Those expecting a "King of Kings" or a "Greatest Story Ever Told" will find the later, but more of a psychological aspect than the physical. For a film obviously made for church audiences, it is surprisingly details in regards to the political aspects of the goings-on of the early A. D. not enough and life under the rule of Herod, the puppet king for emperor Tiberius. The story is told through a conversation between a zealot played by the great Lee J. Cobb and Apostle Judas Iscariot (James Griffith) with hopes that they can use the presence of Jesus (Robert Wilson) in an effort to begin a rebellion against Roman rule. Between the lengthy conversation is the story of Jesus's rise to acclaim, the fury it causes those in power, and of course, all of the details that lead to his crucifixion and resurrection.
The major problem with this film is the passionless performance of Wilson as Jesus, rather sad considering the necessity for passion for someone t0 be playing the role of a lifetime. Griffith is fascinating as Judass, obviously conflicted, and at one point, something he tells Cobb about the rebel Barbaras, later repeated by Cobb about Judas word for word. Judas seems compelled by something Beyond his control as if has one moment he believes completely in every word that Jesus says and all of a sudden is forced by a divine intervention to change his feelings, as if his betrayal was a necessity to fulfill the destiny that Jesus would find at Calvary and afterwards on Easter Sunday.
You can't expect a big colorful epic from an independent filmmaker on the scale of what they were doing at MGM or 20th Century Fox, so this looks along the lines of sword and sandals films of the 60's. But for a straightforward version of the life of the Christ, it is well done outside the casting of its subject, with realistic sets and costumes and intense, dramatic music. This obviously takes its influence mainly from the scriptures, so the audience can't accuse it of being fictitious. Only the dialog is expanded from the source for dramatic impact, yet is mostly faithful to the gospels, not adding any unnecessary dramatics that don't belong, so the film stays on the straight and narrow rather than becoming exploitive.
The major problem with this film is the passionless performance of Wilson as Jesus, rather sad considering the necessity for passion for someone t0 be playing the role of a lifetime. Griffith is fascinating as Judass, obviously conflicted, and at one point, something he tells Cobb about the rebel Barbaras, later repeated by Cobb about Judas word for word. Judas seems compelled by something Beyond his control as if has one moment he believes completely in every word that Jesus says and all of a sudden is forced by a divine intervention to change his feelings, as if his betrayal was a necessity to fulfill the destiny that Jesus would find at Calvary and afterwards on Easter Sunday.
You can't expect a big colorful epic from an independent filmmaker on the scale of what they were doing at MGM or 20th Century Fox, so this looks along the lines of sword and sandals films of the 60's. But for a straightforward version of the life of the Christ, it is well done outside the casting of its subject, with realistic sets and costumes and intense, dramatic music. This obviously takes its influence mainly from the scriptures, so the audience can't accuse it of being fictitious. Only the dialog is expanded from the source for dramatic impact, yet is mostly faithful to the gospels, not adding any unnecessary dramatics that don't belong, so the film stays on the straight and narrow rather than becoming exploitive.