Skip to comments.‘Son of God’ fails to deliver a holy message
Posted on 03/02/2014 2:54:54 PM PST by Gamecock
A repurposed segment of last years History Channel miniseries The Bible, the film stars Diogo Morgado, a Portuguese actor billed as the first Latin Jesus. He makes for a sunny, can-do Portuguesus wandering the land with a miracles-on-demand service available to anyone who walks up to him. He seems oddly, disturbingly in love with himself as he dazzles the Israelites with his fluorescent, Brad Pitt smile.
It trivializes Christian thought to reduce the parables to one-liners and the miracles to magic tricks, but the film was made with the entirely unsurprising input of Joel Osteen, the charlatan self-help guru who has advised his followers that prayer can help you snag a good parking space.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
The millennials certainly like this movie.
Made some fat cash though, especially considering it’s recycled footage from a TV show.
Pretty Amazing when the secular media picks up on this.
YBPDLN* Ping List Ping!
The YBPDLN Ping List is generally published infrequently but based on the exploits of the megachurch pastors posts can spike for a season. If you would like on or off of this list please FReepmail me.
*YBPDLN=Your Best Purpose Driven Life Now
That is a brutal review. I wouldn’t know because I probably won’t watch it.
Many phony Jesus movies will come in his name.
Funny how you say “ignore the media” except when it supports you terrible agenda.
In Victoria Texas, the Cinemark 12 was totally sold out, SRO in the entire building.
Despite his abuses and self destructive behavior, I suspect the high end film by Mel Gibson out shines this soap. (I speak from seeing a few scenes from “the passion” and the TV movies “The Bible” from wence SOG was edited out of. )
I'll stick to Mel Gibson, thank you. I was haunted by The Passion for weeks.
The production on the whole was a little weak. I supported the intent, and I’m glad I saw it though. The Christ in the movie seemed to me like a younger Brad Pitt reading his lines the way Johnny Depp would do; dreamy and languid. He spoke not in lines of dialog, but in parables and riddles and rhetorical flourishes. To me, he smiled too much for most of the film. I suppose that was meant to be an otherworldly; beatific smile of one who is not disturbed by the wriggles of the earthbound. The first quarter of the film seemed rather disjointed in areas. The areas of clarity in the first half of the film served as a tutorial or refresher about some of the stories from The Old Testament. That was probably a good idea, since many people are growing up these days unchurched, unfamiliar with Genesis and other books. After a while, I accepted the film for what it could offer; an updated Passion Play, done with respect and sincerity. It did not ‘throw me out of my seat’ the way Passion of Christ” by Mel Gibson did, but the direction and the intent were wholly different. I don’t mind having a break from Mel’s extreme depictions of violence anyway. This was a sweet movie for those who already believe and wish to see the stories played out in a colorful and elaborate manner. The Portugese actor did a good job in the title role, staying true to the proposed form. The man who played Peter, might have made an interesting Jesus himself, with his more bold delivery and purposeful actions. This actor may have seemed too robust, too physically centered vs appearing as one ruled by the spirit, which comes closer to the popular concept .
The guy may be Portugese, but his features are remarkably Nordic. The SS would have immediately featured him on their posters.
That's not really a criticism, only an observation that's he's unlikely to bear much resemblance to a 1st century Middle East Jew.
I guess they didn’t consult the actual people who attended the movie who gave it an A+. Plus who stupid is this idiot author to write a review after the first weekend. He or she is so dumb that most people who are going have done so. Dumb Dumb media .no wonder they are the losers and not this film. This film is a hit!!!!! 26 million when it cost nothing to make because it was made already. Brilliant!!!!!
I love ya, but The Passion bored me to tears. I know I was the only one on Earth, but I really liked this edition much better.
Even if Roma and Mark were Jewish or Atheist (the latter, of which, may or may not be true), is it a “bad” thing to have this available?
Of course, we could be allowing our kids to watch “The Amazing Race” with the obligatory gay representative(s) or “Shark Tank” with 0bama-supporter Mark Cuban, instead. Of course, those casting stones at this movie have never let their kids watch programs with gays or other 0bama supporters though, right? GET REAL—OF COURSE YOU HAVE!
I would rather people support true Christians of good character (walking the walk, not divorced and didn't sleep around before marriage, etc.), but this is a fallen world and you have already made compromises far worse than catching a version of the life of Jesus.
This morning I heard on KNX news radio (Los Angeles) that “Son of God” grossed about 5 times as much money than any other movie this weekend. The film took in more than $25 million on its first weekend. Boffo box office!
The left would ravage any movie of Jesus where he doesn’t personally conduct a gay wedding and do sermons from a bath house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.