Redeemed? Review of ‘Son of God’

For God so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten... well, Me.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten… well, Me.

Rated PG-13, 138 minutes (watched 3/2/14) Review:
The Bible has  inspired some truly masterful works of art: Michelangelo’s “Pieta,” Handel’s “Messiah” and DaVinci’s “Last Supper” are but three masterpieces that show man at his cultural pinnacle with a biblical underpinning. Sadly, biblical art has slipped a little.

“Son of God,” a new theatrical release edited together from snippets of “The Bible” miniseries that aired on the History Channel last spring, doesn’t rise to Da Vinci’s standards. To be honest, it doesn’t rise to Thomas Kincade’s standards. But despite what you’re about to read, I actually kind of liked it.

The re-edited footage follows Jesus through the four Gospels and while many things must obviously be cut and edited down, it presents a decent episodic summary of Jesus’s ministry, death and resurrection. Some have criticized the editors for removing the role of Satan that appeared in the miniseries, but I didn’t think the absence hurt the biblical truth of the movie in the slightest. Something had to be cut; the movie is still too long at 138 minutes. Sin is still present as mankind’s chief problem, and for a summary that’s enough for me.

I missed the miniseries when it was televised, so I can’t comment as to whether it may play better on the small screen. That the footage was originally intended for television, however, is quite obvious. The director(s) rely heavily on close-ups of the actors, perhaps to hide the very shabby sets and scale models of Jerusalem and the Temple that are fake to the point of distraction in wide shots. We get several flashbacks to scenes that were most likely in the miniseries but are not in the movie. It’s odd and confusing to anyone who isn’t already very familiar with the Gospel narrative.

Diogo Morgadoa, a Portuguese actor playing the lead is the cast’s weakest link. His Jesus is not quite the lily-white, blond-haired, blue-eyed caricature, but he (He?) does have long, flowing, very clean locks and a silly smirk on His face for most of the performance. I have zero doubts that Jesus smiled – a lot – but there just was something off here. It bugged me that His teeth belonged in toothpaste commercial and the bottoms of His sandals were a bright white. Is it heresy to suggest that only Man to ever live a sinless life occasionally got His feet muddy or didn’t have access to modern cosmetic dentistry?

It will no doubt be compared to “The Passion of the Christ.” I am seemingly the only believer in the country who has never seen that film, so I can’t say which is more biblical. I can however say that its portrayal of Jesus’ flogging and crucifixion is less graphic; “Son of God’’ carries a PG-13 rating, versus “Passion’s” R. It’s still not a pleasant scene to sit through. In real life it truly was a brutal event, so maybe the more restrained approach is incorrect. That’s for you to decide.

So does anything — ahem — redeem “Son of God?”

One scene shows three prayers in quick succession: Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, the high priest in the temple preparing for Passover and Pilate invoking his ancestors. The contrast among a relationship with the Father, rote religiosity and paganism is stark and tragic. Knowledge of which prayer is pleasing to the Lord makes this moment a dramatic high point.

A second bit of cinematic success shines through as Peter runs to the disciples after the resurrection. Instead of explaining what he saw at the empty tomb, he shows that it’s finally dawned on him what Jesus meant at the Last Supper as He broke the bread and poured the wine. It’s not necessarily biblical, but it communicates the idea well enough in a way I wasn’t expecting. Peter, it should be noted, gets a lot of screen time and Sebastian Knapp, the actor portraying him, turned in the best performance of the cast by a long shot.

So “Son of God” suffers from major artistic problems, and the only two scenes that stood out to me were towards the end. The ultimate redeeming quality here is that despite its myriad of faults, “Son of God” reminded me of the incredible true story the Author and Creator of the universe has given us. It conveys the Gospel of Jesus: that He alone is the way, the truth and the life (though the last part of that phrase,“no one comes to the Father except through [Him]” doesn’t make the cut in the movie).

I realize I should probably just be happy that Jesus’s name is in the theaters and for once is not being used in vain. I just wish we had a little more talent behind and in front of the camera; Sherwood Baptist church and the Kendrick brothers (“Fireproof,” “Courageous”) have shown Christian are capable of producing increasingly decent films. We need to keep pushing foward.

If you want a reason to eat popcorn and a way to spark conversation, it’s worth a matinee ticket. It’s just that like countless movie adaptations, I’d simply prefer to read The Book.

movie stubs

All that’s wonderful, but what’s the movie’s grade? I’m in a hurry here, buddy.
Sigh. It feels like sacrilege to give it anything less that 5/5 (or 7/7?). I’ll give it 3/5, but that’s including some major Christian grade inflation.

Where do I know that guy from?
Really? You recognized anybody from the cast? It’s a cast of unknowns, which isn’t that big a deal in and of it’s self.

What is the star’s spirit animal?
Well this question got weird. Um. Pass? Wait! A Dove!

What color socks are you wearing right now?
Tan socks with a fun purple argyle pattern.

Spoiler alert!
Jesus wins.

Megan’s Take:
Megan refused to see it with me, but since we were in Poplar Bluff for a funeral and had some down time, my 13-year-old brother-in-law Jacob went with me. He loved it. We went in the middle of a snow/sleet storm and were the only ones in the theater. As the credits rolled, we got up and the theater staff was standing there waiting for us to leave so they could shut things down and go home. As we left, there was a sign on the door saying they closed 30 minutes after our movie began.

movies closed

Heard any good jokes lately?
What is the difference between a piano, a tuna and a glob of glue?

(pause for guesses)

You can tune a piano but you can’t piano a tuna!

(pause for polite chuckle)

(pause while joke hearer says “Hey, what about the glob of glue?”)

I knew you’d stuck on the glue!

Snacks eaten:
I had a Diet Coke. Jacob got a bottle of water and some Sour Patch Kids. I wish had gotten some Sour Patch Kids.

Unrelated Word of the Day:
Froward FROH-erd adjective  habitually disposed to disobedience and opposition

Would the movie have been any better with the addition of Morgan Freeman as narrator? Yeah, probably, now that you mention it. It sort of had a narrator for part of the movie, John (the Revelator, not Baptist). But he only had sparse and inconsistent narration. More evidence that the footage came from TV.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s