Wait and see what the Catholic Register has to say about it.
World magazine gave it a decent review.
I look forward to hearing from anyone who has seen the movie. A fella from a family film group said it was one of the best..in line with all the classics.
Boston Herald wrote a negative review so it must be a great movie.
Michael Medved recommended it, that's good enough for me. I would never go by what any newspaper review has to say.
At Last, a ‘Shepherds and Wise Men’ Feature
http://ncregister.com/site/article/1362
The Nativity Story is a welcome addition to the family Christmas-film collection
BY STEVEN D. GREYDANUS
November 26-December 2, 2006 Issue
Posted 11/22/06 at 8:00 AM
Bible scholars tell us that the passion narratives in the Gospels represent the earliest stage in the development of New Testament tradition regarding the life of Christ.
How Jesus suffered, died and was raised was of paramount importance in the earliest days of the Church; interest in his birth and infancy came later, leading to the infancy narratives of Sts. Matthew and Luke.
It is fitting, then, that the success of The Passion of the Christ paved the way for The Nativity Story.
Previous Jesus films have generally sought to cover the whole story, whether according to one particular Gospel (Pasolini’s The Gospel According to St. Matthew) or synoptically (the 1977 miniseries Jesus of Nazareth). By contrast, The Passion and The Nativity Story, like earlier forms of Christian drama, are narrower in scope — modern equivalents of the medieval passion play and Christmas/Epiphany pageant.
Astonishingly, The Nativity Story is essentially the first major “shepherds and wise men” feature film in Hollywood history. There’s never been any shortage of Christmas movies, of course. Yet even at the height of Hollywood biblical epics, the real meaning of Christmas was essentially ignored.
The Nativity Story goes a long way toward redressing this historic omission. Written by Mike Rich (The Rookie) and directed by Catherine Hardwicke (Thirteen), the film weaves and elaborates the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke into a character-centered tale of faith, calling and sacrifice.
MORE @ http://ncregister.com/site/article/1362
Here's another trustworthy reviewer: http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movies/index.cfm
26%? It's gone up.
Since you both were thinking about going, why not go, and make up your own mind?
Read the reviews carefully. Each one will tell you why that particular critic praised or panned it.
One I read said that, unless you were a believer, it offered nothing except a religious tract.
I plan to see it, and think I'll enjoy it, but I will not be judging it purely on artisitic merits (and I do appreciate film greatly).
I have a good feeling about this movie and really look forward to it. Try finding a movie to see at your local theater, and it's mostly all junk.
Being against Christianity is supposed to make one appear "enlightned". It's also a great way for college guys and Hollywood types to get laid.
The San Francisco Chronicle gave it a good review this morning. How scary is that?
Fr. Z from the Wanderer gave the movie a "beretta tip". I take that to mean that it's good. I plan to see it.
The angles seem quite ordinary, until you notice a blurring of the sleeve--wings? And then a bird flies away. I would have had a perfectly ordinary person, or preferably a totally mysterious one. But not a blend of the two. Good music would have helped with all of this. Sometimes I think the music is what does the trick, in fact.
I would have had a ball with the Three Kings and not made them into the comic relief of the show. I would have tried to show the almost magical aura of true scientific knowledge in that long-ago time, mixed with their amazement that the heavens were revealing something, something so arcane in sheer astronomical terms that the ordinary person would have had no hope of understanding why the Kings were fascinated. A great chance was missed here to have the Magi puzzled: What could be greater than the birth of a king, since this is certainly something greater?
There were plenty of opportunities here for art. Not artiness, but true film art. The filmmakers have missed them all, as well as the option of making it a totally natural film.
All in all this movie is like linoleum. It does the job, but it doesn't inspire.
I just came back from seeing "The Nativity."
I must say that I was underwhelmed.
Granted, Mel Gibson has set the standard extremely high. His cinematic genius and fervent conviction permeate every frame of "The Passion." I found nothing remotely like that in "The Nativity."
Gibson worked with Scripture, the evidence of the Shroud, age-old traditions, and the visions of mystics like Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich and Ven. Mary of Agreda to compose his script. His decision to use Aramaic, his narrative structure comparing Calvary to the Last Supper, and his depiction of Satan are just a few examples of the genius Gibson brought to "The Passion" as a man driven by his convictions to tell a story from a singular perspective.
By contrast, "The Nativity" is obviously the work of Hollywood committees and board rooms. Everyone involved does his or her job; some better than others. But there is no spirit in the work.
In an interview, Hardwick was asked whether she believed in miracles, and she hemmed and hawed a sort of "Who knows?" response. She said that when her agent sent her the script, she was put off by the idea at first. She was proud to say that the film was influenced by the the writings of Fr. Raymond Brown, a historico-critical demythologizer.
I'll take Anne Catherine Emmerich over Raymond Brown any day of the week, thankyouverymuch.
I could scarcely recognize the Blessed Virgin Mary and Saint Joseph in their portrayals. I definitly did not recognize Saint Joachim or Saint Anna the way they were performed.
There's a lot of attention to historical detail in the architecture and worklife of the period, but that does not replace the need for a vision if a film is going to be above-average cinematically.
Go see it and reward New Line for doing this much, because if this film makes enough profit other writers and directors will have an easier time getting other biblical or religious films made.
But for depth of inspiration, look elsewhere.