Becket (1964)

Cinema Sweetheart's Rating: 10 out of 10

Director: Peter Glenville

Starring: Richard Burton, Peter O’Toole, John Gielgud

Rated: PG-13

Genre: Drama, Historical, Religious

Runtime: 150 minutes

A story of friendship, betrayal, and honor, Becket is a stirring drama that is not to be missed.  King Henry II (O’Toole) is a mischievous rogue, spoiled rotten twat, and the ruler of England a few generations after the Norman invasion.  Thomas Becket (Burton), his best friend and partner in crime, is a bitter Saxon, who is unable to find real love or compassion for anyone but himself.  After making him a nobleman in Norman society, Henry gets his friend appointed first as archdeacon, then as Chancellor, and Archbishop of Canterbury.  However, once he gains this high position, Thomas comes to find religion and compassion, and for the first time, he begins to defy the will of the king, rather than accepting his every order without question.  What results is a series of events that would shake the very foundations of their friendship.

I was first drawn to this film for two main reasons: one, Richard Burton was acting in the title role.  Although I’m not extremely well-versed in the filmography of this actor, I’ve always been a fan.  My first introduction to Burton was through the musical Camelot, where he played the role of King Arthur.  And in my Classical film class, I was able to view scenes from a few other Richard Burton films, including The Robe (1953).  There is something about Richard Burton, some commanding force that he displays so perfectly, that makes him wholly delightful to watch.  The second reason I wanted to watch this film was because of the story.  After having studied The Canterbury Tales three times now for school, the name Thomas Becket is very prominent in my literary vocabulary; after all, the whole point of the book is a pilgrimage to his grave!

Even though Richard Burton was obviously my reason for watching the film, I must say that Peter O’Toole was wonderful as well.  While Becket obviously made changes in his philosophies as the movie progressed, it was a bit subtle.  However, it was very powerful watching the changes that Henry was forced to go through because of his friend’s decision. The movie opens with a very serious, mature Henry II at the tomb of Thomas Becket.  Not more than ten minutes later, we see Henry as he used to be: mischievous, immature, and free.  It leave the audience wondering what had happened to this man that he would be in the condition we see at the start of the film.   O’Toole plays the transformations flawlessly.

This was a wonderful, wonderful movie.  Despite the length (two and a half hours), I sat enthralled by the story and the characters.  Even though we know what is going to happen at the very start of the film (Becket will die), we do not actually know how these events are to come about, and therein lies the suspense.  It is not a clean cut plot, either.  I mean to say, there is not just one reason why everything falls apart.  When Thomas starts refusing to listen to Henry’s commands, sides are taken, and things start to build up.  Becket finds an ally in King Louis VII of France (John Gielgud) and the tenacious young monk Brother John (David Weston).  Henry, in turn, appeals to corrupted members of the Church, who are upset that Thomas has taken power away from them.  But, through it all, despite their differing loyalties, one cannot forget that these two men once had a beautiful friendship; and where did it go?

This was a powerful, very moving film.  If you’re a fan of either Richard Burton or Peter O’Toole, I would highly suggest watching Becket.  Also, this might be of interest to English majors (especially those with a concentration in Medieval literature), because if it were not for Thomas Becket’s martyrdom, there would be no Canterbury Tales.

Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo, or The Gospel According to St. Matthew (1964)

Cinema Sweetheart's Rating: 5 out of 10

Director: Pier Paolo Pasolini

Starring: Enrique Irazoqui, Margherita Caruso, and Susanna Pasolini

Rated: Not Rated

Genre: Religious, Historical, Drama, Biography

Runtime: 137 Minutes

Language: Italian (dubbed in English)

Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo is not exactly my first choice of film.  That's not to say that I don't enjoy a good theological film or anything like that.  It's just that when looking for the Gospel of Matthew in a movie form, I would normally turn to Godspell.  However, if you're in a somber mood, have about two hours to set aside, and are a well-versed Christian, this is surely a film you would enjoy.

Il Vangelo Secondo Matteo is basically what you would get if you fed the Gospel of Matthew into a screen-writing machine and handed out the completed piece as a script.  That's not to say that there aren't inaccuracies and changes made, but rather that the plot takes you straight from the Nativity to the Resurrection and everything in between--complete with choppy transitions and lots of speeches.

One frustrating aspect of Il Vengelo Secondo Matteo is that you really have to be a Christian to understand it.  Not enjoy it.  Understand it.  The film lacked transitions that make plots easier to follow, and besides that, there were very few details to designate who certain characters were.  Mary and Joseph were not named in the opening scene, and even later on in the film, it was difficult to tell who several of the characters (including John, Peter, and Judas) were.  All viewers had to go off of was the classic actions performed by them in Gospels.  I was also bothered by the lack of transitions between the scenes.  It was almost as though Pasolini decided that he wanted to change the scene, and he wanted to change it right that second, so he just jumped into it.  Now, it’s understandable if this is how the Gospel plays it out, but for the viewer, it can be a bit confusing.  We don’t have chapters and verses to break it up for us.

And of course, who can forget the dubbing?  Personally, the one thing I love so much about foreign films is the language.  I can’t understand any of it, but there is something delightful about listening to the sound of the French in Germinal or the Italian in Life is Beautiful.  However, with a dubbed film, I usually feel like I’ve been force-fed some sort of nasty meat-substitute in place of real beef.  What I mean to say is that it’s kind of shitty.  This was one of the better dubbings I’ve heard, but even so, I would have greatly preferred subtitles instead.  It was annoying when the English-speaking actors would rush through their lines because the Italian was shorter, or when you could see that the lips obviously didn’t match what was being said.

However, putting all my complaints aside, I have to say that there were several things that I really liked about this movie.  First, I loved the cinematography.  The sets were amazing; and when you were shown a scene, it wasn’t just a little piece of it.  Actually, the camera would pan out and show you everything…and it was beautiful!  When you weren’t panned out on the scenery, the camera was drawn close to all the faces…I loved seeing the faces.  There were so many people with so many unusual faces and expressions….it made you feel as though you were right there in the crowd coming to see Jesus; a sense of intimacy was produced with the film and the audience. 

Enrique Irazoqui was an amazing Jesus.  His commanding presence among the people was perfectly offset by the gentle smile he gave the children.  What interested me the most, though, was his appearance in general.  Strange as it may seem, I was surprised to see a short-haired Jesus.  The long-haired, bearded Jew has become the iconic picture of Jesus.  This one was a bit different from how I pictured him looking.  I was also a bit surprised by how serious he was.  I guess I always thought of Jesus as someone a little more kindly.  That’s not to say that Irazoqui was too harsh; just different.

All in all, I would say that this was a good film.  If you’re interested in Christian Theology, then you would probably enjoy this.  (I enjoyed it for that reason).  However be forewarned about the length and the terrible dubbing.  If you are able to find a DVD copy, you’ll have to tell me if they have it in the original Italian or not.  I had to watch an old library VHS, haha.

(On a side note, there is a version of this film in color.  Get the black and white variation; something is lost in the transition to color!)

Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (1999)

Cinema Sweetheart's Rating: 10 out of 10

Director: David Mallet

Starring: Donny Osmond, Maria Friedman, and Richard Attenborough, Joan Collins

Rated:Not rated

Genre: Musical, Religious, Family

Runtime:78 minutes

This is one of my favorite movies.  I've loved Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat since I was in THE FOURTH GRADE, and even now, this is a movie I treasure.  It's cute, quirky, and fun, with music that makes you want to get up and dance!  I can't even remember how many times I've seen this film.....but at least 20, to give a conservative estimate.

This is based off of Andrew Lloyd Webber's first musical: Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat, written in collaboration with Tim Rice. It retells the Biblical story of Joseph (Osmand), son of Jacob (Attenborough), and his eleven jealous brothers.  Joseph is his father's favorite, and when Jacob buys him a brilliant coat of many colors so that everyone will know how much his father cares about him, his brothers decide they've had enough of being second best, and decide to get rid of him.  While a slave in Egypt, Joseph gets falsely accused, thrown in prison, and eventually rises though the ranks to become second in command to the Pharaoh, who needs him to interpret his dreams.

This is a movie that the whole family can enjoy; not just the adults or just the kids.  Most of the entries on this blog will be geared toward teens and adults since those are the kinds of movies I choose to watch, however, this is one of the few films that is for everyone.  Full of fun songs such as "Go, Go, Go Joseph," "Benjamin Calypso," and "Any Dream Will Do".

Yes, this production is a bit cheesy, but that's a part of the charm.  Just trust me on this.  So, get some popcorn, a friend, or the whole family, and enjoy this wonderful, energetic film!

Jesus Christ Superstar (1973)

Cinema Sweetheart's Rating: 3 out of 10

Director: Norman Jewison

Starring: Ted Neeley, Carl Anderson, Yvonne Elliman

Rated:G

Genre: Musical, Religious, Historical

Runtime:108 minutes

Other Versions:Jesus Christ Superstar (2000)

Because I had just watched the 2000 version of Andrew Lloyd Webber's classic "rock opera," I thought it was time to review this one as well.  Jesus Christ Superstar is a musical sensation that details the last few days of Christ's (Neeley) life through the eyes of Judas Iscariot (Anderson).

I had quite a few issues with this version of the film.  Although I love the music, and enjoyed the "Millennium" edition quite a bit, this movie was greatly lacking.  It takes place in the deserts of Palestine, where a group of actors drive up in a bus and proceed to act out the story of Christ's passion.  There were minimal set pieces, but lots and lots of expansive sand, which was very boring after a while.

My biggest issues were with the acting.  Not to be mean, but Ted Neeley cannot sing.  At least, not well enough to play the role of Jesus.  Also, I felt as though his performance was greatly lacking in emotion; he was very flat.  Carl Anderson's Judas was better, but even his singing was not the best.  Joshua Mostel, who played King Herod, some sort of creepy bi-sexual beach bum with a mixed harem of guys and girls covered in paint and body glitter.  In my opinion, the only actors who sang well were Bob Bingham as Caiaphas, Yvonne Elliman as Mary Magdalene, and Barry Dennen as Pontias Pilate.

While the 2000 version of Jesus Christ Superstar focused on Judas as the main character, this movie pushed him into the background, making it hard to understand what his motivation was for his betrayal.  Jerome Pradon's Judas was distressed, overwrought, and easy to sympathise with.  You could understand his motives, whether you agreed with him or not.  Anderson's performance left me scratching my head, wondering what his justification was, seeing as I didn't understand it myself.  Whereas Pradon seemed to be doing everything for the greater good when Jesus wouldn't listen to him, Anderson just seemed to be smoldering in his own jealousy of what Jesus had.

All in all, I found this whole film to be a huge disappointment. If you're interested in this rock opera, I would suggest staying away from this production and watch the 2000 version instead.  It's so much better!

Jesus Christ Superstar (2000)

Cinema Sweetheart's Rating: 5 out of 10

Director: Gale Edwards, Nick Morris

Starring: Glenn Carter, Jerome Pradon, Renee Castle

Rated: Not Rated

Genre: Musical, Religious

Run Time:107 minutes

Other Versions: Jesus Christ Superstar (1973)

Based off of Andrew Lloyd Webber's famous "rock opera" of the same name, Jesus Christ Superstar is an epic musical production.  The story details the last week of Jesus' (Carter) life through the eyes of Judas Iscariot (Pradon), his best friend and right-hand man, who will later betray him.  Although a delight to watch, this movie is filled with Biblical inaccuracies, portraying Jesus as a self-centered, ignorant young man who has allowed his new-found popularity to go to his head, while Judas is the level-headed apostle who tries to keep him on the right path.  The setting is more modern than its 1973 counterpart, with revolutionaries and gangs instead of hippies.

I enjoyed this movie, however, there were quite a few things that bothered me.  First of all, I don't agree with how Jesus was portrayed as naive, oblivious, and a conceited drama queen.  Plus, I was not a fan of how they overly sexualized his  relationship with Mary Magdalene.  Also, Carter has a wonderful voice, but he launched into falsetto tones far too many times, and at parts that didn't need falsetto.  The chief priests, especially Annas (Michael Shaeffer), besides looking like a cross between The Matrix and the Spanish Inquisition, were absolutely demonic (but wonderful), making it nearly impossible to understand why Judas would go to them to betray his friend.
 

Speaking of Judas, I have to say that next to Ben Vereen, Jerome Pradon is my favorite Judas.  His performance is powerful, moving, and emotional, making the viewer really sympathise with him.  I loved his role, and honestly, Pradon made the movie for me.

All in all, an okay movie.  Not the best I have seen, but enjoyable, and reminiscent of Donny Osmand's Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat.  Although, I have to say that I preferred Godspell to Jesus Christ Superstar.  However, if you enjoy the works of Andrew Lloyd Webber, I would say that this film is worth it.  If musicals really aren't your thing, then I'd suggest looking for a different movie.

Godspell (1973)

Cinema Sweetheart's Rating: 8 out of 10

Director: David Greene

Starring: Victor Garber, Lynne Thigpen, and Katie Hanley

Rated: G

Genre: Musical, Religious

Run Time: 103 minutes

Godspell is a modern interpretation of the life of Jesus Christ based off the Gospel according to Matthew.  A group of New Yorkers are approached by John the Baptist (David Haskell) who encourages them to come and follow the words of Jesus.  Soon, the group of eclectic misfits, dressed like hippies in bright colors with painted faces begin to retell the Gospel of Matthew through stories, songs, and performances that they put on for Jesus and for each other.  A fun, feel-good movie, with unforgettable songs such as "Day By Day" and "Turn Back, O Man".

In all honesty, I found this movie to be a bit strange.  I'm a Catholic, and so I was a bit perturbed about some of the representations of Jesus (like why is he wearing pompoms on his shoes, face paint, and a superman shirt with suspenders?  He looks like a clown).  But, I think the reason that it was done this way was to show through the hippie movement that Jesus was counter cultural.  He was not like everyone else; he went against the grain.  Also, I felt that the film portrays Jesus as gentle, caring, and fun.  He seems like someone you'd want to hang out with and who would be happy to just spend time with you and be silly. This Jesus is not too serious, which I kind of liked.

All in all, I thought this was an incredible movie with great music and a great cast.  Sometimes, however, I will say that I thought it was a bit over-the-top in how silly they made it, but still, I would happily recommend it.