Nicholas Ray’s King of Kings (1961) is a firm depiction of the Biblical epic genre of film. It is also very much a product of the times in which it was made. Kings of Kings employed the cultural criticism, academic and technological advancements, and the emergence of youth culture to give an updated retelling of Cecile DeMille’s The King of Kings (1927). Right down to the title, Ray’s film invokes its forerunner, but is a significant deviation from it as well. Unique and pivotal to King of Kings is its historical-political focus, its concern for the subjective person, and a dramatically human portrayal of Jesus. Ray creates a Jesus of justice, morality, and love, though one that his contemporary’s and maybe even we do not understand. The historical nature and emphasis to the movie is the most dramatic and clear feature of the film. As such it is also the realm of most interest and importance in looking at this film. I will conclude with a few questions and some implications of Ray’s depiction of Jesus for theologies of justice.
History, Politics, Jesus, and The 60’s
King of Kings opens with a dramatic and sweeping image of the Roman occupation of Palestine. Red clad soldiers (a symbol of power throughout the movie) march in endless lines towards Jerusalem and the Temple located there. This is odd because it depicts events many years before the time of Jesus. For a Jesus film, the director has chosen to start quite a bit back from the beginning of his life. Fast-forward towards the time of Jesus and a similar scene depicts Pontius Pilate, later to figure prominently in the execution of Jesus, coming to Jerusalem. While on the way he is attacked by a band of Jewish rebels led by Barabbas. Ray, in these two scenes, has set the tone of the entire movie. There is a Jewish struggle for release from oppressive rule.
World War II has come to a close and by the sixties there is a rising consciousness of the Holocaust. The images of mass graves, burning bodies, and the tyrannical murder of the Jewish people is coming to the fore in post-war studies. The opening scenes of King of Kings clearly reflect this consciousness and concern. From images of mass graves to lines of Romans marching curiously similar to Nazi parades, Ray connects the social struggle of the ancient Jews to the present day political climate.
The sixties saw a major concern for political activism, cultural criticism, and historical evaluation. Biblical scholarship had been focusing on the history and culture of locale Palestine. This made possible many advances in understanding the dress, customs, and larger historical context in which the Biblical narrative is situated. Political activism and cultural criticism are also becoming mainstream at this time. Youth are questioning the roles, stereotypes, values, ideals, and motivations of older generations. The culture is one of great hope for change, firmly believing that one person can change the course of history.
Ray capitalizes on these trends in his opening scenes. The Gospel accounts are artistically placed in their historical context. The dress and equipment represented the best understandings of what the Roman legions actually carried. The costumes of the characters attempted to accurately reflect the clothing worn in the time period. Ray also focused the story on the politically charged nature of the times. The Gospel of Luke is the most important gospel to King of Kings because it has the most concern for narrative history. The movie may be said to be more of a presentation of first century Palestine, than a movie about Jesus.
Barabbas is introduced in the opening scenes, while we wait a good length of time for Jesus to arrive. The figures of Jesus and Barabbas are immediately juxtaposed. Both are seeking a dramatic change; Barabbas a change in social order through violent revolution and Jesus a spiritual revolution through peace. Barabbas’ peace and liberty comes only at the end of a sword and the beginning of self-rule free of the Romans. Jesus’ peace is an internal peace, the kingdom of God within, arrived at by the good moral life. As Jesus preaches in the Temple to gathered crowds, Barabbas stands outside leading a violent hoard through the streets. At the end of the movie Jesus is, of course, put to death and Barabbas is released. The resurrection is, though, a grand reversal, a demonstration that the way of peace and moral transformation is unconquerable, even by violent means.
The struggles of an emerging youth culture of political activism are firmly influential on Ray’s interpretation and presentation of the Jesus story. The miracles and divinity of Jesus is down played, or at least eclipsed by the moral teach and peaceful revolutionary of the human Jesus. The only extended scene featuring Jesus is the Sermon on the Mount. This is the pivotal ethical call of Jesus’ ministry and to Ray it is the ministry of Jesus. Ray also directed Rebel Without A Cause, which is also a peace of social commentary. Jesus is the rebel with a cause, the renewed spiritual vitality of a people. His power lies in words, love, and peace that will transform the person despite outward circumstances.
Oppression and the Nature of Evil
The depictions of oppression and evil produce an interesting commentary on how a noble people should endure suffering. On one hand there is the strong critique of Roman oppression through the direct oppression of Barabbas. On the other is a very indirect, even passive, Jesus. Jesus’ revolution is one of the spiritual person, not one of the community’s united resistance, even non-violent resistance.
There are two evils confronted in King of Kings, that of societal injustice and that of personal morality. Barabbas confronts the societal injustice and stands as a figure whose actions are associated with Judas and contrary to the will of God. Jesus, however, faces and defeats an internal evil. When Jesus is in the wilderness being tempted Satan is never depicted. There is a disembodied voice as if to suggest Jesus is not wrestling with personified evil from without, but rather an evil that is within. This is not stated, but implied by the slightly crazed look on Jesus’ face, his obvious thirst, and the use of mirages. Subtly, King of Kings, argues that the most important stand against evil is not the stand against a societal evil, but that of an internal moral struggle.
This seems to stand against the overarching them of the movie and its concern with politics and social activism. It is, however, the individual of exemplarily moral character who first conquers the demons within that truly stands for what is right.
I leave you then with a few questions and considerations. Given that Ray’s King of Kings is centrally concerned with social activism and politics, how does the portrayal of evil fit with this agenda? Should not Jesus be concerned with justice and oppose the Romans openly, even if non-violently? It would seem that one should openly resist this oppression, and indeed modern liberation theology would argue for active resistance against oppression. The majority of liberation theologians would reject violence, but non-violent resistance is a central political activity taken up by these thinkers. Ray’s Jesus is clearly not a Jesus of liberation theology. How then does this Jesus remain a Jesus of justice, love, and extreme moral integrity?
