|
Description An epic in the spirit of THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST, this widely acclaimed motion picture is a meticulous recreation of the turbulent era of Jesus and the events that changed the course of history! Narrated by Golden Globe nominee Christopher Plummer (Best Supporting Actor, AMERICAN TRAGEDY, 2000), its the bold and powerful story of Jesus as told by his disciple John. The best-loved but least understood of the gospels, John presents a uniquely human portrait of courage and passion encompassing Jesus' entire three-year ministry, the final years of his life. Intimate and reflective, THE GOSPEL OF JOHN offers an unparalleled opportunity to experience the incomparable life and times of Jesus Christ. ... Read more Reviews (63)
Very Graceful Storytelling.
I have watched both the 3 hour version and the 2 hour version and have found both to be very accurate in their presentation of the Gospel of John.I think the film will along with the free 'Jesus' film being distributed by Billy Graham are good tools in presenting the message of the Gospel.My middle son who has dyslexia and finds it hard to read his bible without help especially likes it.
Since it is an almost direct word for word presentation of the Gospel of John it does suffer somewhat in entertainment value but the original source was written to inform not entertain.
It is definitely a more graceful telling of the Gospel than 'The Passion of the Christ', and is probably a better medium for reaching unbelievers.
The only quibble I have with the presentation is that Mary Magdelene seems to appear everywhere.She is in the upper room, she is at Gethsemane, places where it is not mentioned she actually was.It is as if she is the 13th disciple.It is almost as if they are trying to play to the Davinchi Code mania.
Visual John...
So much positive feedback has been given about this film that to say anything remotely negative about it seems like the highest form of blasphemy. But what the film's supporters fail to grasp is that we curmudgeons are not attacking the content nor the message, but instead, its delivery.John's gospel is as intricate as it is explosive in its spiritual implications and this film conveys neither its richness nor its power.'The Gospel of John' falls far short in its attempt to recreate this supremely complex evangel.Phillip Saville simply wasn't equal to his task.
I approached this film with trepidation and great expectation. At last, John's power put onto film.Needless to say, I was greatly disappointed with what opened before my eyes.So much so that my interest waned and I pressed 'stop' at John 18.Therefore, my review isn't completely fair, but in its defense, I doubt Saville's depiction of the Passion and Resurrection would have proved any more powerful than the first half of the film.
Other reviewers have done a much better job of illuminating this film's many faults, so I wouldn't like to repeat them.Instead, I would like to examine 'why' this daring project doesn't succeed.The main problem is its over-riding tone.From the opening scene of the evening sun floating down over the water and Christopher Plummer enlightening us with the 'Word became flesh,' I felt I was back again in Sunday school. The film wants to instruct rather than show and thus fails at both.Its greatest drawback dogs it the whole way through: a lifeless literalism.OK, be true to the text. Include every and, but and thus, but at least make it come alive!Visceral energy and power are absent from this film.Although John is the 'most spiritual' of the Gospels, that doesn't mean it is in any way two-dimensional.Rather, there is layer upon layer...but we only get the bare surface withSaville's 'The Gospel of John.'
The source of such flaccidity is the amateurism that pervades in scene after scene. With their undisguised Brit accents and wooden presentation, the Baptist and followers ruin things from the start. They are hardly believable and the film cheats with the 'inserted' baptismal scene, another homage to the certain 'interpretation' that the film seeks (under-the-cuff) to present.And ironically, such creative allowance is none too 'literal' as John is oddly silent about Jesus's baptism.
With the Baptist's cry of 'Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world,' Henry Ian Cusick's Yeshua comes before us.As one reviewer stated correctly, Cusick does the best he can and helps to save the film from complete mediocrity.According to John's Gospel, Jesus is God incarnate who visits us sinful humans to fulfil His redemptive mission.To play God incarnate?Is that possible?Cusick should have declined and Saville should have been thinking. Unable to give us neither the Son of Man nor the Son of God, Cusick falls into a bland no-man's-land.He gives neither passion, nor power--human or divine--and instead shouts and smiles his way through the Gospel. He states his part, but has he come to terms with it?I doubt it.Instead, what Cusick does manage to capture sometimes is the impenetrable authority of the Rabbi from Nazareth.The scenes when Jesus returns to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles provide a glimmer of what this film could have been.Jesus's stern corrections of the Pharisees contain a fragment of the righteous anger that is found in the text.(And yes, anger is there!)These spiritual sparring matches hold the viewer until a grinning Cusick lets out a mundane, 'You belong to your father the devil!'
Outside of Cusick's performance, nothing can hold its own.Only the integrity of the text remains, but the lack of power in its presentation seems almost blasphemous.The miracles are all there:Cana, feeding the 5,000, walking on the water and Lazarus, but all shown so shoddily that they lose their 'unbelievability.' Isn't that the point of a miracle????How can you believe that the water indeed became wine when it is served up in plastic cups????How can we believe when Cusick walks across the waves with the left over background from the Ten Commandments??? And the Samaritan woman?Her forced facial contortions invoke more laughter and revulsionthan sincere consideration of Jesus's words.
If this film had been truthfully marketed for what it is--an evangelical tool--then, I wouldn't have felt so cheated.I would have known what to expect.And had it been done more professionally--with true craftsmanship and respect, dare I say, awe, for its source material, then its message would have hit harder.Gibson's 'Passion,' with all its faults, succeeds in forcing the viewer to react, to confront, to decide.'The Gospel of John' provokes more blasphemous laughter than meaningful tears or serious self-inspection. For those who want the real kingdom, power and glory, then READ The Gospel of John rather than watch it.
Inspirational and illuminating
This movie is cast and acted and directed with great sensitivity and veracity. It brings the familiar words of The Gospel of John to life in an entirely convincing way. It is both inspirational and educational. Every member of the cast is believable in his or her role. This is the best Biblical movie I have ever seen, not detracting from its source but illuminating it. Outstanding!!!
Excellent
If you've seen The Gospel of Matthew (TGM), know that this movie is as excellent as TGM is horrible; thus it's excellent indeed. I watched it soon after seeing The Passion of the Christ, and it's even superior to that. The Gospel of John excels on every level, particularly with the performances of those who play Jesus and John the Baptist. It's not simply great "entertainment" as the AP says in its review. The Gospel of John DVD has transformative power. I recommend that you read John's gospel first, then watch the film; you'll see how exact this word-for-word rendition is. I can't recommend it more highly.
Powerful & riveting film!
What a wonderful movie made about Jesus. This is an extremely powerful and riveting film. It is a word-for-word adaptation of the 21 chapters of the Gospel According to John. Christopher Plummer narrates parts of the film. Henry Ian Cusick is the most realistic Jesus I have seen portrayed on film. My other favorite Jesus performance is by Robert Powell in "Jesus of Nazareth" - a mini-series that first appeared on TV in 1977 and is 382 minutes long. That is also an excellent movie and worth buying on DVD.
The directing, acting and musical score are done extremely well. This is an inspirational movie with a positive message and I highly recommend it to everyone.
I recently bought the 2-disc DVD set of "The Gospel of John". My only complaint about this new 2-disc DVD set is that they got rid of the 3-disc DVD set and replaced it with the 2-disc set. So far, the only difference between the two sets that I can see are that this new 2-disc set dropped the DTS audio track but kept the Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. Also, this new 2-disc set includes a new 2-hour version of the film plus the original 3-hour theatrical version. I have no idea why someone would want to only watch a cut up version of a "word-for-word" movie version of "The Gospel of John".I'm assuming that because they included this chopped up version of the film, they dropped the DTS audio track to make room for this other version of the film. I tried to buy the 3-disc set version of this film but I waited too long. I cannot find it (brand new) even on the film's website. But I'm still glad I bought this 2-disc set - It's a lot less expensive than the 3-disc set was. I haven't finished watching everything on it yet so I hope it has all the extras that the original 3-disc set had. It seems to have most of the extras except the DTS soundtrack.
This movie is HIGHLY recommended for anybody and everybody but especially those who prefer to SEE and HEAR the Gospel of John in a "visual" way in addition to reading and studying the Bible. It's a treasure to keep forever. I think the Gospel of Mark is coming soon to theaters made by the same people that did this movie.I hope they do as good of a job with that movie as they did with this one.My rating: A+
... Read more
|