Showing posts with label The King of Kings (1927). Show all posts
Showing posts with label The King of Kings (1927). Show all posts

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Two Marys’ of the New Testament as Portrayed in Film: Scriptural Confusion or Cinematic License

The name Mary is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Miriam or Marianne. It can mean wise woman or lady. It was used many times in the New Testament so it was apparently a popular name during that time. The focus of this blog will be on Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. How they are written about in scripture and how they are portrayed in films.
Gospel Scriptural References

The four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are the main sources of information that the Christian church has on the life or history of Jesus. There are theological disagreements on the historical accuracy of the Gospels since they were written by humans and ascribed as factual wittings of events. There is also debate on whether the ascribed writers were actual disciples or just attributed to these individuals, especially since these were oral stories that had been passed down in the church until they were written down fifty to seventy years after Christ death and resurrection. There is a belief that each of the Gospels where written to different audiences, giving a specific focus to different genres.

Even given all these factors, the Gospels not only mention many women but also give them prominent roles is extraordinary. Especially in a cultural period that women were seen less important than even slaves. Jewish men thanked God daily that they were not born as women. Greek philosophy was admired during that time. The Greek theory of dualism was fluent where everything had an equal and opposite other, negative and positive, women were placed in the negative category.

As the Gospels are our main source for knowledge of the life of Jesus, Christians use this as the litmus test for any other outside portrayal. So we begin our look at these two Marys in the parallel Gospels.

Mary the mother of Jesus

The book of Matthew begins with the birth of Jesus and the importance of Jesus’ mother Mary. Mary is throughout the beginning of the book of the Matthew 1-2. She is the mentioned as Jesus’ mother and Jesus’ other siblings in Matthew 13:55. Matthew then mentions Mary the mother of Jesus at the end of the book were she is present at the crucifixion and resurrection.
In Mark, Mary is mentioned in 6:3 to be Jesus mother and Jesus’ brother and sisters. She is then mentioned in Mark 15-16 at the crucifixion and resurrection. Mark is the shortest of all the Gospels.

In Luke, the book is more comprehensive in the story of Jesus’ life. Luke 1-2 is full of detailed information on Mary and Joseph’s call to be the parents of Jesus the Christ. This is where the connection of Mary and Elizabeth the mother of John the Baptist is told. Mary song is also detailed. The story that Jesus is taken to the temple and how not only Jesus is prophesized over but Mary too. Again, in chapter 24 Mary and women are at the resurrection and told the remaining disciples.

In John, Mary is fist mentioned at a wedding in John 2:1-11 that both she and Jesus attend; where she asks him to turn water into wine. This gives Mary and Jesus’ relations a different dynamic as maybe a center of her family and is respected by her adult son. She is then not mentioned again until John 19 and 20 when she is at the cross with other women and at the resurrection.

Mary Magdalene

Since there are many Marys that are mentioned in the Bible, we will only note the scriptures refer to Mary Magdalene, meaning that she was from the town/village of Magdala on the western side of the Sea of Galilee. This would be done to help narrow what Mary was associated to particular acts.

There are very few references to Mary Magdalene in scriptures. Many times, she is joined with Mary the mother of Jesus and other women. This would seem appropriate since women being alone with a man or men would be inappropriate outside of their family. She is also referred to as a financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples. She may have been looked at as a leader of the group of following women.

In Matthew and Mark, Mary Magdalene is not mentioned until she is at the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus with other women, Matthew 27:56; Matthew 2761; 28:1; Mark 15:40; 15:47; 16:1, 9.

In Luke 8:1-3 Mary Magdalene is the only time defined as possessed by demons~
After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of Herod's household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.(NRSV)

Again she is indicated as being at the cross and resurrection with the other women, Luke 24:10.
In the book of John Mary Magdalene is referred to by name at the crucifixion in John 19. She then is also at the resurrection and could be considered the first missionary. She meets the risen Jesus and runs to tell the disciples of the resurrected Jesus, John 20:1-18.

Film Representations of Mary the Mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene

This is where as a Christian if we were presented with only a cinema-graphic picture of these women we may be very confused with the written events in scripture. We do recognize that in writing many things are left out. Even in the Gospel of John 21: 25 he acknowledges this, “But there are also many other things that Jesus did; if every one of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (NRSV)
So we have to come to viewing films of the life of Jesus as not final authority but recognize it as an entertainment medium. Many times directors and writers will reinvent scenes of characters to fit their own creative view or increase cinematic drama.

Looking at three of the films that we have seen this semester let us see how these Marys have been portrayed.

King of Kings 1927

In this film, a silent film, the portrayal of Mary the Mother of Jesus is seen as virginal and holy. I am not sure that she is not in a scene that does not also have dove flying around. Her dress is very conservative, covered from head to toe. She seems to have a calming presence about her at all times. She is shown in other scenes with Jesus and his disciples that are not present in scriptures. Yet, as a women and the mother of God she is still portrayed in the background, but more holy than others women. She also is represented as having some female camaraderie with Mary Magdalene after her conversion as a follower of Jesus. This Mary has the alluded essences of what many would associate with the Mary of Catholicism.

Mary Magdalene in this film is portrayed so uniquely that I knew I needed to use this film as one of my examples. The film begins with Mary Magdalene as a main figure. She is portrayed as a well to do concubine associated with Judas Iscariot. She is scantily clad, for me surprisingly for this dated film, with heavy makeup and jewelry. She has her own entourage and servants, portrayed as wealthy and a concubine to many famous individuals. She has been given numerous gifts, even a set of zebras she uses for horses. She goes to seek out her wayward suitor Judas who is now following Jesus. She is appalled at being left. When she meets Jesus, she tries to sway him but just his presence affects her so that she begins to change. In a dramatic scene is exercised of seven demons, during which time she is changed. Her hair, clothes and jewels are transformed into a more conservative manner. This is the only movie we watched that actual had the scene of her healing, the only factual reference to her ailment in scripture. Mary Magdalene in now one of Jesus’ troupe and is seen with Mary Jesus’ mother and other women through the film.

Jesus of Montreal 1989

This foreign film is a more modern portrayal of Jesus. It is a little harder to associate who is who in the film because of this. The film is a portrayal of a reenacting of the passion play for a Catholic church. The ‘Jesus’ character, Daniel in the movie, is asked to gather a group of actors to freshen up the old rendition of the play. There is no mother of Jesus in this film but there is a mother figure, who has a young daughter. She portrays this in the friendship of the actors outside of the actual play rendition. This mother is nowhere near perfect as she is having a sexual relationship with the priest in the film. Yet, when the rest of the groups is around, she is the figure that makes sure they eat, is comfortable and is the caring mother character. She also builds a friendship with all the actors and they gather at her home, some evening living there. When the Jesus actor dies, she is there caring for him with the Mary Magdalene character. Even in the end, she is there to encourage carrying on his legacy of truth and justice.

The character that portrays the Mary Magdalene type is Mireille. Mary Magdalene is again portrayed as a sex object. She is an actress that does scantily clad rolls and is sexually involved with her director. The ‘Jesus’ character saves her from this to play in the Passion play. She moves in with the group and the mother figures home. She is called by Jesus (Daniel) to change her way of life and not to compromise herself. There remains a hint that she had some type of attraction to ‘Jesus’ more that platonic but nothing develops in the movie. She becomes friends with the mother character and is there at Jesus’ (Daniel’s) death. Her life as with all the actors or followers of Daniel is change by their experience, not only from the play but also from their friendship.

The Passion of the Christ 2004

As many know this film by Mel Gibson focuses on the last twelve hours of Jesus’ life yet has sprinkled throughout clips of previous events of his life. With Gibson being a Catholic, it is not surprising to see Mary Jesus’ mother as portrayed in a holy perfect light. She seems to be even dressed as a nun throughout the film. She is humble throughout and always in the background with Jesus and his disciples. She is portrayed as a loving mother supporting her son, knowing where his life will lead, to the cross. Yet, there is a wonderful scene of camaraderie with mother and son where he is building a table and she calls him to wash and eat. In the end, she is always there even watching the brutal scenes of his beating, even on hands and knees wiping up his splatter blood. She runs through the street with the disciple John and Mary Magdalene to follow Jesus to the cross. She never leaves his side. They watch his crucifixion, death and burial. The Marys both go to the find to Jesus is risen. She is a devoted mother to the end. One that really cannot compare to anyone human today. No mother I know could mental stand to see such horror happen to their child. This Mary has something more. Some type of superhuman ability to stand this atrocity.

Mary Magdalene is a staunch follower of Jesus and friend to Mary his mother. Here she is portrayed in roles that were not ascribed to her in scripture. An adulterous and the women with the alabaster jar of oil to wash Jesus’ feet. As a follower of Jesus, her clothes and actions become more subdued. She is now a dedicated disciple of Jesus and is seen with His mother throughout his final hours.

Women seem to be more prominent in the film if nothing but as supporters and staunch followers even when many of the disciples deserted Jesus.

Conclusion

Most of the films we have watched have taken cinematic license when portraying many of the scenes in the films compared to the scriptural writings. Yet, it seems that the most dramatic license taken is with the character of Mary Magdalene. She is portrayed as an adulterous woman in almost every film even thought scriptures never say this about her.

As filmgoers, we are to always recognize first and for most, these films are for entertainment value and made for economic profit. If one is seeking personal theological enlightenment, one needs to turn back to the scripture and prayer.

Monday, April 18, 2011

The Cleansing of The Temple

My focus aspect for the semester has been the Cleaning of the Temple. The three films that I have chosen to analyze in regards to my focus aspect are Cecil B. DeMille’s silent Film King of Kings, Norman Jewison’s film of Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s’ Rock Opera Jesus Christ Superstar, and Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ. Each of these films takes a unique look at this memorable scene from the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. I also believe that the filmmakers in each of these three films took this scene seriously and found it to be a crucial part of both their film and the way that they portrayed Christ as a person and as the savior of humanity.

Cecil B. DeMille’s King of Kings
DeMille’s Depiction of Christ and the Cleansing of the Temple did not sit well with me initially. I felt like Jesus looked weak and effeminate in the scene. He seemed disengaged and uninterested in what was really happening. This did not seem to me to be the Jesus that I knew. He looked old, pasty, and frail. I questioned both DeMille’s casting and his directing of the scene. I felt as though my view of DeMille’s depiction of Jesus was tainted from this scene. While I liked the gentle way that he treated the adulterous woman in the scene before I expected to see him respond in a stronger way to the moneychangers in the temple. When I saw him pick up the leather whip I expected to see him use it but he only held it. He said all the write words but his actions didn’t seem strong enough to match his strong words.
It is however interesting to look at DeMille’s explanation for his depiction “The slightest trace of overacting would have ruined it... 
He simply picked up a leather thong and wrapped one end of it around his hand, but with such authority that it was entirely believable when the money-changers fled in confusion from a Christ whose anger was the more terrible because so perfectly
 controlled”[1] This is very interesting to think about this idea that his anger was the more terrible because so perfectly
 controlled. Clearly, more than entertainment was in the mind of DeMille. It would appear that controlled anger was very much a part of his Christology. This certainly makes me look at how DeMille’s Jesus is depicted in other scenes in the film.
Norman Jewison’s film of Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s’ Rock Opera Jesus Christ Superstar
Jesus Christ Superstar has always been one of my favorite films and musicals. I enjoy the way that Jesus is depicted through both Jewison’s direction and Ted Neely’s acting.
It is clear in this depiction that the director holds one belief and wants the view to have a clear feeling that Jesus believed in justice. This is evident when Jesus did the cleansing of the temple; he was showing justice since he did not want people disrespecting the house of God or being taken advantage of.
While I found this depiction of Jesus as a whole in the film to be a bit lacking a felt like he was strong and well played in the Cleaning of the Temple. In the rest of the film he seems like and angsty teenager who is lost in his own skin and upset with his parents. While I do think that is in many ways Jesus is represented in the Gospels it just did not work for me on the screen. I felt like in the Temple scene Jesus was strong out of most of the scenes in the films he seems to understand his mission here more.

Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ
In the Last Temptation of Christ we see a downright angry Jesus he takes issue with everything that is going on and quite simply Jesus goes on a rampage. In this depiction of the Cleansing of the temple Jesus becomes so angry and is so violent that as I viewer I almost began to lose some of my understanding that I was watching Christ being depicted. He is sweating, struggling, and so emotional that this scene almost depicts him as too human. Knowing that one of Scorsese’s goals was to wrestle with the two natures of Jesus, both human and divine, I understand this added dose of humanity in the scene it just seems to put me as a viewer off.
Another part that I found myself critical of in this depiction was all of the dialogue between Jesus and the temple leaders. It seemed to me that there was quite a bit added he and much of it I didn’t even feel was needed. This added dialogue seemed to push the depiction of Jesus too far and make me question how he was even able to walk out of there alive after the things he said. It is clear that Scorsese was aware of this and it seems intentional as the disciples almost escort Jesus out before he says anything more. While I liked the look of this scene it just seemed to over the top for me to really connect with.

Conclusions
Out of the three films depictions of the cleaning of the temple I fell that I connected most with the Jesus Christ Superstar depiction. What was interesting to me however was how over the course of the semester I have become fonder of the King of Kings depiction. There does seem to be something to be said for DeMille’s idea of a controlled anger in his portrayal of Jesus Christ. All of the films makers seemed to so a respect for this scene and its importance and all seemed to make it a key part of their films. I believe that it would be hard for anyone’s view of their depictions of Jesus not to be affected by how he is portrayed in the Cleansing of the Temple in each of these films.

[1] Donald Hayne, ed., The Autobiography of Cecil B. DeMille (New York: Garland Publishing, 1985), p. 277

The Many Temptations of Christ: The Temptation of Jesus in Film

The temptation of Jesus, as recorded in Matthew 4, Mark 1, and Luke 4, marks the first activity of Jesus ministry in the Synoptic Gospels. Directly after his baptism, Jesus is driven by the Spirit into the wilderness and is tempted there by the Devil/Satan (depending on translation). This story has been popular material for the film industry and interpretations of Jesus on film. Each Gospel writer and each film director construes this story differently as it begins to shape who Jesus is and what Jesus is about. I would like to suggest that through the many temptations of Jesus as depicted in scripture and film, a variety of Jesuses emerge. The way in which Jesus is tempted and the way in which Jesus responds is integral to the way in which the film identifies Jesus and his mission.
To demonstrate this I will cover three films: The Passion of the Christ (2004), The Gospel According to Saint Matthew (1964), and The King of Kings (1927). I will avoid any in-depth discussion of the Gospel portrayals of Jesus’ temptation because this will take us far from the topic at hand. Suffice it to say that while similar, the accounts are not identical. While the Jesus they present is similarly not identical, their understanding is much more similar than the three films I will discuss here.
The Passion of the Christ
The passion of the Christ follows John’s gospel closely (which has no temptation of Jesus) and is itself a presentation of Jesus’ final hours before the crucifixion; it would seem this is an odd place to begin a discussion on the temptation of Jesus. The film contains not direct scene of Jesus’ temptation as recorded in the synoptics, but there is a highly similar scene in the garden of Gethsemane. This scene is essential a ‘temptation replacement,’ or a dramatic re-imagining of the way Jesus ways tempted throughout his ministry and final hours.
The scene opens with low but ominous music, a downtrodden, suffering Jesus, and a misty creepy feel. Here Jesus is praying in the Gospel fashion to avoid the crucifixion, yet in the end proclaims to fulfill God’s will. In the midst of this prayer a cloaked, androgynous figure interjects questioning Jesus as to whether he believes he can bear the weight of humanity’s sin. Jesus does not directly responds but prays for God’s protection. Satan again interjects saying it is impossible. Jesus again appeals to God, saying it is possible through God’s will. Satan responds by questioning Jesus’ identity. Then a snake slithers from Satan’s feet and as it is about to strike, is crushed by Jesus’ foot and Satan disappears.
This is clearly not a Biblical account but does have multiple attestations in the visions of medieval mystics. So Mel Gibson’s Jesus is more of a Jesus of the medieval mystic than a Jesus of scripture. In this scene Jesus is also seen as carrying humanity’s sin, suffering under the load of sin and what he must do, and in a high stakes battle of identity and mission with Satan. Jesus is here dramatically human in his suffering, yet divine in his will to persist. Mel Gibson’s Jesus is a suffering Jesus, yet triumphant Jesus. A Jesus riveted with pain, yet finally dedicated to the task before him. In moving the temptation of Jesus into the garden is displays Gibson’s focus on the role of Jesus in the divine-human drama of sin and redemption. The temptation of Jesus, while certainly contributing to the identity of Jesus, serves here to reinforce his role as sasvior more than his identity as a person.
The Gospel According To Saint Matthew
Pasolini’s version of the temptation is a much more literal interpretation of the Biblical text. All of the dialogue is directly from the Gospel of Matthew, as is the progression of the scene. Jesus is a first alone and then approached by Satan. The temptations of food, testing God, and power over the world all come one after another. After being told to leave Satan looks sad and shuffles away. Throughout the entire scene Jesus is rather dispassionate and seems very unconcerned at the appearance of Satan. At most Satan was a minor inconvenience of his alone time in the wilderness. There is no hint of Jesus being hungry or in anyway worse for the wear after forty days in the desert.
This presentation is interesting because Pasolini presents a principally human Jesus. Throughout the film Jesus is seen in the grim and struggle of the lower working class. His temptation occurs in the same harsh conditions. Jesus responds with no significant strength or Godly response. Jesus is a human like any other human, simply a strongly moral and unwavering in his convictions. In Pasolini’s presentation of Jesus the viewer is invited to join with Jesus and resist the forces of evil and oppression just as Jesus had. Jesus is primarily a teacher, and his action stand as instruction as well, ‘go and do likewise.’ In this rendition of the temptation of Jesus we are told to resist gratifying our sensuous appetites, lust for power and need to control. Instead, we are to join Jesus in opposition to institutions of power and a recognition that God is with the poor and marginalized.
The King of Kings
The King of Kings has a remarkable portrayal of Jesus’ temptation; there is none. Cecil DeMille presents a passively divine Jesus where there is almost no passion in any of his activities. DeMille’s Jesus is almost completely divine and so there is no temptation, Jesus is beyond temptation. Persons are transfixed and transformed by Jesus’ presence. Of course De Mille does not come out in say this in the film, it is implicitly demonstrated throughout the film.
I Satan had appeared to Jesus one could imagine that he would be immediately changed by Jesus presence. Mary Magdalene, portrayed as licentious and loose, is immediately cleansed of her evil and spurned on to modesty simply by meeting eyes with Jesus. Satan has no chance against De Mille’s Jesus, no temptation is possible for the Son of God.
Conclusion
Three different films have produced three different Jesuses with three different treatments of the temptation. The Passion had a temptation, which displayed more about Jesus’ role as a suffering savior than about him as a person. Pasolini’s Jesus was of a morally upright and unshakable, very human Jesus. DeMille presented an entirely divine Jesus without temptation. Many scenes could be analyzed to determine how Jesus is portrayed, the temptation scene is one of many ways to go about this project. It is inevitable that different interpretations of Jesus would be evidenced by the directors’ approaches to the temptation scene. Who is Jesus in this film? Look at the temptation, or its absence, its bound to give you a clue.