The Hunt for the Hidden Relic (2002 TV Movie)
User ReviewsReview this title
In common with many action movies, we see the hero being beaten up, shot at, tortured ... and still running around in the end. Had it been me, I probably wouldn't even have survived the main character's first drop. Contrary, however, to many action movies, there was a story and the story did not get lost in the action. Dialogues were more than some stupid grunting and one-liners ... there was an attempt to make this story if not believable, then at least acceptable.
All in all, a nice movie ... It got my attention enough to want to read the book.
This is definitely not a candidate for the `worst film ever'. It just is so depressing that this particular novel offered something we rarely get to see: new ideas, no cliches! But the movie doesn't use ANY of these ideas and delivers a below average action movie (I voted 3/10) instead. Such a waste of potential is annoying.
In opposite to a few other reviewers here, I think the actors did okay (within the limited possibilities the script gave them). Naike Rivelli reminded me so much of her mother, screen legend Ornella Muti, in the early 1980s. I'm looking forward to see more movies with this talented young lady, but please not `Jesus Video 2 - Pontius Strikes Back"!
During an archeological dig in Israel a student discovers an artefact that doesn't belong in the time period of the find along with clues to a missing piece that might have profound implications on the history as we know it. What follows is a suspenseful hunt by different organisations to find the missing piece and use it for their purposes.
Well scripted, acted and directed with some shortcomings towards the end.
While it isn't Hollywood material, lets face it - it is much better than some of the Hollywood movies out there (like The Pacifier and The Shaggy Dog).
Its a great movie to watch and very enjoyable. But wish the DVD had subtitles in English (and other languages too). Very enjoyable and worth watching.
The leading lady was fine and very beautiful too.
How would the expert have liked it to be so that his review could have improved?
I don't agree with the critic, he was very biased.
As for the ideas, the cliches abound and nothing is believable.
So even though the film is full of unbelievable moments, and of cliches, believe it or not but it is a marked improvement on the book!
Make sure you don't buy the book, or waste time reading it.
Yes it was a best-seller in Germany but I guess this only proves that today's masses are ignorant and unsophisticated enough, that they can be made to love such a thing... ;-)
You would think.
Instead it turns out to be a POINTLESS film. The acting is OK and the locations fulfill the requirements of sandy exotica, but the rest...
How does he suddenly get the idea that the skeleton could be a time traveler, five minutes into the film? How can any of the characters survive all these onslaughts of violence with nothing than the odd photogenic cut next to his eyebrow? If all these people are looking for him why does he walk around Jerusalem looking exactly the same as he normally does?
The questions go on and on but it would spoil the plot of the movie, so i will stop. Enough to say that the why? you ask yourself at the beginning of the movie is still unanswered by the time the credits roll. From what you hear from the members of the board, the book sounds rather interesting, containing the elements that would have made this a great movie. Therefore the recommendation is pass the rental and go and buy the book.
Now about the film itself: There are some weaker acting performances with bad moments in here, but there is not one area where the film really sucks. But there is also not one area where it is really convincing. I already stated in the title that I feel the script is kinda bloated. The title of the film states that this is a film about time travel and thus about the possibility of making a video about Jesus Christ with actual footage and the latter is the absolute core plot in the film. But wait... isn't the fact that they may have succeeded with time traveling much more spectacular? Anyway, there are some moments here and there when the film digs into sucker territory, like the way they kill off one guy so that the female protagonist is single again and ready to mingle with the male protagonist. Anyway, with this subject I am not too surprised that the film received a great deal of attention (not with awards bodies, just audiences), but it is sadly at over 180 minutes not good enough, not focused enough, not concise enough to really live up to its potential. The ending is fine I think, though a bit melodramatic perhaps and I also liked some other scenes like the interrogation at the end of the first 90 minutes. As a whole, however, the negative is more frequent and I give this one a thumbs-down. Don't watch.
The story actually sounds really interesting. But the acting is terrible, there is absolutely no logic to the events, and even less realism. The author of the book was apparently quite upset about what they had done to his story. No wonder! Take a terrible screenplay (completely changed from the book), add some awful actors, and you've got a candidate for turkey of the year.
I haven't read the book on which it was based, but it was a bestseller and won several awards, so I'm sure it must be better than this made-for-TV garbage. If there's nothing else on TV one of these nights - go to bed. Play Scrabble. Read a book. Clean your apartment from top to bottom. Just don't suffer through this self-proclaimed "movie event of the year!"
The book: it is not utterly brilliant, but contains some excellent ideas and some cleverly touching moments, making it a worthwhile read on overall.
The film: although I appreciate that the plot had to be shortened to fit into a two hours duration, it has almost nothing in common with the book. On the plus side, a few entertaining and well-made action sequences that weren't contained in the book. But most (really, most) of the good things of the book were simply left out - IMHO the screenwriter did a terrible job. The plot was super-flattened and the characters were frighteningly empty, making it a silly action flick as opposed to the great and clever film it could have been. I have *very* rarely observed such a huge discrepancy between a book and its film version.
I think the book has the potential to serve as basis for a good remake as a mini-series. Actually, I saw the short version in TV a few years after it was released (according to the posted date here) but I couldn't make much out of it and just found the 3 hour version dubbed to English at a friend's CD library. It actually made sense but I guess the four hour version much be better in the storytelling department.
I'm giving it a 6/10 grade mainly because of the plot. I don't think the book will be translated into English or any other language I can read fluently as I've found it was not a huge sales success, but hopefully the novel by Andreas Eschbach and its sequel do get remade into a couple of seasons of a better produced mini-series.
I would not necessarily encourage the actors (the blond protagonist included) to go and tackle some of the great Shakespearian tragedies, but again, this is pretty much par for the course.
However, our blond hero does look spectacularly trim and handsome, especially in shorts and underpants. He continues to look spectacularly trim and handsome, even when getting punched and beaten up like a giant stress ball. The same goes for those scenes where he is getting tortured or being threatened with torture. (Strangely, none of this causes him to get hospitalized for fourteen months or so.)
Which rather brings me to one of the negatives : there are some pretty weird undercurrents here. I get the impression that some of the material, especially the torture scenes, might be of considerable interest to psychiatrists. Hell, I can picture a seminar full of psychiatrists making notes, using quite a lot of words beginning with dys- or ending in -pathy and -phobia.
Finally it needs to be said that the ending is frustrating, since it does not offer any clear dénouement or resolution, and this after hours of pursuits, explosions and double-crosses. It's quite possible that it was designed to be mysterious and tantalizing, but still, frustrating is the word...
Based upon a novel by Andreas Eschbach, you get two contrasting opinions on the film compared to the book. At over three hours, you will think you are reading a novel, rather than watching a film.
It is a suspense thriller/time-travel movie. Archaeologists find bones that are carbon dated at 2000 years, but there are amalgam fillings in the teeth and a rod in the leg that can only be seven years old. In addition, there is a plastic bag withe instructions for a video camera that is not even on the market.
Only one explanation, and the German title, Das Jesus Video, gives a better clue to what was going on.
While the archaeologists are trying to decipher the riddle, there is a group led by a man in a secret organization descended from the Spanish Inquisition, much like Silas in The Da Vinci Code. Both have no qualms about killing for Jesus.
Lots of action, and great stunt work, along with blood and torture, as the two groups go after the video camera that allegedly has the face of Jesus. Some surprises at the end, as expected, which add to the mystery.
well done from technical side..., no complains about actors'es play, pity the director focused only on "run for your life" scenes, but as it seems a quite low budget movie (so don't expect any FX to remember), sounds as a nice event for an evening (if you red a book before - otherwise go and see "Mummy ..." series"). Veni, Vidi, flushed....
I loved to see it as the book is in my Top 10 "Sci-Fi" list.... go and spend a week to find what is it all about.
Can please anyone tell me why they have changed the wonderful book plot this way? The original author of the novel, Andreas Eschbach, carefully avoided any logic errors, like the time paradoxon problem or the fact that the main character does not recognize his own handwriting. All this was destroyed thru the radically changed new ending. Also, some of the nice details of the book were initially mentioned in the movie, but not used to the extent: the monk says that "they can take a look at the mirror every hundred years", but when the camera is examined, it has no power whatsoever.
Sorry, but this movie is a dull example of what filmmakers can do to a really great book!
This starts a hunt for the jesus video that's hidden somewhere.
It's a great exciting plot with a lot of action.