Did you?
Roger Ebert wrote: "Among those who do not already have rigid views on the subject, The Last Temptation of Christ is likely to inspire more serious thought on the nature of Jesus than any other ever made."
Did it?
I encourage you to write whatever you'd like about this week's film - one of Scorsese's most controversial - just be sure to do it with as much passion and detail as you can.
I look forward to reading your thoughts, feelings, insights, etc. by no later than midnight Monday April 3.
While reading through the chapter on “The Last Temptation of Christ”, I found a quote from Martin Scorsese that spoke to me, and perhaps all lapsed Catholics on a spiritual level, ‘Over the years I’ve drifted away from the Church, I’m no longer practicing Catholic, and I’ve questioned these things.’ For those who weren’t raised in religious (more so Christian) households, “The Last Temptation of Christ” may seem like nothing more than another film about the trials and tribulations of Jesus Christ with some spicy sequences in-between. But for us who were raised believing that the figure of Jesus is a pure, angelic figure who could do no wrong, the film is far more.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly to Kazantzakis and Scorsese both, I too have struggled with the idea of Jesus Christ being both fully divine and fully human, the conflict of the spirit and the flesh. Pier Paolo Pasolini once said that he wasn’t a believer anymore, but had a very strong nostalgia for believing. Well, nothing truer could be said of my experience when I initially saw “Last Temptation.” I’ve always thought of Jesus Christ as less of the Son of God, and more like Martin Luther; “Just another Jewish politician” to quote David Bowie’s Ponticus Pilote. But as where a figure like John the Baptist came to baptize with fire, Christ came to baptize with love.
The facets of the film that truly sets “Last Temptation” apart from other films about Christ was Scorsese decision not to make “Last Temptation” a traditional sword-and-sandal epic like “King of Kings” or “Ben-Hur”. The cinéma vérité aspect of the film, no doubt inspired by Pasolini’s “The Gospel According to St. Matthew” truly puts the audience at Christ’s feet as he delivers the Sermon on the Mount, or side by side as he expels the moneychangers from the Temple in Jerusalem. The film, to many’s agreement, would have failed drastically had Scorsese taken any other approach to the feature. The one aspect of the feature that does rub me the wrong way is the score by Peter Gabriel. At times the score can be particularly powerful and transcendent, like the Palm Sunday sequence when Jesus rides into Jerusalem on an ass to be greeted as “King of the Jews!” But there are other moments when Gabriel let’s too much of synth get in the way of what would seem like music contemporary to that period; drums, horns, chanting, etc.
Now, what is the last temptation of Jesus Christ? Well, as Scorsese said, “…for Christ to get off the cross and live the rest of His life as a normal human being.” This was something that I had realized on my first screening of the film, but continues to awe and inspire me every time I see the picture. How powerful it is that the Son of God, like every single one of us, struggles with a fear of death. The temptations of lust, greed, power and jealousy. If Jesus Christ can go through these trials, living like a normal human despite his superhuman destiny, perhaps the Roman solider was right in the Gospel of Matthew when after Jesus die on the cross, he broken down and wept “Truly this man was the Son of God!”
Since I feel that this will help contextualize my response I was raised in a very lax and progressive Episcopal environment, and while I do not subscribe to any Judea/Christian beliefs I have a strong literary understanding of the Bible and the life of Christ. This background knowledge of the faith as noted in the above quote from Scorsese, gives a certain perspective to his film, The Last Temptation of Christ, and its "transgressive" elements that stray away from traditional New Testament interpretations and beliefs. This being said, I've always been fascinated with the outrage over this film considering how honest and accurate this portrayal of Jesus is to the one found in the Bible. The message of his words, the events that happen, and his symbolism remains in tact, with the key points of diversion coming from Kazantzakis's book, primarily the "Last Temptation" segment where Jesus is able to live a life as a man, free from his Divine half. But Christ chooses to embrace himself and the path laid out for him and make the sacrifice of love that he has been preaching for the whole film.
ReplyDeletePeople get real sensitive about this shit, we saw it happen most recently with "Noah", mass protests against the film were manned by people who had not even seen it, although the film indulges in touches of fantasy the heart of the film, the message of the film is to take these mythic larger than life events and consider them from a human perceptive. The Last Temptation of Christ operates in the same way, by embracing the human side of Christ does that not only make him more relatable to the struggles that we go through? It is preached that Christ is man and god in one, the living covenant between the Worshipped and the Worshippers, but so often the humanity is removed and instead the Messiah figure is propped up as an ideal to strive forward, not someone who struggled for the same ideals and hopes that those who subscribe to the faith do. It seems quite backwards, especially when Scorsese goes to great pains to make Jesus's story in the film representational of every one's struggle with God.
This idea to focus on the humanity of christ is felt throughout the film by many choices made by Scorsese, such as the dialogue retaining a more modern sensibility, the lack of Bible accents, and contemporary music. These choices help remove the distance between a contemporary audience and an old story in a distant land. Jesus is the ultimate Scorsese protagonist, who struggles with all of the same issues that previous Scorsese leads have. The violent struggle between two worlds (usually crime and straight living here replaced with the world of man and the world of god) and a fractured mental state where we are never sure what is real and what is fantasy (The same way Travis Bickle and Rubert Pupkin are visualized). Jesus also literalize's Scorsese's on going Madonna/Whore complex with Mary and Magdalene. Here all of Scorsese's obsessions become manifest, and one could liken the filmic process itself to the struggle of Christ. There seems to be some supernatural obsession that Scorsese has with all of his films, Film itself is this larger omnipotent prescreen that transcends time and place that Scorsese is a beholden follower too and finds himself torn between his journey of art and his personal struggles. In this film these worlds and obsessions collide, and almost by a Holy touch the last words of the film, "It is accomplished" ring out. These words ring true for Christ in the film, his Journey is completed, but I wonder if Scorsese felt his was as well, if this film was his supposed climax, his completion to find something within himself, some inner peace or sense of accomplishment for his journey as a disciple of film and his struggle with God.
I was never raised religious in any way. My father was Muslim, has been an Israelite, and has tested different religious followings throughout his life. My mother was Christian her whole life and has never strayed away from it. They have been together for 40 years, married for 35 and they have never forced me to go to church, hammered into me what Jesus was or is like, or that he even existed. They simply presented me with the facts and the stories, while letting me figure out what I wanted to believe in. They never forced religion upon me and my brother and for those reasons, I have my own beliefs in terms of what I think Jesus Christ was like. My beliefs are more aligned with Scorsese’s depiction of Christ in the film, then they are with most religious texts. I am a spiritual guy, and I wouldn’t call myself religious at all, so I didn’t bring my own sense of Jesus to the movie to compare, or nit-pick at what I think is wrong or right about the way he is portrayed. I simply just took it for what it was
ReplyDeleteI was intrigued by a story that depicts Jesus as more man than God, and at times, more dislikable then adored. I think this movie plays devil’s advocate and forces those who do have very concrete mindsets about the messiah to take a moment to reconsider and at least entertain the idea that he may have not been the Jesus that some religious text described Him as. The outrage that people have over this movie is intriguing and I thought the portion of the book that described this displeasure amongst the masses was fascinating. I think as a filmmaker you must make people uncomfortable sometimes, and you can’t be afraid to show the world your perspective on things. I know for a fact that this film would not have resonated with me if it portrayed Jesus as this omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent figure who is perfect in every way. I have never felt that way about Christ I think he is more man like man than we believe. That’s not to say that Jesus isn’t a powerful being who has more insight about life and existence then man himself, it’s just to say that I truly don’t know, because to know God and Christ would in a sense mean that you have insight than another human. I don’t think humans can comprehend God as humans and by human law and it’s a foreign language to us all in my opinion. It’s refreshing to see that such an inspiring figure like Scorsese may share those sentiments.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteScorsese humanizes Jesus and portrays him like some of his other protagonist in other films. He is a man torn between himself, the world around him, and God’s will. He battles with depression like Travis in Taxi Driver, or Jake in Ragging Bull. He lives in the world of reality where he is completely connected to the people around him such as his followers, and fantasy, like Christ’s moment in the circle in the desert where He listens to God, meets the devil, eats the apple, and kills the Baptist. As a viewer, you just aren’t sure if it’s happening or not, and it makes you question how true these sorts of passages in various religious text are in the way they describe these events and others so viscerally. At times, Christ is very likeable like when he first preaches to the people as and after they stoned Mary Magdalene. In other moments, you are torn as a viewer on if you like him at all, like when he comes back to his followers and tears his heart out after spending weeks in the desert finding himself; he comes off as kind of evil and monovalent. There are moments where he is very humble and gentle, and then others where he comes off cocky and arrogant. There are moments where he seems very sure of what he wants and God’s will, followed by moments where is filled with uncertainty and selfish desire like his last temptation, which really humanizes him because most human are afraid to die, especially if they haven’t lived a fulfilling life and are unsure as to what lies on the other side. These traits make him very relatable and they force you to empathize with a figure who man still hasn’t fully come to understand or know. We humans are complex people trying to identify the middle ground between the extremes of existence, and this film levels the playing field between us and Christ in the way it shows him doing the same.
ReplyDeleteThe Jesus that was portrayed within The Last Temptation of Christ was a Jesus I have never seen before. I was raised within a nondenominational Christian church, and the tendency within that church was to view Jesus as more divine than human, but I thoroughly enjoyed the different perspective that was presented within the film. There's a scene within the movie where a man within desert tells Jesus, "All my life I've wanted to hear God's voice... Sometimes, I think I feel him, but I'm never really sure." This man's struggle is something I've felt deeply before, but Jesus' struggle was something I've never considered. There are a few moments within the film where Jesus speaks to the masses, and each occasion, there's some dispute which arises from it. Jesus will preach love, and the masses will hear "revolution." For the first time within this film, I actually saw the Romans' point-of-view. The Jesus within this film was dangerous--a liability. He sparked revolution (even unintentionally) and he brought people together, a threat to the subjugator. Judas, too, was portrayed in a way I've never considered--a man obligated to betray his friend, fulfilling his duties just as Jesus. This was a much more noble light than I've ever considered for this character, and as a whole, I think The Last Temptation of Christ put these stories I've heard my entire life into real, human characters that I could sympathize with.
ReplyDeleteEven the miracles within the films were rationalized a bit, without entirely diminishing their merit. A good example of this is when Jesus tells his disciple to "check again," then realizing that the water is, in fact, wine. There's subtlety in these miracles, a lack of 'showboating' that feels even more Christlike than the way that the stories are presented. At times, it doesn't feel like this Jesus is trying to make waves; he just accidentally does. This is a struggle that I think anyone can relate to--going into a situation with good intentions only to have the situation get out of control, anyway. It rationalizes Jesus' drive to choose 'axe' over 'love,' since a lifetime of scenarios going horribly awry could create a hardened and more cynical person. Through all of this, Dafoe's Jesus just wants to live a normal life, a wish that's fully realized with his last temptation. He doesn't want to spark revolution or die for man's sins; he just wants to live and create a life outside of the chaos that follows him.
At first, I was a little confused at the prolonged temptation scene... my Christian senses were tingling. I thought maybe a chapter had been removed from my childhood Bible, and though the film was prefaced by stating it was only loosely based on scripture, most of it still adhered to stories I had read and been told in the past. After I realized the last half hour's purpose, it really put Jesus' struggle into even more perspective for me, giving me an avenue to relate his desire for a normal life to mine. Also upon first watching it, I was a little disappointed that we do not get to see Jesus rise from the dead and revisit his apostles, but after reflecting on it, I think this was a wise-choice. Jesus, at the end of The Last Temptation of Christ, has come to terms with his purpose, and the movie ends the moment he accepts this. Dragging the movie beyond this point would have no purpose (at least to the Christ character), and the rest is talked about enough that you get a sense of resolution. I suppose my wanting to see these scenes is because I appreciated the new and fresh perspective on the other moments throughout the story that I wanted to see how this film would tackle the resurrection.
I grew up Lutheran, but quickly drifted away from religion during my tween years. Which I believe is a very common theme for todays youth. I remember the first time I started to question my faith. I was eight or nine, and I was looking through a children's bible, complete with illustrations to keep me interested. I remember reading about Adam and Eve and thinking, "Hold on... In school we just talked about the dinosaurs. What's going on?"
ReplyDeleteI've always found the bible to be quite boring, and overrated. So many adaptations have been made, the story is over used. But Scorsese manages to give us a unique look at the story that hasn't been looked into as much. Jesus as a man. This I find to be much more interesting. When Jesus is God, and can do no wrong, he is boring. No one likes a hero who has no struggles, who isn't challenged. I feel the same way about Superman. He is too powerful. He has one weakness. What is the bible's version of Jesus' weakness? Maybe his flat story arc?
Scorsese’s film gives us a much more interesting version of Jesus. He is a man, asked to do the work of a saint, a God. This internal struggle of wanting someone else to be chosen instead of him, and his acceptance of his roll is what makes for such an intriguing and interesting story.
This film takes on of the most beloved, and well known ‘characters’ in history, and asks us to wonder, “what if he was different from what we thought he was like?” Which of course will lead to lash back and protests. Because how dare someone suggest something different from he norm that has been in place for over two thousand years. This is one of the reasons I love and respect Scorsese. He is bold, and not afraid to make films that will have people sending him death threats. I hope to make relevant films like that in my career.
I was raised Catholic by two non-practicing Christians, which is strange. What I remember from attending a rigorously religious school is how disconnected I, along with my parents, felt towards these ideas. How was I to believe and follow someone who had the power to turn water into wine. While the story of Christ and who he is may change depending on who you speak to, I think the most basic level of Christianity is the belief that Jesus was the son of God whose responsibility was to protect the people. My immediate reaction to The Last Temptation of Christ was a question of what did I just watch. Days following the screening, I am still wondering if I loved it for what it was or what it stood for. A humanized character study or a controversial film.
ReplyDeleteWhile my personal feelings toward biblical characters are completely individualized, I think it speaks about what inspired Scorsese to create the film. It’s much easier to believe something that you can relate to. Someone who can cut his heart out or heal those suffering is challenging to completely believe in. Yet, a man who devoted himself to something who can now live his own life, that’s somewhat universal. By humanizing a glorified symbol, I believe Scorsese unified believers and nonbelievers. I attended a very public high school where a literature class required the reading and analysis of the Bible. It was not used as a tool for understanding the validity of the religion, but one to study the structure of storytelling. It’s disappointing to learn someone’s fear prevented them from understanding the psychology of the film and appreciating the art.
I think first and foremost, the film is a Scorsese film. The interest in concentrating on Jesus and his temptations, specifically his last, is similar to his previous male protagonists. Raging Bull was as much about Jake La Motta’s psyche as his boxing career. I agree with Rosenbaum when he said everyone will bring their own understanding of Jesus to the film. It had me thinking about my experiences, both good and bad, with religion and the symbol of Jesus. I think that’s a great thing. I think that uncomfortable conversation is what filmmaking is all about. I think that if people didn’t feel threatened when someone had a differing opinion Roger Ebert would be right, The Last Temptation of Christ can inspire an idea.
I thought that "The Last Temptation of Christ" was a very bold film because of its content matter. That is one of the reasons I have so much respect for Scorsese...he makes the films that he wants to make, even though he knows it's quite dangerous and might not sit well with others. I appreciate the approach that Scorsese was trying to implement in this film. He wanted to humanize Jesus and allow him to have qualities like normal people. That being said, in this book, he states something along the lines as he wanted Jesus to make love and feel pain just like everybody else. Many people thought that act was sleazy, but Scorsese only wanted audience members to feel closer to the character of Jesus and have more of an intimate relationship with him. I believe that his approach was successful in the sense that this is the first film about Jesus where I can really empathize with the character because he has qualities just like the average person.
ReplyDeleteThe beauty about this piece is that I don't think Scorsese is picking a side. He is not saying that being religious is wrong or being a not believer is wrong. He is merely exploring political/religious agency and coming to terms with it in the best way that he can, which for him is making a film. He is exploring his inner feelings about religion and showing us both sides so that at least it can trigger us to think and further research. And when it comes to that type of subject matter, I believe the best way in executing a film in that manner is to merely explore it. It's good to have doubt and take into account everything so I really think that Scorsese did a respectful job in directing this piece.
Personally, I relate to this piece and the aftermath in a plethora of ways. For one, my graduate thesis film was screened last Friday and it was inspired by the 2011 Egyptian revolution. I am an Egyptian-American that grew up in a household where I was raised by a Muslim mother and an atheist father who used to be Muslim. Luckily this dichotomy of faith, allowed me to be more open minded and explore things before blindly following. My piece as well does explore political agency in the Arab world and there is some content that is dangerous. After the controversy of his piece, one of my favorite things that Scorsese said in "Scorsese On Scorsese" is that, "He had shown his film to his mother before its release, and she thought it was fine". I thought that was so sweet because Scorsese's mother being religious and all...that must of definitely reassured him. In the same way, that I showed my short film to my Muslim mother and she didn't think it was too bad either.
I’ll preface this post with a little context into my relationship with religion. My mother was raised in Germany in a fairly strict Catholic household, but ended up identifying as Agnostic as she got older. My father was raised in a Methodist household, with a pastor for a stepfather. Despite having been involved in the church for most of his childhood and young adulthood, he converted to what I refer to as “white guy Buddhism” after spending a summer in Japan. Because of my parents’ lax attitude about it, I was raised without much of a religious identity. I was baptized by my step-grandfather into the Methodist church when I was 8, but I did that more to appease my grandparents than I did out of any connection to Christianity. For me, an ADD riddled child, church was a place where I had to wear uncomfortable tights and sit still for far too long. Even now when I hear my grandfather preach, I find myself zoning out.
ReplyDeleteSo, I was somewhat apprehensive going into The Last Temptation of Christ. I’m not a huge fan of sword and sandal epics, because it’s a mythology that I am just not that interested in. But, I was excited about the controversy that surrounded the film, because that made me feel like it would set the film apart from other biblical epics.
But unfortunately, I sat in that screening room squirming around and feeling very similarly to how I felt in church as a kid. I just couldn’t get into it. Objectively, I could see why the film resonated with people so much and why it was so controversial. I thought all the performances were great, the script was well written, the production and costume design were fantastic. But ultimately, I guess it just came down to me not caring enough about the subject matter. Religion isn’t something I find myself interested in very much, so it’s hard for me to take an entire movie about the mythology of a religion all that seriously. And I know this is very much a personal issue I have. In no way to I want to take away anything from anyone else’s opinion of the film or their relationship with spirituality.
I think one of the powers of this film is how it inspires such individual and unique reactions, which is really fascinating and says a lot about the work Scorsese put into it. I did really appreciate the twist ending, which I definitely did not see coming. It was probably my favorite part, and made me recognize it specifically as a Scorsese film. As we have talked about before, he likes to force the audience to look at and believe certain things. And he completely forced the audience to believe that the “last temptation” was reality.
In China, children are raised to be a communist. But not everyone can be a communist, instead, there are very few of them could become a communist. We don't study other religion in school, though we will learn others in life as there are many others around us, such as Buddhism and Catholic. The communist are not allowed to believe other religion as their belief is communism. There are god/ or Prophet /or Saint in other religion, though there is no god role in communism. There is a goal for communist is their dream world--live in communist society. The communist party said China will achieve communist society in 2050 which is claimed in 1950s. So the communist will make the country like heaven and don't need to die. Though the theory of communist society was proved be an unattainable theory of utopia, just like heaven. People are suffering, that's why they urge to reach the heaven. In Scorsese's latest film Silence, the Japanese peasants thought they were in heaven after been baptized. Religion released their pain and fears. I was fascinated by religion when I was young. I was confused and lost, I tried to gain strength from religion, then I realized I need to change myself. My confusion comes from my ignorance and I am suffering from ignorance. Of course I am still ignorance compare to others, but now I could face the suffering. Now I see the belief is a tool, like philosophy, art, music. It's part of the life. Though I am an atheism, I believe Aliens, I believe high intelligence creatures, I believe science as it is a tool to explore the world. I believe humanity, that's why I think last temptation of Christ is a piece of restoration work of Jesus. He is a philosophy and his followers shaped him as the son of god. This is a big step for believer to ground their religion, to trace the source, to talk with the saint. When I read the protest part in the book, it reminds me some extreme religion claims the believer will have 72 virgins after the death. So dose the believer's belief is still as the same as the original one? Scorsese is a true believer, a thinker. That's is what the religion for, to make people as a thinker not a blind follower. This is what I thought after watching the film.
ReplyDeleteI don't know much about the bible. I know it's basic stories and a little information here and there. I thought that The Last Temptation of Christ did a good job of showing the stories of the bible and keeping the information coherent. I was able to follow the plot of the film and understand what was happening. I think this is important, especially for this movie. It would be easy to get lost without the knowledge of the source material. Scorsese did well in taking this rich background and extracting the important parts and putting them in his film. He kept it coherent and easy to understand.
ReplyDeleteI also think that Scorsese put a lot of thought into this film. He is a very religious man and I don't think that he would've done anything that he knew would have been sacrilegious. He portrayed the characters in a way that was incredibly thoughtful and true to what he believed.
This being my first time watching The Last Temptation of Christ, my mind was kind of blown. I've always enjoyed biblical films. If you look at the bible as a fantastical, mythological, origin like Tolkien's The Silmarillion, the story of the resurrection is a strong, philosophical fantasy. In my opinion, Scorsese is a master of fantasy in his own right. He display's the parallel worlds of a character's soul in breathtaking visual sequences like the one in Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. The Last Temptation of Christ is steeped in visual mysticism and ambiguity, instead of a single fantasy sequence related to the character, we have multiple fantasy sequences related to the state of the world.
ReplyDeleteIn typical biblical filmmaking like Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments, there is surprisingly little time for character development in the protagonist, most of the film is dedicated to displaying god's will in a realistic visual scale. Scorsese utilizes his dramatic fantasy sequences as a way of not only advancing the plot but as a way of showing Christ's internal dilemma, his choice to carry out the will of god. This is a level of personality that is rarely seen in a religious protagonist.
I thought the controversy of this film was going to extend from its depiction of Mary Magdalene as a prostitute. But in reality, the most controversial part of the film is its depiction of Christ as a questioning figure. He devoutly trusts in the signs given to him by God until he is asked to allow himself to be killed, only then does he wish to be freed of the cursed reality that god has set upon him, and god grants his wish. It's understandable that many Catholics would be opposed to the idea of a human Christ who does not want to die for the sins of mankind, it's contrary to the core of his being. The Last Temptation scenes are my favorite parts of the film because they contradict everything I know about this style of filmmaking.
I can’t say that “The Last Temptation of Christ” is one of my favorite of his films, but it certainly has its moments. I thought the film was a very grounded interpretation of Jesus Christ which revealed Scorsese’s personal beliefs on the matter. There is a duality of Christ where he is described as both God and man, with the former usually the aspect that is more emphasized from a Catholic perspective. I think it was a very interesting, and also bold, choice for Scorsese to focus more so on the human side of Christ as well his interpersonal struggles. Scorsese chose to represent God in a series of visions and voices that are all in Jesus’ head. Probably what I liked the most about Scorsese’s interpretation was that not even Jesus himself was sure these signals were coming from God. Sometimes, it was very clear they were coming from the devil.
ReplyDeleteThere were a lot of the common Scorsese tropes spread out along this film. I immediately made a connection with the beginning of “The Last Temptation” and “Mean Streets”. Both films start with a man lying on his back with the visual accompanied by a contemplative interpersonal voiceover. Charlie thinks about how he wants to be the savior of his neighborhood while Jesus thinks about the pains and hardships coming from the visions in his head. The camera work was very much the same too. There were a lot of shots where Scorsese was leading the eye of the audience through his classic panning and zooming techniques. However, what I thought was different about this film was that those techniques didn’t really fit in with the pace of the movie. Scorsese’s camerawork serves a fast paced movie very nicely as it creates a sense of chaos. But for a film like “The Last Temptation”, which in my opinion runs at a snail’s pace, these techniques really didn’t hold my interest the way they typically do.
In terms of character, Scorsese’s interpretation of Jesus Christ does line up with a particular archetype he frequently uses in his films. Jesus, like Charlie from “Mean Streets” or even Rodrigues from “Silence”, is a guilty soul who is afraid to leave the world he knows. But Christ also falls under the category of Scorsese’s reluctant savior archetype, joining the company of Travis Bickle and, again, Charlie.
Overall, I admired the attempt to make a film of this subject matter. But in terms of execution, I felt it was a slow moving film that was highly predictable at times. It was abundantly clear to me when Jesus was fantasizing about his life off of the cross and, as a result I didn’t feel like that was even supposed to be a twist ending. Fully understanding that this was his first try, in terms of religious epics, I think Scorsese has done better with his future attempts.
I usually have very little interest in biblical epics and I hated watching DeMille’s The Ten Commandments around the holidays, but I was curious to see Scorsese’s auteur style would come through in this film. However, I think I need to give this film another screening because I was more focused on trying to understand the narrative than its visual style. Since reading the book, I understand why he would take on a project about this subject. He said something along the lines of wanting to “get to know Jesus better”, but the practicing of religion is a reoccurring theme in both Mean Streets and Who’s that Knocking at My Door? So his choice to tackle this subject isn’t as bizarre as I would’ve thought before taking this course.
ReplyDeleteAlthough my family claimed to be Christians, I never had to read the bible or really learn about God and Jesus Christ, so I was slightly confused during the beginning of the film. I expected that Jesus already knew his power and we would only see how this would lead to his downfall. Instead we see him in a confused, painful state, discovering that he is actually He. Obviously, I’ve never read Kazantzakis book, but I like that we see Jesus as a human first, rather than a divine being from the start. He’s constantly asking what does God want and he’s battling with his own desires that may offend God in some way. I can understand why his choice to live out the rest of his life as a human rather than the Jesus Saint Paul created would’ve upset religious groups. Again, I like this choice because it reminds the audience that Jesus was also a human. But we’re also reminded that people need a power greater than themselves to believe in.
First off, I was raised in a home where religion wasn’t forced upon me, so growing up I never had this attachment to a god or any sort of religion. Some people may label me as an atheist because of it, but I honestly see myself as being indifferent to this entire situation. Before going into this film, I was worried that my apathy would hinder my enjoyment of this movie, but generally speaking, I thought it was a solid film. I’m glad Scorsese took the route, where he explored the human side of Jesus Christ. It fleshed him out, it showed us a character that struggled with faith, and because of his fears and his sense of self-preservation he originally didn’t want to take on the role of god’s messenger. Because of these “imperfections” it made Jesus more relatable and added layers to a characters that was originally depicted as more divine, than human. The movie does have its faults, I feel that the film had slow start to it and the ending should’ve been a bit more streamlined. Even though the ending led to a nice twist, I felt that Scorsese could’ve shaved a few minutes off by restructuring scenes with Mary and his new wives.
ReplyDeleteAfter seeing The Last Temptation and Silence I can see many similarities in these two films. Acting as a spiritual “sequel” Silence also tackles the theme of doubt. Jesus doubts his role, because he believes his weaknesses disqualifies him from becoming god’s messenger. While Rodrigues doubts his faith to god, because his faith is directly tied to the lives of the people in his flock. He eventually struggles with the morality of preserving his own ideals over the suffering of other people.
When reading about all the controversy surrounding "The Last Temptation of Christ" it made perfect sense. After all, one thing that makes Martin Scorsese a true auteur is his willingness to take risks for the sake of reflection and truth. His version, and transitively Kazantzaki’s version, of Jesus gives him flaws, self doubt, and temptations. Like Ehrenstein said, Scorsese made Jesus human above all else.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the film Jesus changes his mind, contradicts himself, multiple times. Should you use the axe? Should you use love? What works? Jesus struggles with these answers and many times leads his followers towards failure. The dialogue in the film is straightforward, nothing is really lended purely to subtextual innuendos, and because of this the film is very easy to follow and understand. But the real reflection and questioning comes from the way the words disagree with the plot and visuals. As he tells one of them in the film, I think it was Andrew, “You live by this, you die by it” or something along those lines. This sums up the bible's emphasis on devotion to God but is something Jesus struggles with.
As someone who grew up in a split household, my father being Christian and my mother agnostic, I was forced to redefine my understanding of Jesus Christ. I found myself questioning this portrayal yet I had no clear definition myself. Scorsese is willing to dive into self reflection so honestly and so truthfully that it can make even such an iconic, symbol such as Jesus Christ seem fresh, intellectually challenging, and confrontational. Willem Dafoe also aids to this portrayal.
Willem Dafoes character came across as kind of psychotic. Even the scenes that were straight out of the bible, like the first sermon where he is talking about seeds, comes across as outlandish. In a sense this is because we see Jesus as a human from the beginning. The first scene is him building crosses, slaving over his work, and then eventually punished by his “boss” Judas. He then is punished by the rest of society. He is the lowest of the low. Obviously not divine or God’s son. This makes his transition that much more painful and full of doubt. Also I think because Martin Scorsese decided to dive into fantastical moments 100 percent, like when he’s talking to the devil in the desert.
Being raised Irish Catholic, and now having my own opens on religion I found this film very interesting. This was my first time viewing the film, and I can defiantly see why it stirred up so much controversy. To see the "son of God," portrayed as a simple man with flaws like any person, and not this divine being would without saying piss some people off. Since grammar school I've always seen Jesus as a spiritual master, rather then the son of God. I also enjoyed how Scorsese takes us through a dream like fantasy Jesus lives through as if he didn't die on the cross. I very much liked how we get, through dialogue, more of a background on Jesus where growing up it was always vague stories about his life before he was crucified. Showing even more that he was just a man like anyone else, he was flawed but had compassion for his people. Beyond the super natural side of the story, I very much enjoyed this film.
ReplyDeleteGoing into some of the technics the one I can recall the best was when Jesus meets John the Baptist. Everything falls silent and all you can hear is Jesus's voice and John's voice. Very much like the scene in Silence when a deafening sound engulfs the room, and all you hear is the voice of Jesus forgiving the missionary. John Baptized Jesus and at one point even called him the master, after the water flows down Jesus the sound of the people around them starts back up. Which left me with the impression from this point on Jesus was one with his people and would lead them. Another was that Jesus asked all his companions that he's seen them in his dreams. Going off Scorsese's idea that films should be a dream like state, now we find his adaptation of Jesus found his followers through his dreams, or maybe even the will of God guiding him to them. But in scenes like when Jesus was meditating and seeing visions of snakes, lions, and fire I had the impression of a dream in mind while watching.
Finally, I respect how Scorsese walked away from what he once believed and even wanted to be a part of, and still use it in his films to create compelling and artistic stories.
Just like everyone else, I feel that before talking about the movie, it is important to give some context as per my relationship with religion.
ReplyDeleteI attended catholic school and church for the middle part of my life (5th grade up through 8th grade for school, and the same start time up until freshman year of high school for church). I started getting out of religion as I got into politics (circa 2008).
It’s been a solid 6 years since I’ve been to church, and I don’t foresee myself going back.
I really wasn’t a big fan of the film. It’s sooooo long. It’s just 18 minutes shy of the three-hour mark. And it isn’t a quick feeling three hours. The beginning and end dragged the most. I felt like way too much time in the beginning was spent establishing who the hell it was that was playing Jesus. I was reasonably sure it was Willem Dafoe, but I wasn’t 100% on that until what felt like way later than it should have been. The ending also takes way to long. Especially for such a lame twist. I saw the little girl being Satan from a mile away.
I feel like part of my boredom may also have been rooted in having heard a lot of the stories depicted in the film read multiple times in church as an antsy middle school kid.
The core concept had potential I think. Duality of man is always interesting. Duality man/god is like twice the duality, and thus potentially twice as interesting (at least on paper). And there was duality aplenty. it just wasn't interesting. Lots of movies have conflicted protagonists. The fact that the one here happened to be the son of god didn't add anything for me.
Rosenbaum is not wrong when he says that we’ll bring our own sense of Jesus to the film. It was oddly refreshing to see Scorsese’s Jesus so often influenced by the devil. This is the first time I’ve ever seen Jesus portrayed so broken, and human, and I’m not surprised it rubbed so many people the wrong way. The Jesus that I grew up knowing was one that would be recognized as soon as you saw him, as the son of God. Scorsese mentions in his book that he wants to counter this and focus more on the side of him that is “man”. Not to my surprise, Scorsese injects his own feelings of sin, and guilt into Jesus, as we’ve seen many times before. Mary Magdelene is introduced early on, setting the tone for the character that we’ll be following. He asks her for forgiveness because he’s done so many bad things.
ReplyDeleteI think that people have such closed off views of who they see Jesus as, that almost any film attempting to portray him will offend some. This film especially shows him in such a different light that it created great controversy. I’m sure that Scorsese’s portrayal will ultimately push people to open their minds up to see Christianity for something other than what they’ve been taught in the church, in hope to get the most pure and personal teachings from Jesus. Ebert said in his review that “the film has offended those whose ideas about God and man it does not reflect. But then, so did Jesus”. Jesus challenged the church, and the status quo. I think that’s something that is often times forgotten in Christianity. That’s why it’s so important that Scorsese made this controversial film that stirred things up and made people see Jesus through a different scope.
One part of the film that I couldn’t get over, was Keitel sounding like he’s from New York. I’m not sure if it’s just because I’ve recently seen him in Scorsese’s other work, but it was a problem for me.
The film was beautifully shot. Ironically, the most pleasing shot to me was Jesus on the cross bleeding. The incredibly blue skies contrasting the red blood looked beautiful. The most beautiful part of Christianity, perhaps, is that Jesus died on the cross, and sacrificed himself for the people.
The Last Temptation 7 out of 10.
ReplyDeleteThe Last Temptation is a spiritual and religious experience. The story of Christ in my opinion is the greatest and yet most difficult story from the Bible to analyze and explore. The Last Temptation exemplifies the complexity of Christ. It's about loving all people and yet hating sin. One of the main themes that the picture establishes is the balance between love and hate. Christ goes through this thought process and transformation during his conversations with Judas and John the Baptist. Judas and John are two signs of the same coin. They believe in the sword. They believe in fighting a physical war with Satan and the Romans. Christ however was given a different way by God: he has to bring love back into the relationship in order to bridge the connection between God and his people and at the same time- bring war against sin. Christ destroying a temple that was full of moneylenders is one of the examples of Christ using violence to achieve his ends. Earlier in the film, we had seen Christ saving Mary Magdalene from being stoned and when he does- he preaches love.
The main theme of Temptation is in the title: it is about overcoming all carnal and worldly temptations in order to achieve a greater good and to become part of something bigger than yourself. Christ is the messiah but he was born a man. He still sexual and earthly desires as well as flaws that he struggles with and has to overcome.
The scene where Christ is tempted in the desert greatly exemplifies this. He is visited by a snake (voiced by Barbara Hersey), a lion (Harvey Kietel) and Satan appearing as a bright flame. The snake represents Christ's lust and his desire to have a relationship with a woman. The Lion represents his pride and his temptation to seek out glory for himself. Satan tempts Jesus by telling him about all of his selfish desires when he was younger and that he's just a man after all. Just a man. That phrase is repeated over and over again in the film. It's a taunting statement for sure and is the basis of Christ's fears of what is to come and why he doubts himself. He is human and at times it is hard to believe that he could ever be more than that. Christ wants what every man wants: a woman, children, a quiet but decent life, and the ability to find happiness. That is all stripped away from him when he realizes that he has to stop doubting himself and become the Messiah. That is a lot to ask of someone and Christ does doubt that he is the Messiah at times. He lashes out against God. Through his many conversations with friends and followers, we see the true Christ. The fearful Christ. The lustful Christ. The vengeful Christ. The effeminate Christ. That what also makes the last temptation sequence so interesting because in that sequence, he gets everything that he previously desired. He does get to marry Mary Magdalene although she dies later. Christ suffers that heartbreak and the first big blow as to what being just a man truly means. Christ the messiah can bring people back from the dead, heal the sick, turn water into wine. This Christ can only bury an axe into the ground out of anger and sorrow for Magdalene's death. Christ does marry again (has many children with two women) but there is that sense that something isn't right. Something just seems incomplete. We all know that Christ was meant to so much more- to save the world and he turned his back on it. That task is greater than any mere joy that being a mere mortal can give you. Christ learns this at the end of film when he realizes that the Jews will be eradicated because he turned his back on God and the cross and he has crawl all the way back to the sight he was supposed to be crucified. Christ repents and screams out to God "I want to be your son! I want to be crucified!" The dream ends and we see him back on the cross. He screams out, "It is accomplished!" with such happiness, euphoria and peace that it's hard not to get an emotional reaction. That ending shot stays with you as the horns sound and the film flickers into an odyssey of colors before the credits roll. That entire sequence stays with you. The whole film comes full circle and you get that sense of relief that Christ died for humanities sins.
ReplyDeleteOkay, so for the small observations and flaws:
ReplyDeleteThe relationship between Christ and Magdalene is one of the best things about the film. Seeing Christ care so much about a woman and how he drove her to prostitution when he jilted her is a very interesting dynamic. It gives the story life. The scene where Christ watches all the men have their way with Magdalene and then once they've all left, he comes to her to ask forgiveness is one of the truest moments in the film.
The relationship between Judas and Christ is one that I have mixed feelings about. The friendship between Judas and Christ is another powerful dynamic in the film, but to have Judas not only depicted as being Jesus' loyal servant but also to have been ordered by Christ to be betray him is brilliant. It's a completely different and one that works because you actually feel the love between these two men and to also learn that your friend is the messiah and that you would be the one to cause his death would cause a lot of trauma ( in that sense I can understand why Judas kills himself afterwards). It's a completely crazy route that only Scorcese and Schrader could've pulled off.
The film does have it flaws however. The miracles are glossed over and we don't get to see all of them. It would've been awesome to see christ walk on water. The torture and crucifixion scenes are watered down and we miss the sequence of Barabas, a serial killer being set free instead of Jesus. Those are some very important moments in the story it should've been given more detail. However, the shot of Christ walking with the cross with the grinning mob surrounding him is a powerful shot. I can see the connections with renaissance paintings in it and I think that it's one of the things that make that sequence worth watching.
Shots that also stay with you: coins being tossed in the air. How much is money really worth? Is it worth your pride? Your honor? Your beliefs? Your morality? All of the characters come in contact with the power of the coin and it is shown has it corrupts your sense of morality. It also serves a recurring visual motif and one that represents the Roman's dominance over the Jews.
In conclusion, The Last Temptation of Christ is a film you have to see to believe. It's not Scorcese's best but it is the one that deserves a lot of discussion and should be revisited every so often. The story and themes are timeless and it is the most radical depiction of Christ ever shot on film.
I’ve tried to read the bible on two separate occasions and both times I have failed. Even though I’ve never had a profound sense of faith in any religion, especially Christianity, I have always maintained an interest in the stories contained within the Bible. I am a lover of history and I’m always interested in reading an old story. I have no real connection to christianity therefore I typically don’t get into movies related to it simply because I don’t feel like I take anything significant away from the experience. “The Last Temptation of Christ” was the first time I have felt connected to a film about Jesus Christ, and at first I didn’t quite understand why. As I thought more about it I realized that it was how Scorsese had depicted Jesus realistically as a man and not just as the Son of God. I was able to better understand the struggle with acceptance that Jesus Christ would have presumably faced during his journey towards crucification. I think if Scorsese had in reality become a priest as he intended in his youth I would be much more interested in Christianity because of his realistic interpretation. However, the elements of supernatural that are not so realistic only occurred every now and then, This created a more powerful impact for me personally because the miracles and hallucinations weren’t the main focus which could easily shift into and epic spectacle that would have lost me very quickly.
ReplyDeleteThe Last Temptation of Christ: 8/10 80%, if I were a film critic on Rotten Tomatoes.
ReplyDeleteThis was my second viewing of Scorsese's controversial, "The Last Temptation of Christ", and I have to be 100% honest with you. I did not know what I was watching. I want to start off by saying that the story of Christ from the Bible is probably one of the most complicated and difficult to center an entire film narrative on. The film chronicles the spiritual and educational journey Christ endures; in his quest to become the God that he is known for today. The film brilliantly addresses the existential themes of religion, identity, morality, and battling one's demons with immortality. I can say this though, it was a truly fascinating look into Scorsese's take on religious faith; specifically Christianity. For me, especially, being raised as a reformed Jewish kid in the North Shore, upper middle class suburbs of the Northern Chicagoland area, it was eye opening and cinematically enriching to see. Before watching this film, I did not understand or care that much about Jesus Christ or religion for that matter; but after viewing this film and its existential look on Christianity; I became much more of a spiritually enlightened person. As a result of watching this eye opening, yet controversial film, I have in turn, become more informed on the concept of religion, because I have a greater and deeper appreciation for it. Although, I did not completely understand every aspect of this film, I did understand the subtextual emotions of the characters and the thematic and philosophical story he was trying to tell when approaching the script.
One worthy asset this film had were the exceptional and convincing performances from Willem Dafoe as Jesus Christ, Scorsese's muse, Harvey Keitel as Judas, and Barbara Hershey as Mary Magdalene, I had a difficult time understand what their motivations were. Personally, I found that the character's motivations in the film were ambiguous and unclear. The one aspect I liked about the characters was their chemistry with one another. I especially loved the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. They had spot-on chemistry with one another; which was a true testament to the extraordinary direction from Martin Scorsese and talent shown from Willem Dafoe and Barbara Hershey. Mary was essentially Jesus' humanity.
Through Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdalene, Jesus begins to envision more for himself and his life. Through her guidance, he gradually begins to entertain the notion that he actually is human. He soon starts to embrace his newfound humanity, by marrying Mary Magdalene, and starting a family with her. Because of her positive impact, he starts to envision more for his life; by living his life with pride and conviction; and not thinking he should be crucified for his alleged sins. There were other aspects of this film, which significantly helped cohesively facilitate the narrative. I especially loved the metaphors this film had. Specifically, the metaphor of the snake. The snake represents Jesus' psychological demons he is wrestling with throughout the duration of the film. It truly was a stunning unraveling of one man's emotional and philosophical journey to find his place in the world. Was he supposed to live as a human? Or was he supposed to live as a God? Those two existential questions were the two lingering questions you would have to ask yourself when viewing this film.
I’m not very religious. I’m not very familiar with Jesus’ story, except for the basic log line: son of god preaches love and miracle in His name across Israel, gets labeled blasphemous by the occupying Judeo-Romans, and is crucified. And later, as story goes, comes back to life.
ReplyDeleteI’m grateful for the Last Temptation of Christ, because it sidelined the “narrative” of Jesus in favor of a really rich character conflict. Don’t get me wrong, the story of Jesus plays out in a scattered “greatest hits” kind of fashion, and those moments are spectacular. The scene where Jesus saves Mary Magdalene from stoning was equal parts heartbreaking and uproarious (JUDITH!), the Lazarus Cave scene is rendered with a larger than life tension as we see the crowd realize that this crazy speaker is perhaps truly the man he says he is.
However, what was interesting about Temptation was seeing this anomaly of God-and-Man rendered as an internal conflict between desire and selflessness. This internal conflict is mirrored by the narrative of Jesus and the Roman establishment, this sense of needing to remove yourself from the safety net of society in order to dive into greater truths for the greater good. Scorsese as always is doing his best to get us inside of that conflict, so we can understand and empathize — but that uncompromised perspective inside Jesus’s POV also allows the audience to step back and analyze the conflict within ourselves.
Ultimately, I enjoyed the film as a technical achievement and an interesting character study. Dafoe’s pretty rad too. However, as somebody who is not very familiar with the New Testament, I feel unable to fully engage with the subtext, and decipher every technical choice Scorsese levees at the audience.
The snake also represents Jesus' desire to have a relationship with a woman; by encouraging him to indulge his sexual desires. The young girl who appears in the film; right before he is about to be crucified, represents his guardian angel; who serves as a moral conscience and spiritual guide to him throughout the film. She consistently advises him to live the best life he can live; and to not allow his transgressions and past mistakes to define his moral character. The young girl was also another person, who helped him fight his demons and be the man that he was always destined to be. These cinematic motifs significantly helped Jesus find out who he is, and what path in life he should be taking. This film was an astonishing, unflinching character driven narrative, from the perspective of Jesus's POV, that had him questioning his life's overall purpose; but in the process, had the audience questioning our life's journey. This film exemplified the existential, internal conflicts one encounters in their life; and brings it to life in an intelligent, eye opening, and thought provoking way.
ReplyDeleteAs a child, I was raised catholic and was forced to endure catechism up until my inevitable confirmation. Not to my surprise, the representation of Jesus that I remember learning about was vastly different to the one in the film. He was not a lost and troubled soul, he did not have to battle inner demons, and he certainly did not question the will of God. Instead, he was a clear minded and courageous soul who accepted his destiny with humbled grace. I never bought that portrayal of him though and always wondered how a person could just accept the fact that their destiny was to die in an unimaginably painful fashion. Similarly, the fact that he was half human was more or less ignored, as the Jesus we learned about was free from the burden of human error and instead, was always able to rise above temptation.
ReplyDeleteThough I found the movie to be a bit dry and had a hard time getting into the story, as years of sitting through church has greatly lowered my threshold for religious tales, I did greatly appreciate the vastly different and, quite frankly, more realistic portrayal of Jesus. I found myself relating to this man way more than the Jesus I previously learned about and wondered why he wasn’t always portrayed in this honest fashion. In my opinion, it shows more about a person to know that they struggle with themselves and yet are still able to overcome, rather than always having the ability to do so. The ending of the film was the only part that I can say that kept my entire attention. To watch him go through an entire lifetime, one that he’d dreamt about his whole existence, and then still choose to give it all up and return to the cross to die was incredibly poignant.