Ebert gave "Last Temptation of Christ" 4 stars and said:
"Among those who do not already have rigid views on the subject, this film is likely to inspire more serious thought on the nature of Jesus than any other ever made.
That is the irony about the attempts to suppress this film; it is a sincere, thoughtful investigation of the subject..."
"I see that this entire review has been preoccupied with replying to the attacks of the film's critics, with discussing the issues, rather than with reviewing "The Last Temptation of Christ" as a motion picture. Perhaps that is an interesting proof of the film's worth. Here is a film that engaged me on the subject of Christ's dual nature, that caused me to think about the mystery of a being who could be both God and man. I cannot think of another film on a religious subject that has challenged me more fully. The film has offended those whose ideas about God and man it does not reflect. But then, so did Jesus"
Seems consistent for Roger to praise a fiction film about a real man (who depending on acceptance of belief systems and amount of faith, could also be God incarnate).
Yes, somehow this fictional film "Last Temptation..." should be required viewing of Christians. < /sarcasm >
When did it become a sacred text?
Roeper wrote a piece last week on the way Hollywood attacks Catholics and Christians, and seemed to be insinuating that the anti-semitism charge of the film isn't true. He mentioned that he saw the film, though didn't comment on whether he liked it or not.