mythical references throughout the film, (Magdalen lobster, the Lawyer as Satan, The Charon restaurant), and that the director appears as a judge when Daniel is on trial. The story itself is well constructed, and its somber denouement drives home the suggestion that resistance and a revolutionary viewpoint are liable to bring ill fortune...You don't have to be Catholic- or even 'religious' - to enjoy "Jesus Of Montreal": this is a film for anyone who has ever contemplated the difference between spirituality and religion, or who has had to make a decision between doing what the system demanded and doing what they believe is the honest thing to do.
19 out of 20 people found the following review useful: Vivid and memorable, 28 June 1999 Author: Stephen-12 from London, England
A robust, inventive parallel to the life of Christ. This film seems to display utter commitment and genuine integrity. It is moving without being sentimental, and tells its tale with rigour and without too many contrived plot developments. The performances are splendid. You don't have to be religious to appreciate this one, since it stands up in its own right, even if the parallels are ignored. Deserves to be better known.
22 out of 26 people found the following review useful: Can't recommend it highly enough., 31 October 1999 Author: James B. from madison, wi.
"Jesus of Montreal" is one of my two favorite films...it's tough for me to decide on one or the other (the other is "With Honors"), but it's one or two. This film has meant so much to me over the years, with its simple, powerful messages of artistic freedom, personal redemption, perseverance during a personal quest...and how heartbreaking the world, and reality, can be.The male lead has a beautiful Zen-like quality about him during this film...meaning the character as well as the actor. I'd love to see more of his work.I can only watch this movie once in a while, as it moves me to tears too easily. It's very funny in places, too.
19 out of 21 people found the following review useful: Art VS Commercialism *MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*, 18 March 2002 Author: Daniel Yates from Montreal, Canada
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Although I was born in Quebec, and I've lived here for the better part of my life, I still have a hard time identifying with the rest of the province. I don't follow hockey, I still don't understand heavy jouale (a highly slang-ridden form of French specific to Quebec), and I haven't even seen "Les Boys", "Les Boys 2", or "Cruising Bar", three of the highest grossing Quebec films ever made. Yet, despite the amount of money these films have made, the only place you're likely to meet anyone who has seen (or much less appreciated) these films, is here in Quebec. A film like "Jesus of Montreal" on the other hand, while not being as successful in terms of dollars, has reached a much broader spectrum of people. It has played in theaters across Canada and the world, and was even nominated for an Oscar for best foreign language film. Most writings on "Jesus of Montreal" focus on it being a modernization of Christ's story. I will focus on how the film is a reflection on Arcand's own struggles.Denys Arcand is now a highly respected and admired director. However, since making "Jesus of Montreal" in 1989, Arcand has only made three features. Despite his reputation, it is extremely difficult for him to get a film made. Positive feedback no matter how strong, doesn't mean anything to the companies that provide the funding, if it doesn't rake in the cash. I mention these points for a reason, because, among other things this is one of the key themes of "Jesus of Montreal".Of course, the film is about other things as well, but it is important to remark on the interesting parallel between the story that takes place in the film and Arcand's real-life situation. In the film, Daniel's version of the Passion Play is popular amongst the public, but because the Church disagrees with the content of the play, the play is canceled. In real-life of course, it is not the Church that prevents Arcand from making films, but still, the popularity doesn't help either Arcand or Daniel produce their art as often or as easily as they would like to. Another parallel is that that Daniel refuses to sell out or compromise, and subsequently so did Arcand. Although Arcand has gained a lot of recognition for his work over the years, he has never made a blatantly commercial film. Arcand's film after "Jesus", "Love and Human Remains", although in English and not up to his usual standards of quality, was by no means an escapist film, and was clearly not made to rake in easy money.Of course despite the message in "Jesus of Montreal" that trying to create meaningful art without selling out is a constant uphill battle, the film is not cynical. On the contrary, the film seems to be saying that the rampant commercialism in the world is one of the very things that give true art its meaning. Twenty years from now, no one will be discussing "Les Boys" and its importance to Quebec Cinema. Whatever makes money one day is forgotten the next and replaced by something that makes more money. But a film with a message that remains relevant throughout the years will never be forgotten. "Jesus of Montreal" is as meaningful and inspiring today as it was eleven years ago when it was released. It has lost none of its wit or bite, and that is it's true value, not how much money it has made.
17 out of 18 people found the following review useful: An awesome historical and religious "WhatIf", 25 June 2004 Author: jcrnfr from Montreal
What if Jesus had been born in the year 1970 instead of year 1, and as unheralded now as He was then- how would our society have dealt with Him?And if people can get possessed by the Devil, can a regular guy -- not a nut or a fraud -- become gradually and genuinely possessed by Jesus?Denys Arcand answers both questions in clever and entertaining fashion. With actual events, people, words and thoughts from Jesus' life being transposed to our modern times. Of course a movie like this is aimed at people who don't turn both their brain cells off as they enter the movie house, and won't be happy with 90 minutes of gunshots, car chases, or Jesus being whipped. And yet this highly hypothetical parable still comes off as a plausible dramatic tale, with the usual Arcand mix of tragedy and comedy. You could have never heard of Jesus and still enjoy this movie.The cinematography is gorgeous and the main actors are uniformly excellent. Some of the minor characters bother me intensely, which they are meant to do -- they're just too darn good at it. The script and direction are nicely conventional - in the sense that at no time does the viewer wonder who that guy is or what the heck is going on. Jarring "artsy" cuts, unannounced flashbacks and weird camera angles are many critics' cup of tea but not mine, and thankfully, not Arcand's either.There is quite a bit of tension-relieving slapstick in this story; some viewers may like it- it *is* funny, but it makes me uncomfortable at times. And the ending is a bit of an anticlimax, although at the second viewing I think I began to see the light. I originally rated this movie 8/10, but after seeing it again I got more in tune with it and also noticed a few very clever details, so I'm upping it to 9/10. Maybe 10/10 when I see it next.
13 out of 15 people found the following review useful: Awesome, 19 December 2004 Author: Dharia Diaz (dancerfairy@yahoo.com) from Mexico City
After about ten years I finally could watch this movie again. I was just around 13 the first time I did and even though I could not remember all the scenes and many details, the essence of the movie stayed. It is not just intelligent, it is beautiful... the photography is excellent... the music is magnificent. But the most important and awesome thing is the argument. What if Jesus would have been born again and everybody is too busy with commerce, fame and banality to notice it? Then you start to think not just in Jesus, but in all the people that lives in the planet and we don't give them the chance to enter in our lives. A perfect example of that are the two TV producers (that might be a metaphor of the followers of Cesar 2000 years ago). And about metaphors there are many others and that's what makes the movie so unique: The beautiful actress is Mary Magdalene, the actors are the prophets, and finally (there might be a big spoiler here): The Lawyer. Maybe the scene that impressed me the most is after the trial, in which Daniel gets free without any problem, when he is talking to the man that wanted to be his defense (that Daniel refused), in a very tall building (that remembers to me the biblical story in which Jesus is on the top of the mountain with Satan, being tempted), when he says "you could have this city if you want"... It's really moving. And like that one I could mention lots more. Even in the very end, when Daniel dies, and her friends give his healthy organs to other persons and you can see them: they will live longer: the resurrection. I'm not religious at all, but the way they handle the movie and the story is really heart moving. By the other way we have a preacher that has been with a lot of prostitutes, such as they say Mary was, we find a Daniel that besides his friends, is completely alone in the world, we have a girl that (even though is not exactly prostitution) has to sell her body to live, and many other things that are not that nice. So it is not just a white, nice movie, it is very ambiguous. Besides its beautifulness it has a dark (very real) side. It is awesome.
20 out of 29 people found the following review useful: An accurate depiction of the Jesus of academia, not faith, 5 April 2001 Author: acadams5 from Fort Worth, TX
All of us knows who Jesus is, right?This movie brings to light a concept of Jesus that most people do not know is a topic of serious academic scholarship. The question is, "What can we reasonably say about Jesus based solely on historical sources?" Of course, the Bible is the primary source, since Jesus is referred to only in passing by nonreligious sources of his time. And, because this is an historical pursuit, one goal is also to separate those things which are clearly matters of faith from those which do not require a religious faith in the man. Therefore, we are left with a Jesus who led an iconoclastic life and was killed for it. The historian cannot say in an historical journal that Jesus was divine, walked on water, or was raised from the dead. This portrait is called "The Historical Jesus".The historian can, however, make a personal statement of faith-- "I believe Jesus is the Anointed of God, who saves us from our sins". This is not the statement made by "Jesus of Montreal". Masterfully, the cast and crew of the film weave a tale which demands several viewings to fully consume. Both explicitly and through the use of metaphor, Jesus is depicted as a revolutionary teacher of great charisma and whose life was one of tragedy. But this film is not about the traditional Christian concept of Jesus; rather, it illustrates only the human aspects of the man who is, to me, God incarnate. This is the story of Jesus, the man-- not Jesus, the Christ. Christians may be disappointed by it, or outraged, but I encourage us all to remember that where that where faith (trust in that which cannot be observed) begins, there the historian (or scientist) must stop. Believers go further. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who wants to think, be they a believer or not.
12 out of 14 people found the following review useful: Pro-Montreal, 10 December 2004 Author: Hamlet Danilatos from Australia
This film was utterly astonishing. It was one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen. Every word, every action and every track of music that was played was completely appropriate. It really gave me, and I'm sure, all of it's other audiences, something worth thinking about regarding modern religion's morals and even hypocrisy. The film,to me, was like three revolutionary religious ideas in one. First, there was the actual Passion story that caused a stir in it's time, secondly the much disputed portrayal of the Passion performed by the actors, which is what the film basically revolves around, as well as the actual film itself. All three stories, incredibly similar in their own way, are not against religion but simply point out the irrationalities and stupidity of organized religion of the past and of the present. It was a truly wonderful film, and I recommend it to all who are willing to sit down for a couple of hours and be completely absorbed in a very intense yet delicately put together film. The film was one of the most clever I have ever seen.
8 out of 10 people found the following review useful: The greatest film of a great director, 8 February 2000 Author: Vincent Leclair (nealschonfan@yahoo.com) from Laval, Canada
"Jésus de Montréal" is probably the best film of Denys Arcand who also made "Le déclin de l'empire américain".Unfortunately this film had a less big commercial success than "Le déclin de l'empire américain", but it was made with a biggest budget. Even though, it is an accessible film for almost everybody (the Quebequers may be advantaged because it was filmed in Quebec).I highly recommend this film especially for the Quebequers and all other Canadians.Vincent Leclair
11 out of 16 people found the following review useful: Stirs the soul, 1 November 1999 Author: smakawhat from Washington, DC
Yes I have seen, the classics, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Gone with the Wind. Yes I know about Scorcese, Coppolla, and the rest.But this is my favourite film of all time. It is heartwarming, passionate, funny, spiritual, uplifting, and all encompassing that it lifts your soul no matter who you are. It is universal. I don't think I will ever find another movie that will beat this and I have seen many good... no ... GREAT films..And of course it is Canadian (and so Am I) and that is a plus.
Add another review
