Technically the film is little more than a low rent TV movie. It also doesn't help that La Marre doesn't tell the story in a straight forward manner, events are left out or glossed over and a great deal of time is spent with the Jewish religious leaders which helps make his racial plot feasible, but takes away from the story of Jesus. The simple addition of racial questions wobble the film to the point of non functioning (and it could be argued that the casting of the Jewish elders as very white European "Jews" smacks of racism). I would like to say that the film works on terms other than historical, but I can't. From Roman bad behavior, to the ethnic mix of the country (important in a film that hinges on a question of race) this film fumbles with its facts too much to be believable. One can argue with pretty much argue with most of the rest of the film historically and scripturally since it contains a great number of errors. There is a reasonable possibility that Jesus was dark skinned since those native to the region tend to be of a darker skin than the light skinned Europeans who had invaded the country, so from a historical stand point one can't really argue with a dark skinned Jesus. The notion is of course more than likely going to anger many audiences simply because Jesus is black, which is a shame since the poorly made film is bad enough on its own to deserve brickbats being tossed at it. Jean-Claude La Marre writes, directs and stars in a version of the last days of Jesus that posits that Jesus was killed in large part because he was dark skinned.
Reviewed by dbborroughs 3 / 10 Life of Jesus as racially charged tale collapses on itself because the story, at least as told here, simply can't support the premise
0 kommentar(er)
