Amazon.com

Writer/director Pedro Almodóvar's dark, sexy Hitchcock homage is his best work since his Oscar-winning All About My Mother, and deepened by a sun-dappled sadness. Handsome, enigmatic Ángel (Gael García Bernal) arrives at the Spanish movie offices of director Enrique Goded (Fele Martinez) and happily proclaims that he's actually Enrique's long-lost school chum Ignacio--an announcement that is both less than convincing and more than it seems. A novice actor, Ángel pitches a semi-autobiographical screenplay in which he's determined to star, a revenge-laden reflection of the doomed love he and Enrique shared as boys before a pedophile priest cruelly intervened. The script, and the lost days it recalls, carefully unfurls into a series of brooding movies-within-movies and memories-inside-memories, which allow the sensual, multiple-role-playing Bernal to give the performance of his young career--among other things, he makes a stunningly convincing drag queen--and Almodóvar the opportunity to movingly suggest that people will pay any price to ensure that their stories are told. --Steve Wiecking ... Read more

Reviews (37)

'¡Eh!' '¡Despierta!'
This film is incredible. I'm relatively fluent in Spanish and had to make do without subtitles which always tend to detract from the full experience of a film. It took me a couple a viewings to fully understand everything that was said but when I finally twigged, the hairs on the back of my neck stood up.
We start off with Enrique, an up and coming movie producer. He's on the look out for a good story and one comes walking right through his door. Turns out his old school friend, Ignacio, who now wants to be known adamantly as Angel, has the perfect solution. He's written a screen play depicting certain points of their lives with added fiction, naturally, and hopes Enrique will consider producing it, with him staring as the principle character Zahra, a transvestite. Sound unusual? We haven't even scratched the surface. When Ignacio and Enrique were boys, they attended a strict catholic boarding school. The two of them were in love, much to the distress of El Padre Manolo, who wanted Ignacio all to himself. One poignant scene is during a field trip. We see the school boys frolicking happily in a lake while hearing a beautiful coir boy rendition of `Moon River'. All of a sudden the song is cut short with Ignacio running out from behind a bush with El Padre in pursuit. Ignacio falls, a rock cutting his forehead. As the blood slides down the centre of his face, we here him remark `I knew that ever since that moment, my life would for ever be divided in two'. After a little mis-hap in the boys bathroom after lights out, El padre Manolo expels Enrique and continues his advances on Ignacio, which is left to the viewers' imagination. The years go by, and they never meet again, until now, back to the present day. Enrique is delighted to have been reunited with his lost love but Ignacio or `Angel' is behaving rather strangely. Not remembering their favourite song from their school days and indeed turning a rather horny Enrique down in a risqué pool sequence (¡calienta poyas!), something's definitely not right. Angel leaves in a huff and forgets his lighter which conveniently has his hometown address on the side. Enrique journeys to Valencia only to find that *his* Ignacio died 4 years ago and his brother Juan, Stage name Angel, took it quite hard. Part devastated part intrigued, Enrique decides to play along, giving Angel the part and taking him as a lover, all in the desire to find out what makes Juan tick, he's an impenetrable mystery. The story, aptly named `La Visita' has its ending rewritten and as the final dramatic shoot comes to an end Enrique is still at a loss, that is, until he receives a visit of his own!
I'll leave the rest to you; this movie has many intricate threads woven in. A story within a story as they say. The actors are spectacular and Gael García Bernal manages to come off as childish, sensual, innocent, conniving and in the end quite chilling, he also makes a stunning drag queen. I recommend this move to anyone that likes a good mystery. I'm on the hunt for the soundtrack. ¡Cómpralo ya!

Intense & Provocative but not how you'd think
This exceptional film is entirely unique in its intensity and depth, but not how I expected. The priestly molestation is rather matter-of-fact, and not dramatized to the extreme as so many movies have done of late. The sex & nudity is very carefully placed, not at all gratuitous (unfortunately-more would have been welcomed albeit unnecessary for the story). In fact I can not tell why this version is NC-17, have Americans really become That Victorian?
Much has been written about the story, what I didn't know prior to viewing was the intensity of plot twists and turns. I won't spoil any secrets here, but suffice it to say that it isn't even the secrets that are so intense, it is the masterful way in which things are revealed. This is really a film about sex as power, and all of the power plays which don't make anyone happy.
Almodovar's direction and cinematography are stunning, erotic, and intensley emotional. He tells so much of the story visually without dialogue. What a treat.
The film ends on a realistic note. There are no firey car crashes, no earth-shattering explosions, no full-frontal nudity, none of the usual supects, but this film sneaks up on you, shakes you to your being, and as you are drawn in by the sensuality and drama, the film demonstrates that life isn't fair, kind, or even very pretty sometimes.

all stars
After watching many of Almodovar's films in a Spanish cinema class at UNC-Chapel Hill, I must say this one is the most accessible so far.Gael Garcia Bernal does one of the best acting jobs I've ever seen in a film- ever.If you can stomach the subject matter it's worth watching.

Almodovar's attention to detail is amazing, just watch Sr. Serrano cut stories out of the newspaper and you'll see what I mean... Amazing.And Almodovar messes with your mind by the way he does the casting.. don't want to spoil it for anyone, just see for yourself.

Almodóvar Illustrates the Aftermath of Bad Education...
To see is to believe, some say, yet what one sees in Bad Education should not be trusted, as everything has a sinister characteristic.All of the characters are ominously sleazy, even the protagonist of the film offers an element of darkness around him, which seems to stem from a criminal background.This dark theme suggests that the story offers a film noir experience.However, even the concept of film noir does not give this film justice, as it goes beyond the known borders of this genre while venturing into a new territory.Pedro Almodóvar creates a refreshing cinematic experience that takes sudden turns when least expected while traveling into a dubious world.Many of Almodóvar's previous films offer laughter and contemplation, yet most of them deal with a dubious theme, as does Bad Education. His personal insignia with colorful photography still leaves traces throughout the film, even though it is slightly subdued.

Enrique Goded (Fele Martínez), who some might have seen in the bloodcurdling Thesis (1996), or in the mesmerizing Open Your Eyes (1997), is on the rise in the Spanish world of cinema as he has recently made a successful film.Nonetheless, he is now struggling to come up with an equal or better idea for his next film when Ignacio Rodriguez (Gael García Bernal), from Amores perros (2000), Y tu mamá también (2001), and the recent Motorcycle Diaries (2004), appears from out of the blue.Together Enrique and Ignacio used to attend a private catholic school where sexual and physical abuse was predominantly common while the Spanish dictator Francisco Franco heavily tainted the school regulations.They were close friends, but they also discovered their first love in one another in the unforgiving school run by Catholic priests.Now years later they reunite, as Ignacio offers him a film script that he has written based on their time at the Catholic School.

At first, the film seems to focus on the Catholic School where Ignacio was a victim of severe sexual abuse, which is told through the screenplay.This is a clever curveball that Almodóvar throws at the audience, but it is necessary to understand what happens as the development of the story rests in the past of Ignacio and Enrique.However, this review will not elaborate on the notion of what happens next, as it would skew the initial experience with the film.Nonetheless, the script that Ignacio gives to Enrique portrays a world where Ignacio seeks a way to have an operation to reach what he desires the most - to be a woman.Cleverly, Almodóvar throws out the gender boundaries of film noir, as he exchanges his femme fatale for a man that seeks womanhood through modern technology.This displays Almodóvar's ingenious way of telling a captivating story, as it does not follow the conventional rules that often make films one of dozens.

As mentioned previously, the film does not concentrate on the Catholic Church, but instead the aftermath of Ignacio's education.Through several turns the film illustrates what happen to Ignacio.Much of this goes back to his years when the head priest sought him out for his own pleasure, which continues to trouble Ignacio well into adulthood.This seems to be the reason why Ignacio wrote the script in the first place, as he tried to exorcise his demons while trying to find an existence that fits with his upbringing and education.The story drifts between Enrique reading the script to the present time with occasional flashbacks that provide additional information in regards to the story.Initially, it might seem a little confusing, however, Almodóvar has been nice enough to add a couple of side bars whenever there is a flashback or a scene from the script that Enrique reads.Eventually, the audience will have gone through a very troubling, yet spellbinding tale that makes All About Eve (1950) seem like a Cinderella story.

Excellent acting from Bernal
García Bernal is not only doing one, but three roles in the same movie, and he plays them all convincingly. Seeing dressed in drag is quite an experience. However, the movie is darker than previous Almodovar works, because of the nature of the plot: church, sex and homosexuality. Those are touchy subjects, but Almodovar makes us watch by using a well played game of role reversals and twists. It's and enjoyable film, I recommend it. ... Read more

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), it’s 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

Amazon.com

The world can be divided into two camps: those who will watch Joshua reverently and gratefully, and those who will not touch it with a 10-foot pole. The reverent probably own Joseph F. Girzone's bestselling novel about a mysterious but friendly loner who shows up in a small American town and blesses every life he touches. Whites and blacks, Catholics, Protestants, and Jews will work side by side as newly recognized brethren; an estranged couple will resolve to save their marriage; the lonely and disconnected will embrace and be embraced by community; etc. The message--the healing power of Christ's love--is beyond reproach, the intentions of the filmmakers entirely benign, but there is not one whit of dramatic tension or narrative complication to any of it. The cast is stronger than usual in such religious projects (Tony Goldwyn, Oscar^® winner F. Murray Abraham, Giancarlo Giannini as the Pope), but no one has a prayer with a script that posits the hero's Christhood on the fact that 12 people show up for his going-away dinner. --Richard T. Jameson ... Read more

Reviews (96)

Uplifting and inspirational... a movie to treasure
All too often the lack of quality acting, writing or a budget tends to ruin filmaker's attempts to bring a quality Christian work to the screen. Left Behind is an example and if you are a fan of the series and saw the movie, then you understand what I mean. So it should come as no surprise that anyone like myself who has so enjoyed the Joshua series written by Joseph Girzone would be skeptical about the movie. But very quickly I realized that not only was this movie going to be fairly faithful to the original book, it was also going to maintain the consistant message of love and salvation that sometimes gets lost in Christian filmmaking. Tony Goldwyn whose probably been typecast since Ghost, quickly made me forget that role and pulls off an extraordinary portrayal of Joshua. Add that to a quality supporting cast and some surprises that stray a bit from the book but are nonetheless enjoyable, I would recommend this movie to anyone, whether you are a fan of the series or not.

Touches the Soul
This movie adaptation of Father Girzone's book wonderfully compells the viewer to sit back and be fascinated by a modern day Christ story.

Joshua, an artist and woodcarver, drifts into a small town and within days turns a disjointed group of citizens into a community of good neighbors. Joshua's manner is straightforward, kind, yet fun and amusing---just the kind of guy you'd want at your next get-together. He doesn't preach---he simply is---his love and selflessness runs out from him like cool fresh water to the thirsty. His actions are transforming---but alas, they also cause trouble. The pastor of the local church is frightened by Joshua's charisma and he does his worst to disassemble the band of neighbors by attempting to blacken Joshua's name.

The movie is not as complicated as the novel, the scenes where Joshua is asked to speak at the nearby Jewish Synagogue are completely eliminated as is Girzone's hopeful message of all roads--all houses of worship--leading to the same goal rather than insisting that their way is the only way. The dialogue at times can be a little too persuasive in attempting to disclose the true nature of Joshua--which the audience identifies correctly from the start anyway.

I was disappointed that more attention was not paid to Joshua's exquisite carvings----only one of the statues of Peter is manifested here.
Of note is F. Murray Abraham's portrayal of the threatened pastor and lovely sad-eyed Giancarlo Giannini as the Pope.

Recommended to all who enjoy or need a spiritual kick in the head.

What if Jesus showed up as a carpenter in a small town?
"Joshua," based on Joseph F. Girzone's novel, is not about the Second Coming of Christ. In fact I would think that it is not about a second coming either, because I get the feeling from this film that Jesus has shown up in similar ways countless times before. This time a stranger named Joshua (Tony Goldwyn) shows up in the quiet town of Auburn. He moves into a dilapidated old barn on the outside of town and when he finds a Baptist church that was destroyed in a storm, he starts working on fixing it up. This seems odd to the members of the congregation of that church, but some of them start to pitch in and help Joshua.

There are no real surprises in "Joshua," especially since the opening credits tell us that Giancarlo Giannini plays the Pope in the movie we are about to see. But the point of the story here is not to tell you anything you do not already know. The message, when Joshua actually articulates one, is the one that has been around for almost two thousand years. So the attraction here is the enticing "what if?" as to what it would be like if Jesus suddenly showed up in your neck of the woods and started doing things and talking to people. Joshua does not preach series nor does he tell parables. The important thing here is that when you talk, he listens to you.

This is not the first time that a movie has tried to portray a more "realistic" type of Jesus. There was Jeffrey Hunter in the 1961 film "King of Kings," where Jesus walked among the masses while he gave the Sermon on the Mount. In "The Passion of the Christ" the focus on the story is on the scourging and crucifixion of Jesus, but in the film's few flashbacks James Caviezel reveals a remarkably accessible figure. Tony Goldwyn has an advantage in that he does not have to wear the beard, long hair, and flowing robes of the conventional images of the Biblical Jesus. He plays Joshua as what you can only describe as being a good guy, which is more difficult to play that you would think.

Auburn is not a modern Sodom or Gomorrah. The worst you can say about the place is that the different denominations are not paying attention to each other. But then one of the points about Joshua is that he not only fixes churches and carves statues of Peter, he also fixes small things. "Joshua" is about the ministry of Jesus and the miracles have the same affect they did the first time around.

The supporting cast is solid, with F. Murray Abraham as Father Tardone, the local priest who is suspicious of the stranger in town, Kurt Fuller as Father Pat Hayes, who is captivated by that same stranger, and Stacy Edwards as Maggie, who has a different idea as to what void in her life Joshua can fill. Granted, anyone who has never been to church on Sunday is not going to be interested in this film, but "Joshua" should appeal to most Christian audiences, who will find it a pleasant reaffirmation of their beliefs.

A Gift from the lord
I have watched this movie well over 50 times, though i dont beleive in the church i do beleive in god, this movie i have recommended to others in need weather it be for emotional support or physical pain, it is uplifting, and beautiful. I truely beleive that the actors in this movie at the making were guided by the hand of God, This is a MUST SEE MOVIE....if not a must own movie, one of the nicest aspects of it was all ages can watch it, and get something out of it

A true call to everyone
The first time seeing this movie was completely by chance. My family and I rented it one evening without knowing what it was about at all. For whatever reason it stood out on that shelf, I may never know, however, the impact it has left upon me will last my lifetime. ... Read more

Reviews (38)

Wonderful, But Still Missing...Something
This is a wonderful, even classic, adaptation of Franz Werfel's haunting, heartbreaking story of the Lourdes apparitions. The cinematography is excellent, the characters are handled with respect and realistic flair, and Jennifer Jones seems to be channeling Bernadette Soubirous in convincing fashion. The film's flaws? Sentimentalism in some cases bogs it down, especially when the angelic choirs start to sing lauds as the 'vision' makes its appearance. Corny to the extreme, if you ask me. The initial moment of the apparition was a stark and frightening one for Bernadette, according to the gathered records of the incident(s), not an experience accompanied by cheery seraphic warblings. This scene should have been filmed in a stark manner, to capture the surprise, abruptness, initial terror, and realism of the experience. Secondly, the actual Virgin Mary figure (played by a somewhat plumpish Linda Darnell) is also a bit garish: she resembles any of the cheesy, cheap, grotesque plaster "Mary" lawn ornaments that are the hallmark of Catholic kitsch.This stereotypical Mary is an unfortunate cop-out. The film makes no attempt to capture the haunting dignity and true historical nature of Bernadette's visitor, whom the seeress herself described in early testimony as "ou petito damizelo"--a "little pixie-girl," no more than 13 or 14 years of age and certainly not maternal in any way whatsoever. What the film DOES successfully capture is the impact of the many miraculous, mysterious events that descended upon a real town, among real people. It also captures a glimpse of the special, undeniable love shared between Bernadette and the enigmatic being who revealed herself only (and perhaps with a wistful sense of irony) as 'the Immaculate Conception.' A fine, fine film and worth owning for anyone of pure heart.

INSPIRING FILM - DISMAL TRANSFER
"The Song of Bernadette" is a film that by all accounts should distill into a religious pot boiler. And yet there is something haunting, awe inspiring and yes, even stirring about this tale of a child, Bernadette Soubirous (Jennifer Jones) who, after witnessing visions of the Virgin Mary, begins to have miracles performed in the small French town of Lourdes. Jones is angelic, tenderly conveying the warmth, innocence and poignancy of someone truly touched by the hand of God. Anne Revere is cast as Bernadette's non-believer mother. Vincent Price turns in a wicked performance as the town magistrate who, weary that Bernadette's claims will insight religious fervor, threatens the child with imprisonment unless she ceases with her visions. Charles Bickford and Gladys Cooper give outstanding performances as the skeptical priest and nun who come to believe that Bernadette is divinely inspired. Truly, this is a film that requires a whole box of Kleenex to get through. It is haunting, stirring and overall life affirming.

However, the transfer from Fox is poor, even though it improves upon previous VHS and Laserdisc versions. Though the B&W picture exhibits sharpness and better balancing of the gray scale the image is digitally harsh and suffers from an excessive amount of film grain. Aliasing and shimmering of fine details is evident throughout. Pixelization is another down fall. The audio has been cleaned up and is well presented.
Extras include a Jennifer Jones Biography, an audio commentary, a Movietones trailer, some Fox promotional stuff for other movies in their classic series, a restoration film to video comparison that proves that at least some work was done on the transfer before sending it out to DVD and this film's original theatrical trailer.

The Song of Bernadette
This movie had a deep and profound impact on me when I first watched it on television as a young teen. It is beautifully done a real tribute to film making. The acting is outstanding and I fully believed and empathized with young Bernadette as portrayed by Jennifer Jones. I was a protestant at the time I first watched the movie. The effect it had on me sent me on a journey that eventually lead me to Medjugorje and then to becomimg Catholic. I strongly would recommend this film to everyone. It is beautiful, moving, very touching, a profound experience for all who have an open heart.

Excellent
Written by a Jewish man, The Song of Bernadette, is wonderfully brought to the big screen. Typical of old black and white "Hollywood". Very well acted, full bodied characters. A great family movie.

Universal Thematic Appeal
The Song of Bernadette begins with the classic quote, "For those who believe in God, no explanation is necesary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible."

That having been said, one need not be religious to enjoy this film. What makes the movie so enjoyable is that it contains man's universal struggle with religion and his sense of meaning. Vincent Price does an excellent job of portraying the fatalistic expert, while Church officials are accurately protrayed as questioners - but not outright denyers - of the possibility of miraculous events.

Jennifer Jones is fantastic, and accurately portrays the reported humble nature of St. Bernadette.

Definitely one to see at least once. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Famed Royal Shakespeare Company director Peter Brook helms this multinational production of India's greatest epic myth. A seemingly simple tale of two sets of semidivine brothers vying for the throne spirals out to include wider themes of fate, free will, and the problems of behaving dishonorably to preserve the greater good. The film, adapted from Brook's stage production, uses a presentational style, with the epic's narrator slipping in and out of the action and characters stopping to address the camera. The international cast and simple costuming add to the timeless, dreamlike feel of the story. The Mahabharata does an excellent job of reverently presenting a cherished myth without losing the passion and excitement of the story. The DVD edition includes "The Making of The Mahabharata," an interesting look at both the layers of meaning to be found in the story and the challenges in adapting it for a Western audience. --Ali Davis ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Essence captured
I was entranced by The Mahabharata, as presented by Peter Brookes. Since my childhood, I have heard, read and seen The Mahabharata in my mother tongue, English and Hindi. Irrespective of the medium, it has always impressed with the great canvas on which human yet larger than life characters are etched but the grandeur of the drama has often masked the underlying philosophy - that the difference between humans and gods is infinitesimal, that every person is imbued with some qualities that are god-like (so that depending on circumstances anybody can appear god-like), even the so-called gods have human frailties and can be touched and befriended.
Peter Brookes has successfully denuded the characters of their physical attributes and forced us to really understand this philosophy that we too can become gods depending on which qualities we care to nurture within our selves.

Indian philosophy come to life
This excellent multinational production of the Mahabharata feels almost Shakespeaerean at times - the language so eloquent and poetic, the themes so profound and universal, the action so epic. Truly great literature brought to film.

Briefly, the Mahabharata is a tale of two rival sets of brothers, cousins to eachother, each born into royalty and with divinely guided paths in life. The result, however, is a great war, death, destruction, but a final glimmer of light preserved. Vishnu after Shiva.
.
Peter Brook's five-hour version of the Mahabharata is theatrical, philosophical, spare, poetic. It is rendered in gentle, nearly monochromatic hues and with often silent backgrounds, interspersed with periods of hauntingly beautiful music. The actors are gifted, if a bit too grand and mythic in their presentation. As in the written versions, the characters motives are seen to be, in turns, grounded and human, and unearthly and enlightened.

Such a powerful mix, and such a penetrating vision of life -- all from over three thousand years ago!

I highly recommend this film, anbd the special features of the DVD make it that much more valuable.

Not the Mahabharata, but good on its own terms
Responses to this film tend to be bipolar. On the one hand there are those--usually, but not always South Asian--who find it downright offensive, a baffling misrepresentation of one of the world's great classics. On the other are those who are taken in by the film's sumptuous artistry and pronounce it profound and life-changing and...if they are daring or ignorant...claim that it manifests the essence of Indic philosophy and sensibilities.

I think a more balanced view would go like this. Firstly, nearly everything about Brook's presentation is dissonant with the real character of the Mahabharata and of its cultural matrix generally. Brook himself has said that he interpreted the Mahabharata as a metaphor for nuclear holocaust in the modern age, and indeed he seems determined to transform the work into a Greco-Shakespearean tragedy. The characters are uniformly ashen-faced throughout the film, even *before* anything bad happens, and the score is downright elegiac. Characters mumble on and on about the "savagery of this world", its loss of youth, and we get many closeups of faces paralyzed in existentialist anguish. Krishna--one of several characters terrifically miscast--is not even likeable. The presentation is claustrophobic and minimalist, in stark contrast to the dizzying variety and vastness of the original. Beyond this, the Mahabharata (the real one) is simply not a tragedy. If anything, it is a Divine Comedy. Far from Homer's heroes, the characters are not properly viewed as 'mere men' at all: they are incarnations of gods, demons, and assorted beings whose dramas extend in all directions of time and space, literally into infinity. The true multiplicity of 'Hinduism' shines forth in the work: we get to sample every item on the spectrum between the One Being and the infinity of worlds. The problem of dharma or rightness, meanwhile, is quite beyond Brook's purview. He has ripped the epic too far from its Indic roots, and what he gives us is very definitely a postmodern European imagination.

So, hats off to all those who feel betrayed.

But there is another story to tell. Considered by itself as a work of art, this film has to count among the most visionary and fascinating in recent decades. The visual and aural elements--the spare, elusive sets; the cool Mughal-inspired wardrobes; the gorgeous music which took literally years to produce--are a marvel, and create a world like few seen on the screen. Brook isn't famous for nothing, and his stage-honed directorial skill shines in every scene. I won't spoil the surprise at some of his choices, but they are consistently evocative and turn on the smallest gestures. The film is simply a feast. The characters are not particularly deep--though perhaps a little deeper than the originals--and the 'philosophy' tends to be half-baked and even self-obsessed. But stylistically it stands to challenge anything I've ever seen.

Putting this on my wishlist right now
I rate this a 4 only because I haven't seen the DVD yet, but a friend once loaned me the VHS version. I think I watched it three times over the course of a couple months. In one case, I watched all 6 hours straight through (minus bathroom breaks of course). Another reviewer used the phrase "life changing", and I agree completely. I have continued to draw inspiration from this film for 5 years. With the DVD, maybe I can go for another 50. PS: The soundtrack for this film is out on RealWorld. Also recommended.

Worst version of the great epic that I've ever seen.
I'm totally baffled that people actually enjoyed this movie. The Mahabharata is the greatest epic of all time and this movie did not do it any justice. First of all, I think it's really hard to take the longest epic in history and make it into a 6 hour movie. It leaves too many important aspects out. That was my first problem with the movie. My second problem is that the characters were totally miscast. Anyone who has ever read the many different English translated versions of the Mahabharata or even the original in Sanskrit will tell you that Bhishma was a strong and powerful man who in this movie has been reduced down to looking like a beggar you see on the streets. The Pandavas and the Kuravas were Princes yet none of their clothes or anything in their appearance made them look like they belonged in a King's court. They lived in palaces yet in this movie, they were living in dimly lit areas that looked nothing like the magnificent palaces of ancient India.

I have been a fan of the story of the Mahabharata since I was 5 years old when my grandfather would tell me the tales. When I first heard about Peter Brook's movie, I was about 13 years old and I couldn't wait to see the movie when it played on PBS. I was greatly disappointed. Nothing lived up to my expectations. The grand places and the beautiful Kings and Queens I had pictured my whole life as I had heard the stories were not there. The translation of the word Mahabharata literally means Great(Maha) India(Bharat), yet I found nothing in this version of the movie to be great. Brook's version waters down the magnificent tale and turns it into something very simple and common which this story never was.

If anyone is actually interested in the story of the Mahabharata, I would highly recommend the many books that are out there, including the version by Krishna Dharma that you can buy here on Amazon. Now if you are the type that does not like using your own imagination to picture the story in your head and instead want to see a movie version, then I highly recommend BR Chopra's version which was originally a TV series on Indian TV that can now be purchased on a 16 DVD set. It's in Hindi but has English subtitles and does an amazing job of portraying the true characters of the Mahabharata the way it was intended. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Ben-Hur scooped an unprecedented 11 Academy Awards® in 1959 and, unlike some later rivals, richly deserved every single one. This is epic filmmaking on a scale that had not been seen before and is unlikely ever to be seen again. But it's not just running time or a cast of thousands that makes an epic, it's the subject matter, and here the subject--Prince Judah Ben-Hur (Charlton Heston) and his estrangement from old Roman pal Messala (Stephen Boyd)--is rich, detailed, and sensitively handled. Director William Wyler, who had been a junior assistant on MGM's original silent version back in 1925, never sacrifices the human focus of the story in favor of spectacle, and is aided immeasurably by Miklos Rozsa's majestic musical score, arguably the greatest ever written for a Hollywood picture. At four hours it's a long haul (especially given some of the portentous dialogue), but all in all, Ben-Hur is a great movie, best seen on the biggest screen possible. --Mark Walker ... Read more

Reviews (210)

A Good Presentation Of A Classic Film
Ben-Hur is a classic. It made AFI's top 100 films list. It's chariot race is one of the great moments in film, inspiring Lucas' near shot for shot remake in The Phantom Menace. Others here and elsewhere have admirably debated the merits of this film as cinema. Rather than concentrate on the film, I'd like to review this DVD presentation.

Pros :
- Excellent widescreen transfer. This disk is both dual layer and double sided. This nearly 4 hour film looks wonderful for its age.
- Excellent 5.1 mix from the original multitrack recording. The mix is relatively frequency limited and doesn't have the rumbling lows and crisp digital highs we've become accustomed to in modern films. This would have felt out of place on an almost 50 year old film.
- Excellent making of documentary. About an hour long, interesting and well produced.

Cons:
- Heston's commentary is not full length. It is probably about 30-45 minutes. It is also not very interesting, consisting largely of "This was a great scene." style remembrances.
- They failed to mark which side of DVD is which! To make matters worse the onscreen menus look identical on both sides of the disk. I did eventually realize that there is a serial number printed on each side of the disk which can be used to differentiate the sides. When "65506.1.A US & Canada 212 MINS. WARNER HOME VIDEO" is face up in your DVD player that means you are about begin watching the first part of the film. Intuitive, no?

All in all a good presentation of a classic film, and a good value.

Ben-Hur EPIC DVD, 11 Oscars including Best Movie 1959 !!!
Only a handful of motion pictures compare or even come close to this EPIC of EPIC's. (Voted as one of the greatest 100 movies of the last 100 years (1998) by the American Film Institute.

Ben-Hur won 11 Oscar's in 1959 including the "Big 3", Picture, Director - William Wyler and Actor - Charleton Heston.

This widescreen digitally restored picture & full sound (stereoized) DVD version is an absolute joy to watch & listen to.

The cast was meticulously casted and proved to be the right combination to provide the drama for "General Lew Wallace's" epic story.

In summary; This story parallels the "The Story of the Christ" Wallaces actual book title of this tale.

The setting is a Roman conquered and imprisoned Judah. There is unrest & possible rebellion in the air. Judah Ben-Hur (Heston) a Jewish Prince and grown childhood friend Roman Centurian Messala (Stephen Boyd) clash with different adult views. Shortly after their falling out a serious accident occurs involving the new Roman Governor & the Hur family. Due to this accident Ben-Hur is arrested & sentenced to be Galley (slave) rower & his family is imprisoned to keep this possible rebellion from occuring. Hur promises he will return and seek Messala with a vengence.

The movie is a long interesting journey (over 3 hours)of Hur and Christ. Their paths crossing at key times in each ones life. The Sea Battle and the most famous & spectacluar 11 minute chariot race highlights this greatest of tales.

The DVD extras add to this package !! In closing a movie must for your library.

Really The End of an Era
One of the last great grand sweeping epics. Truly a cast of thousands. I've never been a big Heston fan but you got give the man his due. He was born to play these larger than life characters. The chariot race is really all its cracked up to be. One of the greatest cinematic moments ever. The chariot race in the silent version is even better, if you can believe that. Just amazing.

AMAZING MOVIE!!!
Definitely a great epic and one of my personal favorites, Ben Hur, brings to the screen such heavyweights as Charlton Heston and Jack Hawkins in a tale set during the times of the Roman Empire. There are no words to describe this multiple (11) Oscar winning movie. The acting, the chariot races (!!!) and the costumes are all wonderful! It is simply amazing how a movie made in 1959 surpasses by far most movies that have been made in later years. Ben Hur is about honor, bravery, and heroes from a time long gone.
Together with Spartacus, The 300 Spartans, Cleopatra, and the Fall of the Roman Empire, Ben Hur makes my list of Top 5 classics of all times.
A great marvel indeed!

The greatest Movie of all times
This Movie no matter how many times i see it moves me. I have the Collectors Box Set. This set will be used to be passed down to my family forever. ... Read more

Reviews (73)

Not Michener, but an interesting story!
"The Other Side of Heaven" is based on the true story of John H. Groberg's experience as a missionary on the South Pacific island of Tonga. The movie was produced by Academy Award winner Gerald Molen, producer of "Schindler's List" and "Jurassic Park," and released by Excel Entertainment, an outlet for Mormon media, and it's rated "PG."

Groberg (Christopher Gorham) was called by the Church for a three-year mission assignment to Tonga when he was a 20-year-old student at Brigham Young University in the 1950's. Before leaving he makes a vague pact with his girlfriend, Jean, (Ann Hathaway). A difficult seven week journey takes him to the South Pacific, where he meets his native Christian assistant and companion, Feki, (Joe Falou), and they finally arrive at the remote island of Niuatoputapu. Groberg has been instructed to do two things: learn the language and build the "kingdom."

Initially treated with scorn by the natives, he sets about to learn the language by reading the bible in English and in Polynesian. After four days he has mastered the language, and begins to win the respect of the natives. From here on, it's a series of incidents, each of which is a sort of independent story: he resuscitates a seriously injured child; sleeping with his feet exposed leads to rats nibbling on the soles of his feet, requiring weeks of treatment to "seal" his feet; a boat trip with two natives nearly drowns them all when the boat is capsized by a storm; a severe storm destroys the island food supply, and everyone nearly starves to death.

The young native women are fascinated with Groberg, and one in particular offers herself---but Groberg is not tempted. He is finally taken to task by the girl's mother for rejecting the daughter, but Groberg explains his moral view and his commitment to his true love in the U.S. His experiences and his feelings are also conveyed through a series of letters to Jean, his fantasies about her, and her letters to him. They ultimately marry, in the movie and in real life, and return many times for mission work in the South Pacific.

There is lavish cinematography of the spectacularly beautiful islands and beaches, as Groberg grows to love both the people and the places. The storm special effects are very well done. It is a thoroughly enjoyable story, made even more interesting by the knowledge that it is basically true.

The movie can be criticized for it's single-minded perspective on the role of the missionary, and there is little insight into the indigenous culture of the natives. But it's very entertaining, and it's staggering to think of the hardships missionaries have endured to bring the benefits of our civilization to these far-flung places (a mixed blessing, some will say). The story is told without proselytizing. Theology and faith are important underlying ingredients but are not emphasized at all. It's pure story telling, with no F words, little or no violence, a love story with no gratuitous sex. I recommend it if you can enjoy an uplifting story, absent those typically R-rated elements.

A boy in paradise?
This is (part of) the story of one 20 year old Mormon boy's experiences while on his mission to Tonga in 1954. It is an adventure story with an emphasis on faith and personal relationships.
It may be difficult for anyone without faith to understand why John Groberg, or any other young person, would go on a mission, but if you can suspend your skepticism, you will be rewarded. The missionary came across as a little nerdy, but you can't help but cheer for his successes and pity his failures as he deals with homesickness and culture shock while trying to learn Tongan and preach.
The scenery and musical score are beautiful, and you can almost feel the humidity and bugs that go with a tropical paradise. What I found most appealing of all were the Tongans themselves. I don't know if the actors are professionals or locals or local professionals, but they gave the movie its heart.
I found the movie/story so compelling that I went out and bought the book and the CD and look forward to someday visiting that part of the world.

Pure love
This is a beautiful movie. This past week I attended a symposium given by Elder John Groberg and his wife. This movie was written about Mr Groberg and his Wife Jean's experience. They are wonderful people. Their love story is truly inspiring. In todays world where love means short throw away relationships, one night stands, and marriages that quickly end in divorce it is really refreshing to see a movie made about a true love story. Their love lasted through his mission and all these 40 or so years that they have been married. Their love is still going strong.

I too have experienced this kind of love. My husband waited for me as I served a mission for the church of Jesus-Christ of Latterday saints. Our love grew stronger every day as I was going through similar experiences. We married shortly after I came home. Now, after children and the events of life we are still happy and in love. True love is saving and can last forever.

My husband also served a 2 year mission for this church. I can tell you it is not easy to leave all of your friends and family for 2 years relying only on letters as communication. We serve missions because we want to share the joy that comes from this truth. There is no deception about it. Why else would we pay our own way, leave our families, and go half a world away for 2 years? The answer is love. We serve missions because we love you. As stated in the beginning God loves his people everywhere. So next time you see a mormon missionary be kind.... they are far from home and are here merely to share joy and the love of God.

I feel compelled to respond to a few of the criticisms of this movie. First of all... to the person who said it was unbelievable that this man would refuse the sexual offer from the islander girl.... I want you to know that Mormon Elders and Sister missionaries all over the world keep themselves chaste. Perhaps as unbelievable as it is in this day and age We as "Good faithful mormons" in our youth save ourselves for marriage and the one true love. Also, to the young man who wanted the relationship worked up for sensational reasons, let me say it is a true story. This young mormon couple had a very simple and pure love. They are chaste and virtuous. This movie was never meant to be titillating entertainment.
Secondly, There has been criticism of the islanders playing Tongans. I do understand that one. However, How many movies are made of French people with really sad American accents trying to sound French. Or Mexicans acting as Spaniards. Since I studied 7 years of French and spent a year and a half in Paris it drives me crazy to hear a fake accent. I guess the best excuse is that it was a low-budget film.
Third, I do think it is rather silly how Disney used Anne Hathaway as the star of the show as if the mission were all about her. However, we can't judge the film just because Disney wanted to use Anne Hathaway for Propaganda. That was Disney's decision.
Fourth, I don't see a problem with the contents. Those things happened to him on his mission. My mission definitely wouldn't be G rated either, nor PG for that matter. I saw a lot of dirty stuff on those city streets.
Lastly, we cannot judge this film by rating it's sensationability. It is a true story. It is not meant to be an action packed SPY Kids movie or Harry Potter.
Mormons are a good beautiful people. Many movies have been recorded of many different faiths. It's about time there is some positive coverage of the LDS people.

Wonderful Movie!
There was only one copy of this title at the video store and although my kids rolled their eyes at the cover, I decided it could be a good educational movie. We were pleasantly surprised at what a great story unfolded before us. It was exciting and dramatic and meaningful. To really enjoy this film, it does not matter whether you accept the Mormon faith; the church doctrine is not presented as a main component of the story. It is the dedication of the young man and his experience on the island that is so inspiring. The kind of discipline and faith he has can be applauded regardless of his religion. I was very impressed with this movie, have suggested it to many of my Christian friends and highly recommend it for family viewing with children 13 or older.

Beautiful Setting... Story keeps you interested
This is the story of a young Mormon missionary who goes to Tonga for 2 1/2 years and lives and works with the people on a remote island. It shows him struggling against nature - from mosquitos to hurricanes to storms at sea. These add a lot of drama to the story. He also struggles with himself and his faith and you see him grow and develop from somewhat stiff and self-conscious to warm and open and serving. The story does well to show these struggles without casting him as an idiot who eventually "learns better". It also shows the Tongan natives with respect and warmth. Although their language and culture are different from the young missionary's, they are loving and minister to him as he reaches out to them. The initial resistance from the established minister on the island is resolved with respect as well.

There are a few parts that might have been improved. Does this poor guy really have to wear a tie every day in this tropical location? And when the native men get baptized by him, what does it mean that they are then wearing white dress shirts and ties as well? Is the implication that only Western office attire is "righteous"?

Other than wardrobe, though, the film does seem to show respect for the Tongan natives. It also gives a glimpse of some of the crises they may face. Devastation by hurricanes, being cut off from communication and food supplies, lack of medical services, being exploited by Westerners (who entice some of the young women to leave with them - clearly intending to sell them into prostitution), as well as the seemingly universal problems of alcoholism and family conflict, etc. ... Read more

Description

Based on the best selling series by Gerald N. Lund, The Work and the Glory blends high-powered fiction with true events from the life of Joseph Smith.Experience the tragedies and triumphs of the Steed family amid the raging controversy that surrounds the teachings of one of the most influential religious leaders in American history. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Great Movie!!!!!
I loved this movie. As I am LDS I think it is fantastic that movies like this are being shown in theaters and the DVD releases are in stores nationwide. I feel that the actors did a suberb job in this movie. I loved the humor as well. I recommend this movie to everyone LDS and Non-LDS alike.

Pillar of Light - A UK Review
We received the DVD this morning, set up our multi-regional player and sat down to watch a great story with some trepidation.

How could a movie match the quality of the book. It didn't. What we watched was a brilliant translation to the screen of a breath taking story told by a writer who should be far better known than he is.

The sets were good, the photography truly beautiful. The capturing of sunsets and a stormy night for dramatic tension were superbly captured.

Both of our children, aged ten and fourteen, sat through the entire movie as captivated as ourselves, and they havent read the book.

We cannot wait for the next installment.

Steve & Jill Hodkin.
Manchester UK

Weak effort
I guess I have to pour some cold water here. While other reviewers have praised this movie based on its family values and wholesome entertainment, I have to say that there are many other movies out there with the same stuff but of higher quality.

The movie, Work and the Glory which is based on the book written by Gerald Lund proves to be rather weak. It captured the spirit of the book but not the spirit of the people of the book. The actors in this movie looked like they never done a hard day's work, spent too much time in their air conditioned trailers waiting for their scenes as their pale skins reflects indoor people, not outdoor farmer types. To be perfectly honest, not once did I believed that these people on screen were actually hard working folks of Lund's book.

I was also disappointed in the actor who played Joseph Smith. I really didn't see that charismatic leader, just an another bland actor who seem to step off a soap opera TV studio. Funny that I brought up the soap opera theme since the movie did played a lot like a soap opera with that dominate romantic love triangle story.

I do praised the relatively high production value of this movie though. The camera works proves excellent, the art direction reflects the money that went into it, even the all too clean costumes show good history. Technically speaking, its a fine film but as a movie trying to tell a story, it fall pretty flat.

For less demanding audience who only want to see 21st century Americans living and dressing up like early 19th century Americans, I supposed the movie can satisfied. But if you were looking for a movie that reflect the period as describe in the book, this is not the movie for it. I would be surprised if there will be a sequel and if there were, we can hope that Beverly Hills 90102 group can get little grubblier.

Work and the Glory Movie DVD
This is an excellent movie! The cinematography is very artistic, and a lot of effort was taken to be true the times. The movie also stays very close to the book, with only a few minor exceptions. While the movie obviously features certain events from the early history of the LDS Church, those of other faiths should be able to watch it without feeling like they are being proselyted. The spiritual events are treated with a reverent brevity. The movies moral of religious tolerance should appeal to those of many faiths.

The DVD special features include the original theatrical trailer for the movie and a commentary voiced by the Director and the Director of Photography.

Overall, I felt that the movie was very well done, with some amazing pieces of acting portraying some very emotional scenes. Of course, given the source, there is no foul language (that I could find) and no innapropriate scenes (unless you count a handful of short kissing scenes).

A Pillar of Light
This film stays incredibly true to Gerald Lund's hit series about the lovable Steed family and their trials as they become part of the greatest work that has ever occurred on the earth.The scenery and music take you back to a time of simplicity in Palmyra, New York.Although some of the acting wasn't top-notch, I applaud the whoever cast the characters because they look exactly as I imagined them while reading the books.I felt inspired by this movie and look forward to adding it to my collection. ... Read more

Reviews (169)

Beautifully Boxed 40 th Anniversary Edition
This was Cecil B. De Mille's last film as a director. De Mille's old-fashioned style of filmmaking and story telling is elegant, larger-than-life and rather elegiac and exactly suited for the enormous task of bringing this spectacle to the screen. Charlton Heston gives an excellent and powerfully dramatic performance as Moses. Yul Brynner, who approaches his role with style and confidence, is the prince who outmaneuvers Moses to the Egyptian throne in one of the best performances of his career. Supporting Heston and Brynner is a diverse and powerful cast of actors and performers. John Derek is memorable as Joshua the stone cutter. Anne Baxter is Nefretiri who yearns for the love of Moses. Cedric Hardwicke is an agreeable and levelheaded Pharaoh Sethi. Edward G. Robinson is the traitor to his people memorable for constructing the false idol golden calf. Vincent Price is the villainous and diabolically likable Baka. The beautiful Debra Paget is Baka's slave girl Lilia. Yvonne De Carlo gives a very thoughtful performance as Sephora, Moses' earthly love. John Carradine is Aaron. Woody Strode can be seen as the King of Ethiopia. Laboriously produced, Cecil B. De Mille's THE TEN COMMANDMENTS looks as though it was filmed and acted in a style more suitable to the early days of Hollywood. But that is a very positive quality. The film takes biblical events and turns them into Hollywood's version of history quite effectively. This style of filmmaking brings the larger-than-life scope of the Old Testament to the screen preserving the mystery and awesome power of the concept of a monotheistic divinity. One very effective feature of this film that reinforces this concept are the unearthly looking special effects, which are so eerily disturbing and beyond our comprehension that they truly approach a successful vision of the universal power of God. These distinctively unique special effects by the innovative John P. Fulton are essential to the telling of this story. Elmer Bernstein's rousing and inspirational score is brilliantly moving as it reinforces the vision that De Mille has created. Interestingly, in the earlier parts of this film De Mille shows us the construction of an Egyptian empire. We are witness to and experience the ingenuity of man to engineer and create such mammoth structures. But De Mille through the use of these special effects wipes all this out and shows the futility of man's efforts to subjugate other men when divine intervention prevails. This is such a brilliantly visual film that it still evokes awe and wonder to this day. This 40th Anniversary boxed set handsomely holds the restored and widescreen version of this epic film.

"His god IS God!"
That's the last line Yul Brynner utters in "The Ten Commandments", and for me, that is really the end of the film; the whole rest of the Wandering in the Desert isn't all that interesting, compared with what had gone before. You might wonder why then a five-star rating, but that's how much fun I find all the "Egyptian" characters in the movie. They certainly have all the best parts: Sir Cedric Hardwicke as Pharoah Seti; Yul Brynner as Ramses, heir presumptive; Anne Baxter as Neferteri, the throne princess destined to marry solely a Pharoah; Dame Judith Anderson as the Memnet, Egyptian slave in on a big secret; Vincent Price as Baka, the Master Builder of Seti's treasure city. Throw in Edward G. Robinson as Dathan; even though he's a Hebrew overseer, he spends most of his time among the Egyptians. Star Charlton Heston as Moses is actually kind of boring--he's one-dimensional and has no character development. But every time one of those "Egyptians" comes along on camera--pow!--you've got some wonderful scenery chewing. Check out the great special effects, too.

Good but not great edition of a classic
I already had "The Ten Commandments" on DVD, but with almost no extras and no commentary, it wasn't all that satisfying. This new Collector's Edition is easily worth its low price, to me, even as a replacement. The colors are breathtaking, Elmer Bernstein's store is still luscious, and it's probably as close to what DeMille intended as you'll get on a screen smaller than twenty feet.

I enjoyed Katherine Orrison's commentary track quite a bit (and have put her book on the movie on my wish list), although much more about the movie than some of her amateur theological comments. After spending so much time with Henry Wilcoxon, DeMille's right-hand man on this and many other movies, she has anecdotes and understanding that help you understand how the film was made. I had no idea it took five full years to make, or how some of the seemingly-odd decisions were made or even how some of the effects were created.

The other extras are a bit disappointing. The six-part documentary (complete with titles in Paramount's "Star Trek" font because they can't recreate the hand-lettering of the movie's titles, over leather that shows up in richer color than I've ever seen it) doesn't offer nearly as much as AMC's "Cecil B. DeMIlle" biography from earlier in 2004. That special included pre-matte shots of the parting of the Red Sea - the actual water in the tank, including the sides of the parted Red Sea, and how it was created. Paramount may not own that documentary, but some of that footage should have been on this disc. Without it, there are still some good interviews, but not enough behind-the-scenes footage that we now know exists.

If you like "The Ten Commandments" and don't have it on DVD, this is for you. If you have the older version but like it a lot, this one's also for you - but get the Cecil B. DeMille biography when it comes out on DVD, too.

An enduring film classic
Cecil B. DeMille's wonderful epic is a film for the ages. The entire cast is excellent, beginning with Charlton Heston's devoted and obedient Moses who lives only to serve the Lord and deliver his people from Pharoah's bondage; Yul Brynner's excellent reading as the fierce, stubborn Rameses who witnesses God's miracle from a hill overlooking the Red Sea; Anne Baxter whose love and desire for Moses was so intense and consuming that she killed for him; Sir Cedric Hardwicke's poignant Sethi who tries to forget Moses but never loses his love for his adopted son; the massive exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt to freedom; the exciting pursuit by Rameses' charioteers and soldiers of Moses and the Hebrews that culminates in the memorable Red Sea escape and the destruction of the Egyptians, with Rameses left alone to realize that Moses' God is God.

Great Film STILL Short Changed
I wonder why this edition wasn't held for the C.B. DeMille bio that Turner just produced. Instead we get a lot of anecdotes from Orrison, whom made an inaccurate statement that Brenner and Heston were about the same age. This is wrong, Brenner was in fact 9 years older than Heston. Also, her commentary really spotlighted an actor named Clint Walker who was just an extra. This was a definite who cares moment, like many within her commentary.

C.B. DeMille was the star along with Heston, Brenner and Baxter. There should have been more attention given to the 'stars'.

Why was I surprised that the packaging was 'downgraded'. You actually have to remove 'the first' disc to get to the second disc and no chapter card insert. It takes too much time to sum up this mess. Lets just hope that Warners will get the next edition right. This one needs work - except for the transfer that is which was fine the first time around without the ho hum 'extras'. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The life of St. Thérèse de Lisieux, a young Carmelite nun who died oftuberculosis, is the inspiration for this spare, sincere French film. Theobsessively religious Thérèse (Catherine Mouchet) fights to be allowed to jointhe rigorous order of nuns, taking her petition all the way to the Pope himself.After becoming part of the sisterhood, Thérèse takes joy in the strict ritualsand devotions, until she develops tuberculosis and her inner connection with Godsuddenly leaves her; despite this, she never loses faith, and writes a private diary (which, whenpublished after her death, became hugely popular). The settings of every sceneare depicted only by furniture; the neutral background puts all the focus on therich performances of the actors, including Hélène Alexandridis as a young nunwho falls in love with Thérèse. An elegant film, perhaps best appreciated byCatholics. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Not for Everyone
Keep in mind that the director of this film was an atheist, and that one of his primary purposes in filming it was to experiment with a new/different cinematic style. Therefore, no fancy sets or backgrounds, just a concentration on the life of a very devout, simple, and loving young girl. Not her whole life, only bits and pieces of how she thought, what she said and did, and what life in a Cloistered Convent was like. l've seen this movie several times, and not once did l see any overt or obvious act of the so-called lesbianism. See it for its spititual message, and keep in mind that after this movie was released there was a solid increase in applications to Carmelite Convents and a more solid interest in the life of St. Therese of Lisieux, also known as the Little Flower.

A sweet film about a girl with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
The film is good, it's french and it's minimal. I saw it when I was in the seminary years ago.

If one reads the memoirs of nuns who actually had to live with this eventual saint, none of them really liked her. Short of counting every step she made throughout the day, or avoiding cracks lest she break her mother's back, she was so driven by obsessively compulsive disarray that she HAD to become a saint. She was consumed with the most minor infractions (silly, nonsense sins) that she drove everyone around her crazy.

Is that really a "saint," or is that someone who could have just been helped out a whole lot with a little Zoloft or Prozac? So you think a mean thought of someone who annoys you...well, this woman made mountains out of those inconsequential thoughts, yet she's viewed as special.

Well, she was special. Her neurosis was olympic, and she made others suffer for that. But we didn't have to live with her, so we think she's spectacular.

This film does not deal with her psychological self-induced trauma. This film, like time, makes this woman stand out as a saint.

Fantasy and fond memory beats the heck out of truth and reality.

Mike

seeing a saint from the outside
This intimate, intense little film shows the making of a saint 'from the outside.' When I first saw it, I was so impressed by the portrait of young Therese Martin that I learned all I could about the icon she became to the Roman Catholic World. The after-death publication of her stubby-pencil autobiography "The Story of a Soul" captured the attention of the devout. She rapidly came to be known as 'The Little Flower' or "St. Therese of Lisieux" and was canonized in 1927, becoming co-patroness of France with St. Joan of Arc, and a "doctor of the church". The film shows us this giant figure of the faith as she appeared within the hermitically sealed world of a Carmelite convent-a little girl with quietly extraordinary qualities. No music or heavenly light announces her holiness. The scenes are barren, the light is directional and shadowed, as in a Caravaggio painting. The film presents a series of vignettes, as though on as shallow stage. Within each one, she seems to seek to hide, not allowing herself to dramatize even her own illness and approaching death. But the reactions of other sisters reveal her. An elderly nun chooses her as confessor, surrendering to her the one private possession she has retained, against the rules, for 50 years. A confused and unhappy young sister responds to her clear-eyed and loving compassion. A crabby older sister showers her with flowers and asks her for the relic of a fingernail clipping, astonished that she is unable to withhold her homage. Most important, her Mother Superior, who alone knows her secret desire to become a great saint, requires that she write down the thoughts of her heart, knowing that they will be important. Believers will be moved, the merely curious may find themselves breathless.
One vignette in particular, stays with me as a beautifully rendered cinematic explication of her character. I have never in all my researches on St. Therese encountered a narrative that 'validates' the scene, but it has a haunting truthfulness. Therese is working in the kitchen with another sister. A box is delivered. When opened, it proves to contain a huge, live lobster. Therese boldly lifts it, though she is clearly frightened and awed by its claws and its repulsive appearance. But it is too large for her hand, and falls heavily to the floor, writhing and snapping on its back. She bends over, rights the thing, and picks it up. As she bends, blood streams from her mouth-a hemorrhage from the lungs, and the first sign we see in the film of the tuberculosis that will painfully kill her. She smiles radiantly to her companion sister, wiping the blood away, and saying that she 'bit her tongue.' Thus, Therese faces death. I am struck by this scene because it reflects another painful scene in Dostoevsky's novel, The Idiot. A tubercular young student recounts a nightmare in which he is trapped in a room with a huge scorpion he knows he cannot escape. His terror and horror at this entrapment by inexorable death contrast strongly with Therese's outward reaction, though we later learn that she, too, is afraid. The difference? She boldly asserts her fear as a test of her faith, and continues to give herself to the God she no longer can see.
I see that some reviewers have been unnecessarily disturbed by the young nun who is so attached to Therese. This isn't a sick modern-day attempt to introduce'lesbianism' into the convent. It illustrates that one of the great difficulties religious must face is the inevitable temptation to form special attachment to another individual. Such special, individual love IS a problem for those trying to focus all love on an invisible God. Watch closely. You will see that Therese knows her fellow sister is troubled. Clear-sightedly, but lovingly, she refuses to participate in that exclusivity. The disturbing scene in which this sister eats sputum Therese has coughed up from her dying lungs is clearly based in the girl's attempt to emulate the actions of St. Catherine of Siena, who drank water used to wash a leper's skin. This action is 'perverse' only to those who do not understand it as an attempt to participate sacrificially in another's human suffering. Where the young sister is 'wrong' is that she would do such an action 'for Therese' but probably not for a stranger who is, as Mother Teresa of Calcutta would put it "Jesus in a distressing disguise." Therese herself costantly reveals less self-dramatizing sacrifices in her 'Story of a Soul.' To some, she appears extremely neurotic. To me, her 'craziness' appears the insanity conferred by divine love. Such madness for love of God will always look bizarre to non-participants.

disgusted and appalled
I purchased the VHS version of this movie five years ago. I had difficulty watching this trash as it obviously pandered to every twisted, sick stereotype of Cloistered Catholic Nuns that I have ever heard of (lesbianism, S&M, etc...)! I was so thoroughly disgusted by this poor excuse for a movie that I threw in it the garbage, where it belongs, immediately after forcing myself to watch it in the vain hope that I could unearth at least a single redeeming quality in it. I could not. It is garbage. I only gave it one star because it is a required field. It does not deserve even one!

Strange little movie
I love St. Therese and have read her autobiography, letters, and poems. Unfortunately, this movie does not do justice to Therese. At times, the movie is kind of creepy, paying undue attention to a lesbian nun in love with Therese. This nun is almost the co-star of the movie. It seems to me that the film maker is critical of Therese and the Carmelites. This is not a movie for children in particular, because it would only confuse them. Actually, it would probably confuse anyone. What a shame. The movie gets 1 star only because of good acting by the woman who plays Therese. The movie has other faults, but I'll not dwell on them because its really not worth it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Like The Passion of the Christ, Luther is the story of a spiritual leader, German monk Martin Luther (Joseph Fiennes), in opposition to the religious orthodoxy of the time (in his case, the 1600s). His goal--to bring God to the people and to take money, fear, and shame out of the equation--made him a reformer to some, a heretic to others. Released around the same time as Mel Gibson's blockbuster, it failed to attract the same degree of attention--or controversy. Granted, it's a different film, but not radically so. Directed by Eric Till (Bonhoeffer: Agent of Grace), Luther isn't always easy to follow or as emotionally involving as it could be. That said, it's a fascinating story and Fiennes receives solid support from Alfred Molina (Frida), Bruno Ganz (Wings of Desire), and the late Sir Peter Ustinov (Spartacus), in his final film role, as Frederick the Wise. --Kathleen C. Fennessy ...