Has anyone seen this?
Is it reliable?
Is it reliable?
I think you are being a little too harsh. The film narration mirrors the gospel narration. The movie is a word for word recreation of the gospel. Within that limitation, how else would you film the scene? The filmakers made a perfectly reasonable choice.I thought it was banal and inane. … Want Christopher Plummer doing voice overs THRUOUGHT the ENTIRE movie, that it gets so stupid, that in one scene, where Mary gets ready to tell Jesus they are out of wine (Cana) that you actually see the actress lip the words, “they are out of wine”, but instead of HER VOICE…you get to hear Christopher Plummers VOICE say the line as narration WHILE HER LIPS MOVE!
Had to be that way, otherwise you end up throwing out half the gospel.Its non stop incredibly lame narration that tells you EVERYTHING you are SEEING with your own eyes! I’ve never seen narration over kill in a film, til now.
I tend to agree with you there. Like I said in an earlier post, I would have preferred a more elegant translation.Not good at all…not uplifting, no sense of wonderment or that choked up feeling one would expect from watching a movie on Christ… As dry as the desert that the apostles walked thru.
Yeah, and did you notice how they showed her remonstrating angrily with the servants? There’s not a syllable in the Gospel to indicate that she did any such thing, but the filmmakers apparently wanted to go out of their way to show how non-immaculate she is (in their view).Mary, however, becomes a dowdy, somewhat overweight, English redhead. Totally out of place to my eye.
Here’s another take (with gratitude to Arthur Machen) that I found enlightening:That is why (IMHO) Catholics make better filmmakers than Protestants do. We are visually attuned people.