CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Last Temptation of Christ
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Last Temptation of Christ

post #1 of 35
3/25/05 at 11:47pm
Thread Starter 
I watched this for the first time last night and thought it was very good, a fascinating piece of filmmaking. I find it interesting to compare this to Passion of the Christ as explorations of the same subject matter, I think Temptation is a better film but that's a matter of opinion.

We've gotten so used to the idea of Jesus as a pacifist figure, it's pretty ballsy for this film to suggest that he wasn't quite the pacifist other films have shown him as and he actually wanted a revolution, he wanted to topple the current establishment and he was willing to spill blood to do it. When he starts out he actually does want to spread the word peacefully but as the film goes on we find Jesus becoming more and more aggressive in his teaching's, he starts brandishing an axe and storming mosque's, I find this side of Jesus to be interesting because we're so used to him speaking about peace and love and essentially being the first hippie.

In the end, we're just presented with a man asked to sacrifice almost everything for his father, I found the words of Saul (Harry Dean Stanton) to be the most profound, Jesus the man, is not important, Jesus the figure IS, it's what gives people the strength to move on, maybe that's why this film caused such controversy, they didn't want to see portrayal of Jesus as a man, flaws and all because it went against their preconceptions. People want to see Jesus as merely a figure to look up to, not as one of our own who was given an almost herculean task to accomplish.
Reply
post #2 of 35
3/26/05 at 2:20am
This is one of the few films about Jesus that I would call truly great. It's a beautiful movie, incredibly poetic, and very challenging.

It gets richer with every viewing. One of my favorites, without question.
Reply
post #3 of 35
3/26/05 at 2:51am
Thread Starter 
"It is accomplished"

I'm not up to date on the controversy surrounding this film, was it because the films portrayed Jesus as a flawed human being who'd rather raise a family than be the son of god?
Reply
post #4 of 35
3/26/05 at 3:24am
That, and he kisses a couple of men through the course of the film (namely, Judas and John the Baptist).

Of course, those who complained about that stuff never saw it in context. The Criterion DVD release (a pretty slick disc, by the way) has a pamphlet in it that explains a little bit about the controversy surrounding the film. Of course, I was too young to experience the uproar first hand, if I was even conceived yet.
Reply
post #5 of 35
3/26/05 at 3:50am
Thread Starter 
I did like the revelation towards the end, that Satan was very seductive in his attempt to lure Jesus away from his true, he came at Jesus when he was at his most weakest and almost succeeded, it was only Judas that saved him, bet that rubbed uptight Christians the wrong way.

I had an idea he was still dreaming when his angel came to him but I honestly didn't suspect it was Satan.
Reply
post #6 of 35
3/26/05 at 7:00am
The whole controversy seems pretty ironic to me, since of all the representations of Christ I've ever seen on film Last Temptation is by far the most humane and truthful and likely to make a non-believer really think about Jesus and his teachings - whereas other more traditional depictions of Jesus, such as Passion, just seem to be rooted more in superstition and dogma. So the bigots who decried Scorsese's film when it came out seem to me to have spectacularly missed the point of the film, which is incredibly pro-Jesus and pro-Christianity.

I love the Sermon on the Mount scene, it seems realistic for it not to have a huge "blessed are the cheesemakers" crowd. And the whole dream sequence, and especially Harry Dean Stanton's speech, is very moving. It's a shame I can never buy Harvey Keitel as Jesus though...
Reply
post #7 of 35
3/26/05 at 8:18am
Thread Starter 
You mean Judas, I thought Harvey did a great job.
Reply
post #8 of 35
3/26/05 at 12:28pm
I've always loves this movie myself. Wonderfully directed and acted. I'm also a bit too young to have experienced the controversey firsthand, but I can see how the movie would get some folks' panties in a wad.

The casting choices are pretty bold and while it's hard to see Harvey Keitel on screen and not think of The Wolf or Mr. White, he still does an awesome job in this movie. (I still have a hard time seeing him in The Piano without thinking "I'm hungry. Let's get a taco.")

Also, Willem Defoe is absolutely amazing as Jesus. I mean, what was Scorsese thinking?! Defoe is the last man I'd have cast as Christ, but then I'm not a mad Genius like ol' Marty is.

And I love the fact that all of the Jews in the movie sound like they're from Brooklyn while all of the Romans are British.

Plus: BOWIE!
Reply
post #9 of 35
3/26/05 at 1:13pm
Yeah, I mean Keitel as Judas - good performance, but he does take me out of the film. Dafoe really is perfect though - the mad glint in his eye when preaching, or how he genuinely seems scared by his destiny... great stuff.
Reply
post #10 of 35
3/26/05 at 9:29pm
Thread Starter 
I thought Barbara Hershey was also terrific, her portrayal of Mary was just amazing. She doesn't get much work now, which is a shame, I last saw her in the australian film Lantana but I think her work here is great.
Reply
post #11 of 35
3/26/05 at 9:57pm
One of Scorsese's best. It contains one of my all-time favorite shots, when Jesus says "[God] wants to push me..." and the camera goes over the edge of the cliff. I can't say for sure whether the shot was done with a dolly, handheld, or another way. But it's very impressive.
Reply
post #12 of 35
3/27/05 at 2:29am
Thread Starter 
Great shot I agree.

I find it interesting how modern day christianity begins with the birth of christ but in this film, the people were already waiting for a messiah and one arrived in the form of jesus, many christians are still waiting for his return today but what if it ended with his sacrifice and that's it, we were all saved so there's no need for him to return. I know you have the resurrection and all that but we don't see that in this film, we see him die and that's it.
Reply
post #13 of 35
3/27/05 at 6:05am
Well the Jews had been waiting for the messiah for thousands of years already by the time Jesus came around, and it's funny to note that as far as I know the only films that show this deep yearning for someone (anyone?) to come and show them the way are Last Temptation and Life of Brian - the scene with the camera panning from one mad preacher to another seems pretty truthful in a caricatured way. Other films don't seem to show the context of the coming of Christ so much, they just take it his story for granted, but Last Temptation really makes his coming plausible, which is pretty extraordinary when you think about how far-fetched and full of superstition Jesus' story is (that's why Scorsese just had to dump the resurrection, or we'd be in sci-fi land).


Yeah, what happened to Hershey? Between this and Hannah and her Sisters she was pretty good back then.
Reply
post #14 of 35
3/27/05 at 7:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin L. Bishop
Also, Willem Defoe is absolutely amazing as Jesus. I mean, what was Scorsese thinking?! Defoe is the last man I'd have cast as Christ, but then I'm not a mad Genius like ol' Marty is.

Well, Elias was a pretty blatant Christ figure. I think that cinched it for Scorsese.

I agree Dafoe was awesome in this film. I can't imagine De Niro doing a better job.



Quote:
Of course, I was too young to experience the uproar first hand, if I was even conceived yet.
A little Time capsule....




Quote:
Religion
A Holy Furor
Boycotts and belligerence greet a startling new film about Jesus
By JOHN LEO


Aug. 15, 1988
Jesus has brief onscreen sex with his first wife Mary Magdalene and later commits adultery. Judas is a hero, the strongest and best of the apostles. Paul is a hypocrite and liar. Jesus is so dazed that, even on the eve of his Crucifixion, he is still not quite sure whether to preach love or murder Romans.
Ready for Director Martin Scorsese's new movie, The Last Temptation of Christ?



Powerful, eccentric, bloody, filled with theological gaffes, Temptation is an excruciatingly earnest and freewheeling docudrama based on the 1955 best- selling novel by a tormented Greek Orthodox believer, Nikos Kazantzakis. It is the result of an obsessive 16-year quest by one of Hollywood's most esteemed directors to bring to the screen a struggling Christ who only slowly comes to see himself as the Messiah. The movie, Scorsese says, "is my way of trying to get closer to God."

When it opens this Friday in New York, Los Angeles and other cities, religious crowd scenes are almost certain to appear outside the theaters as well as in them. For the past month, conservative Christians have denounced the film as blasphemous, staged demonstrations, called for boycotts and shaped a national campaign to have the picture destroyed or withdrawn. Along the way, there have been anti-Semitic incidents and threats against the "non- Christians" at Universal Pictures who took a chance on the film partly to encourage the filmmaker to pursue future projects at the studio.

So far, most of the voices raised against the film belong to people who have not yet seen it. Italian Director Franco Zeffirelli called the movie "damaging to the image of Christ. He cannot be made the object of low fantasies." Fundamentalist Leader Jerry Falwell called for a boycott against MCA, Universal's parent company; all MCA products, which include Grosset & Dunlap publishers, Spencer Gifts and Motown Records; and any theater that shows the film. Said Falwell: "Neither the label 'fiction' nor the First Amendment gives Universal the right to libel, slander and ridicule the most central figure in world history."

To head off further furor or perhaps even cash in on it, Universal decided last week to move the opening up from Sept. 23 to Aug. 12. Says Tom Pollock, chairman of MCA's motion picture group: "The best thing that can be done for The Last Temptation of Christ at this time is to make it available to the American people and allow them to draw their own conclusions, based on fact not fallacy." But Tim Penland, a born-again marketing expert once hired by Universal to placate conservative critics and now a critic himself, believes the six-week jump will unleash more Fundamentalist anger. "It's the most serious mistake a studio has made in decades," he says.

The dramatic centerpiece of the film is a half-hour segment in which the dying Christ, played by Willem Dafoe, hallucinates about the devil's final temptation: come down from the Cross, renounce your role as the Messiah, marry Mary Magdalene and live a long and ordinary life.

Nothing unorthodox there, strictly speaking. As both fully human and fully divine, Jesus is viewed in Christian theology as free of sin but subject to all temptations, including sexual ones. Following Kazantzakis, however, Scorsese presents the early Jesus as a weak and dithering collaborator who builds crosses used by the Romans to execute Jewish rebels. Later he becomes the wild-eyed guru to a band of ragged followers but remains apprehensive and fundamentally confused about his message and his mission. He persuades Judas, his best friend, to betray him to fulfill God's plan. During the reverie on the Cross, Jesus is shown briefly having sex with his wife, Mary Magdalene. Later in the fantasy, after Magdalene dies, he weds Mary of the biblical duo Mary and Martha, then commits adultery with Martha.

Temptation is drenched in blood. The blood of sacrificed animals runs through the streets, blood unaccountably pours out of an apple Jesus eats and, at the Last Supper, the wine literally turns into blood. In one grotesque scene, Jesus reaches into his chest (though it looks more like his belly), yanks out his heart and holds it up for his apostles to admire.

For a few critics, this display seems to be an arch-send-up of the Catholic devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Some dialogue also hints at satire, probably unintentionally. Asked by a Zealot to compare being dead with being alive, the resurrected Lazarus says thoughtfully, "I was a little surprised. There isn't that much difference." At times Jesus sounds like a mumbling method actor (his first sermon begins "Umm, uh, I'm sorry"), at others like a recent graduate of the Shirley MacLaine School of Theology ("Everything's part of God")

For Scorsese, a former altar boy who once wanted to be a priest, the movie is no frivolous matter. Actress Barbara Hershey, who plays Mary Magdalene, gave him a copy of the Kazantzakis novel in 1972, and he has been contemplating it ever since. Kazantzakis' Jesus, he insists, is both human and divine, in accordance with Christian teaching. What interested Scorsese in the author's approach "was that the human part of Jesus would have trouble accepting the divine."

For many believers, the problem with all this is that Scorsese is not tinkering with a minor historical figure, as Gore Vidal did with Aaron Burr, but with the founder of their faith. "This is an intentional attack on Christianity," concludes Joseph Reilly, national director of Morality in Media. The group is particularly incensed by Jesus' anguished comment, "I am a liar, I am a hypocrite. I am afraid of everything . . . Lucifer is inside me."

Universal Pictures had anticipated controversy. Paramount, originally set to produce the movie in 1983, backed out just weeks before the cameras were to roll. To head off a storm, Universal took the unusual step last January of hiring Penland to calm down the religious right. But Penland resigned in June, charging that Universal had reneged on a promise to let conservative religious leaders see the film and comment on it well in advance of its release.

Although Universal did hold screenings for religious leaders last month, most conservatives refused to come. Instead they staged protests at the Universal lot and published an admonishing ad in the Hollywood Reporter. In a letter to MCA Chairman Lew Wasserman, Bill Bright of the Campus Crusade for Christ offered to raise money to reimburse Universal for all copies of the film, which would "promptly be destroyed." Universal responded with lofty, full-page newspaper ads in four cities, quoting Thomas Jefferson and announcing that the constitutional rights to free expression and freedom of religion were not for sale.

In the most organized campaign of resistance, Methodist Minister Donald Wildmon, head of the American Family Association, is sending out 2.5 million mailings protesting the film and has scheduled anti-Temptation spots on 700 Christian radio stations and 50 to 75 TV stations. "In the twelve years of my current ministry," he says, "I've never seen anything like the response to this movie."

Make that the response to the response. As an annoyed Scorsese points out, "Ninety-nine percent of the people who are complaining have not seen the picture." Many complainers are instead responding to a bootleg copy of an outdated script, circulated by the Sisterhood of Mary, a group of ultra- conservative Protestant women. That version contained the egregious line, which is not in the movie, spoken by Jesus to Mary Magdalene: "God sleeps between your legs."

Universal has tried to calm things down, inserting a disclaimer in the movie saying it is fiction and making Scorsese available for interviews stressing his religious sincerity. Yet the protest has taken on a life of its own. Virtually every televangelist, including Pat Robertson, has mentioned the film during appeals for money. A nonsectarian group called Concerned Women for America has asked all MCA stockholders to sell the company's stock on Sept. 15. And Mother Angelica, a nun who runs the nation's largest Catholic cable network, is calling on protesters to drive with their lights on on Aug. 22. Both dates were picked at random when the opening was still set for September.


{Continued....}
Reply
post #15 of 35
3/27/05 at 7:23pm
Continued..

Quote:
Some of the protests have taken on ugly anti-Semitic overtones. Three weeks ago, the Rev. R.L. Hymers Jr., a Christian extremist in the Los Angeles area, staged a demonstration near the Beverly Hills home of MCA Chairman Wasserman, who is Jewish. An actor portraying Wasserman stepped repeatedly on the bloody back of an actor dressed as Jesus and carrying a heavy cross. An airplane meanwhile flew overhead trailing a banner that read, WASSERMAN FANS JEW-HATRED W/TEMPTATION, and a crowd chanted, "Bankrolled by Jewish money."

As conservatives shriek all around them, liberal churchmen have been bending over backward to avoid criticizing the film, stressing Scorsese's right to interpret Jesus in his own way and sometimes issuing a tepid defense or two. Fundamentalist fears are exaggerated, says the Rev. Eugene Schneider of the United Church of Christ, because "people who go to the movie are going to come out bored and leave before it is over."

The Rt. Rev. Paul Moore Jr., Episcopal Bishop of New York, offered one of the strongest defenses, calling Temptation "theologically sound." Though the lovemaking between Jesus and Mary Magdalene may offend some, he said, "Remember, it's a dream. This is yet another portrait -- a work of art -- which emphasizes certain aspects of Jesus." The Rev. William Fore of the National Council of Churches similarly sees the movie as "an honest attempt to tell the story of Jesus from a different perspective."

Catholics and Methodists have issued no formal response to the film. Bishop Anthony Bosco of Greensburg, Pa., head of the communications department for the National Council of Catholic Bishops, thinks that the movie should be allowed to expire quietly. "This too shall pass away," he says. But not all Catholics are so patient: his office has received hundreds of phone calls demanding that the church speak out. Says Bishop Bosco: "The anti-Semitism and the hatred this movie has caused can hardly please the heart of Christ."

Many clergymen say they have no interest in fanning hysteria over the film, but they wish that Scorsese had made a better movie. The film's Jesus questions himself so much that "it's sort of like watching The Three Faces of Eve," complains the Rev. Michael Morris, who teaches religion and the cinema at a Catholic school in Berkeley.

There are knotty theological problems too. In the dream sequence, for example, when Jesus interrupts Paul's preaching to explain that he did not die and rise again, Paul says the facts are not important as long as people have something to believe in. This appears to reinforce the familiar and cynical view that Paul invented Christianity and distorted Jesus' teachings. Scorsese's Jesus also makes a number of doctrinal blunders. He announces that his death will pay for his own sins, rather than for the sins of mankind. And he picks up dirt and stones and says, "This is my body too," which apparently makes him a founder of pantheism as well as Christianity.

Such theological slipups are fueling passions about the film. Father Morris says he was told by Scorsese that the filmmaker wonders why everyone is so upset when "it's just a movie." After all, the director said, he has a right to work out his private quest for Jesus on film. "This irks me a bit," admits Father Morris. "You can't be working out private problems to the degree that it causes people to riot in the streets." Although that prospect is unlikely, The Last Temptation has touched off the angriest religious debate in years.
Reply
post #16 of 35
3/27/05 at 7:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Topo

Yeah, what happened to Hershey? Between this and Hannah and her Sisters she was pretty good back then.

Don't forget "Tin Men".
Reply
post #17 of 35
3/27/05 at 9:48pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks Mecha, that was a fascinating read. It saddens me that extremist christians always take offence to this kind of stuff, they want to believe Jesus wasn't human and without flaws, they can't accept another interpretation.

Barbara Hershey was in an australian film 'Lantana' a few years ago, it won rave reviews. I haven't anything from her since.
Reply
post #18 of 35
3/27/05 at 9:50pm
I remember her and Ron Silver being out-acted by a poltergeist in THE ENTITY.
Reply
post #19 of 35
3/28/05 at 1:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mecha superior
Don't forget "Tin Men".
She's also in the upcoming Stephen King adapatation Riding the Bullet.

But is that even getting a theatrical release or is it going stright-to-USA Network?
Reply
post #20 of 35
3/15/07 at 12:17am
This is going to bother the hell out of me if I don't find an answer to this.

The Criterion DVD, chapter 14(or go to 15 and rewind a tiny bit)...
Right when Jesus says "We're going to build a new Jerusalem", and during Jesus' encounter with Mary, has this music ever been in another movie? If so, what? The music abruptly stops when chapter 15 begins.

I recognize it from somewhere, yet I've never seen this film before.
Reply
post #21 of 35
3/18/07 at 4:55pm
The fact that, from my standpoint living amongst the Southern Baptist hordes of Virginia, more Christians seem to enjoy anti-Semitic torture porn more than a rather brilliant movie that portrays Jesus as a good, if flawed, human being reinforces my beliefs on Christianity.
Reply
post #22 of 35
3/21/07 at 10:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon Ma
Thanks Mecha, that was a fascinating read. It saddens me that extremist christians always take offence to this kind of stuff, they want to believe Jesus wasn't human and without flaws, they can't accept another interpretation.
But why should they sense The Bible describes Jesus as the only perfect human being.

There's no extremism in that belief, by the way. It's believed because it's written. Extremism comes into play when followers attempt to use the Written Text to fit their own agenda that goes against what is written.

Christians believe Jesus was both God and Man, and that he was tempted, but he didn't give into temptation. The fact that Jesus fantasizes in the film about having sex with Mary is considered a form of lust, which is why, my guess, we Christians got into a fuss about it.

But I only know what I've read. I've yet to see the film.
Reply
post #23 of 35
3/22/07 at 12:44am
It's not blasphemous. The opening text clearly explains how is based on a work of fiction and not the scriptures. Assuming that you take the Bible as the word of God and the actual events of the life of Jesus (which I don't), it's about being able to seperate factual and emotional truth. This movie is great because it allows you to see a side of Jesus that has always existed but never been explored. Shedding factual truth for emotional truth. I think it's important for Christians to see this movie.
Reply
post #24 of 35
3/22/07 at 1:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
This movie is great because it allows you to see a side of Jesus that has always existed but never been explored.
What is this unexplored area? That he was tempted and felt the lure of the devil?
Reply
post #25 of 35
3/22/07 at 1:28am
Carnotaur, I'd be interested to hear your, or anyone who thinks of Last Temptation as blasphemous's views on the Passion of the Christ, or passion plays in general. Because Last Temptation is basically the same thing. Both are fictional recreations and elaborations on parts of Jesus's life/death whose purpose is to try to bring home to people the sufferings he endured. Only one focuses on the physical, and the other the emotional. Why one would upset anyone so much more is odd to me.
Reply
post #26 of 35
3/22/07 at 1:54am
Carnotaur's probably a dipshit.
Reply
post #27 of 35
3/22/07 at 2:31am
But he's the only one available who's still bothered by the Last Temptation, do he gets asked.
Reply
post #28 of 35
3/22/07 at 3:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3
What is this unexplored area? That he was tempted and felt the lure of the devil?
The difficulty. The Bible isn't exactly the most exciting read around, and it's easy to take for granted the sacrifices that Jesus made. He didn't sacrifice his life by dying on the cross, he sacrificed his life the moment he chose that path. He didn't fight it, he accepted it, and when we only see the God in Jesus, it's kinda easy to not connect with that.
Reply
post #29 of 35
3/22/07 at 11:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf
Carnotaur's probably a dipshit.
Once again, Devin can't bother to be civil.
Reply
post #30 of 35
3/22/07 at 11:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
The difficulty. The Bible isn't exactly the most exciting read around, and it's easy to take for granted the sacrifices that Jesus made. He didn't sacrifice his life by dying on the cross, he sacrificed his life the moment he chose that path. He didn't fight it, he accepted it, and when we only see the God in Jesus, it's kinda easy to not connect with that.
Well, I most certainly agree. I don't mind directors taking liberty in the story, but there are certain things I feel you must not do when adapting the story of Jesus' life, and one of them happens to be showing him as a "flawed" person. He wasn't flawed, but he "did" happen to struggle through life just as we did, but the strength the emoted was greater than any human being because he had to the will power to withstand it.

I for one feel Passion pulled that off. I mean, that has to be the most difficult part about Jesus' life, is that he knew he had to die. How many times did He look up at God and asked "Is there some other way?" Even He didn't want to go through all that. I saw the human side in that one scene from Passion clear as day.

But I agree, we do need to see more human Jesus.
Reply
post #31 of 35
3/22/07 at 11:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz
Carnotaur, I'd be interested to hear your, or anyone who thinks of Last Temptation as blasphemous's views on the Passion of the Christ, or passion plays in general. Because Last Temptation is basically the same thing. Both are fictional recreations and elaborations on parts of Jesus's life/death whose purpose is to try to bring home to people the sufferings he endured. Only one focuses on the physical, and the other the emotional. Why one would upset anyone so much more is odd to me.
I'm sure Last Temptation is a fine film. I'll have to see it some time. In fact, I'll probably rent it this weekend.

But it was just what I've read of that one scene that doesn't ring true with Jesus. I'll hold further judgment until I catch the film.
Reply
post #32 of 35
3/23/07 at 12:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3
I for one feel Passion pulled that off. I mean, that has to be the most difficult part about Jesus' life, is that he knew he had to die. How many times did He look up at God and asked "Is there some other way?" Even He didn't want to go through all that. I saw the human side in that one scene from Passion clear as day.
This is what Last Temptation is all about, including the scene you're talking about. It's the other way, that he didn't take.

But yeah, you should watch the movie before you say any more about it. Or even as much as you have. But whatever.
Reply
post #33 of 35
3/23/07 at 12:10am
The Passion is one of the few movies that really could use a prequel.


Anyone have any idea about my music question further up? It's still driving me nuts.
Reply
post #34 of 35
1/7/11 at 1:54pm

Black Swan made me think of this movie again because of the Barbara Hershey connection, and I find myself wanting to rewatch this over the weekend all of a sudden.

 

Somebody already mentioned this upthread already, but Hershey is amazing in this film. If you're a male, seeing her in Last Temptation is seeing every woman you ever wanted, loved, or hurt. It might be one of my favorite film performances ever.

Reply
post #35 of 35
1/7/11 at 10:09pm

I love The Last Temptation of Christ.  It's one of my favorite movies, both from Scorsese and in general.  I was thrilled when I took a class on Jesus films and this one was on the syllabus, because I had an excuse to watch it again.  And because I'm a Christian, I get mad when other Christians, even in good intentions, start talking about it being blasphemous.  For example, Carnotaur.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon Ma
Thanks Mecha, that was a fascinating read. It saddens me that extremist christians always take offence to this kind of stuff, they want to believe Jesus wasn't human and without flaws, they can't accept another interpretation.
But why should they sense The Bible describes Jesus as the only perfect human being.

There's no extremism in that belief, by the way. It's believed because it's written. Extremism comes into play when followers attempt to use the Written Text to fit their own agenda that goes against what is written.

Christians believe Jesus was both God and Man, and that he was tempted, but he didn't give into temptation. The fact that Jesus fantasizes in the film about having sex with Mary is considered a form of lust, which is why, my guess, we Christians got into a fuss about it.

But I only know what I've read. I've yet to see the film.


I've highlighted one of the biggest incorrect arguments people have against the film and one of the biggest bad reasons people make it.  The scene where Jesus has sex with Mary does not happen in a context where it would be lustful.  At that point, Jesus and Mary are married.  Sex within marriage is not a sin, and is not the temptation Jesus is facing.  His temptation is the life of a normal human being.  There is no scene in the film I have seen that portrays Jesus committing a sin.  Therefore, in that sense, the film is not at all blasphemous.

 

Even in the scene where Jesus feels guilt and says that he has sinned, it's never shown on screen.  Within this characterization of Jesus, an extremely human version of Jesus who has to learn he is also the Son of God (and therefore God himself), it is possible that he has actually resisted committing sins his entire life, but knowing as little as he does about his true nature, does not know that himself.

 

Ironically, lack of Biblical knowledge and understanding is what leads to Christians claiming the film is blasphemous.  It is that and the fact that too many people depend on the opinion of another to tell them what something is about or what might be wrong with it.  One of my favorite Christian pastor/authors mentions The Last Temptation in just this type of context; he calls foul on Jesus marrying Mary and living his life out as a normal man, but I know he hasn't seen, or at least didn't finish, the film because he doesn't know that it was a dream and that Jesus dies on the cross at the end.  If he had seen the film, he might still disagree with it on other principles, but he wouldn't be saying something so ignorant about it.

 

So though we disagree on Christianity itself, I agree with what Patrick Ripoll said about the film in response to Carontaur3.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post

It's not blasphemous. The opening text clearly explains how is based on a work of fiction and not the scriptures. Assuming that you take the Bible as the word of God and the actual events of the life of Jesus (which I don't), it's about being able to seperate factual and emotional truth. This movie is great because it allows you to see a side of Jesus that has always existed but never been explored. Shedding factual truth for emotional truth. I think it's important for Christians to see this movie.


Adding to what Patrick said, Temptation does not even claim to be telling the Biblical story of Jesus.  It's a fictional interpretation of the story of Jesus.  There isn't a scene in any of the four gospels that talks about Satan in the form of a little girl giving Jesus a vision to tempt him off the cross.  It's a story that is used to remind you that Jesus was a man, and dealt with earthly temptations the same as everyone else. 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
The difficulty. The Bible isn't exactly the most exciting read around, and it's easy to take for granted the sacrifices that Jesus made. He didn't sacrifice his life by dying on the cross, he sacrificed his life the moment he chose that path. He didn't fight it, he accepted it, and when we only see the God in Jesus, it's kinda easy to not connect with that.
Well, I most certainly agree. I don't mind directors taking liberty in the story, but there are certain things I feel you must not do when adapting the story of Jesus' life, and one of them happens to be showing him as a "flawed" person. He wasn't flawed, but he "did" happen to struggle through life just as we did, but the strength the emoted was greater than any human being because he had to the will power to withstand it.

I for one feel Passion pulled that off. I mean, that has to be the most difficult part about Jesus' life, is that he knew he had to die. How many times did He look up at God and asked "Is there some other way?" Even He didn't want to go through all that. I saw the human side in that one scene from Passion clear as day.

But I agree, we do need to see more human Jesus.

 

This is where Carnotaur gets mixed up.  I don't think that Jesus was portrayed as "flawed" in The Last Temptation.  Unsure, maybe, and confused at times, but that isn't a sin.  But even Carnotaur himself pointed out that in the garden before he is arrested, Jesus asks God the Father in his prayer if there can be a way besides him dying on the cross.  He might know there isn't another way, but what person doesn't beg and plead that something awful not happen to him.  If you look at Jesus from a perspective that over-emphasizes his Deity, you're in just as bad position than if you do the same with his humanity.

 

The Bible describes Jesus as fully-God and fully human.  But it also says that Jesus lowered himself to be human.  He wrangled in his own power.  No one, not even top Biblical scholars, can tell you in what aspects he restricted himself in his deity.  The Bible only accounts for his humanity and the miracles he performed and knowledge he had that are in the text.  You can't make up something that isn't there.  There is stuff we know and stuff we don't.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

Carnotaur, I'd be interested to hear your, or anyone who thinks of Last Temptation as blasphemous's views on the Passion of the Christ, or passion plays in general. Because Last Temptation is basically the same thing. Both are fictional recreations and elaborations on parts of Jesus's life/death whose purpose is to try to bring home to people the sufferings he endured. Only one focuses on the physical, and the other the emotional. Why one would upset anyone so much more is odd to me.


The Last Temptation is different from The Passion because Jesus is fully human the whole time in Scorsese's film.  Carnotaur pointed out a particular scene, the scene in the garden, that showed him Jesus' humanity.  But Christians, particularly legalistic types (who don't understand the true Gospel anyway), don't think about the humanity of Jesus very often.  And it's not a new thing.  In fact, the "gnostic gospels' are almost all about secret knowledge about Jesus being this super God character and downplay, or outright deny, his humanity.

 

People like The Passion because it's familiar and modern and very impactful.  The images Gibson, quite remarkably, weaves together allude to dozens pieces of traditional iconography and ancient works of art.  It looks like the Jesus story because it mimics things that are heavily associated with it.  But Christians who go into the movie thinking it's completely based on the biblical text don't know their Bibles very well.  Gibson not only pulled heavily from the traditional passion plays, but also from the writings of a mystic German nun named Anne Catherine Emmerich.  She claimed to have received visions of the actual event that were not in the Bible, such as Jesus falling from a bridge and being hanged for a moment in front of Judas and Judas being later attacked by demons, both of which are depicted in the film.

 

The Last Temptation is upsetting for Christians because they don't want to think about Jesus being tempted and it being the slightest bit alluring to him.  They feel like it makes him un-Godly, which really would lessen his credibility if that is what it meant.  What they don't consider is that if he weren't tempted, it wouldn't be hard for him, and it wouldn't have mattered that much anyway.  I feel that the fact that Jesus WAS tempted by many things that you and I are on a daily basis, and was Godly enough to resist them is a much more interesting and powerful story.

 

There is a quote by C.S. Lewis that I love on this subject.

 

Quote:
"No man knows how bad he is till he has tried very hard to be good. A silly idea is current that good people do not know what temptation means. This is an obvious lie. Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is. After all, you find out the strength of the German army by fighting against it, not by giving in. You find out the strength of a wind by trying to walk against it, not by lying down. A man who gives in to temptation after five minutes simply does not know what it would have been like an hour later. That is why bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness. They have lived a sheltered life by always giving in. We never find out the strength of the evil impulse inside us until we try to fight it: and Christ, because He was the only man who never yielded to temptation, is also the only man who knows to the full what temptation means – the only complete realist. Very well, then. The main thing we learn from a serious attempt to practise the Christian virtues is that we fail. If there was any idea that God had set us a sort of exam. and that we might get good marks by deserving them, that has to be wiped out. If there was any idea of a sort of bargain – any idea that we could perform our side of the contract and thus put God in our debt so that it was up to Him, in mere justice, to perform His side – that has to be wiped out."

 

 

And that's the idea behind The Last Temptation of Christ.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Last Temptation of Christ