alb-26920 I am disappointed in this film. I only made it through 37 minutes before shutting it off. I (reasonably) enjoyed The Bible miniseries and had high hopes for this movie, but they took way too much liberty with it. I understand about wanting to make it more in line with what his life may have been like and making Him more relatable to us, but this was too much liberty. They added words, and actions and just made it disappointing. Honestly, I'm surprised we sell it at the Christian store I work at.

emgiezie I watched this movie in the cinema without having seen the series The Bible first. If I had, I would have saved myself the trouble of watching it in the big screen.Though I'm not a biblical scholar and have not mastered the books on Jesus' life, what I do know I can safely say are not consistent with what I saw in this movie. The script is poorly written, the depiction of the biblical characters are shallow and the acting is not very good. Also, one of the main problems I have of this movie is that Diogo Morgado is not how Jesus is supposed to look like. His features are not Jewish-like. The whole time I was watching, I was thinking he was a beautiful model doing a photoshoot set in historical times. Also, his weight and musculature during the crucifixion scene was laughable. I wouldn't believe that a person who was frequently fasting, carried a cross and suffered torture looked like he was in the pink of health.In short, not something I would recommend.

jasonpachar "The Word was first, the Word present to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God, in readiness for God from day one." John 1:1 (MSG) When the Father God made creation He said that man should not be alone. Man became flesh. Flesh became the Word. The Word became flesh and blood through the Father's only begotten Son. He walked among us as one of us preaching and teaching the Word of His Father. When He became full of stature, Jesus became the way for us to live. We have sinned, but He came to this earth to take that sin away with the washing of His blood. This is not a movie review, this is a story, a gospel in the making for 2,000 years. No thing can compare to the vastness of knowing who this man was, is and forever to come. The Jews were seeking a king, they got the Son of God.

brandonleewainscott I liked it. It did have my issues. For example, he calls Peter by that name right off, rather than Simon. Big issue. The name was changed so that Peter could be called "rock" to signify his deep faith as the Fathers teach us.Also the trial thing before Pilate is way off. And Pilate, who is a saint in the Orthodox tradition (he converted)is depicted too harshly. True, he was harsh before he converted, but in the case of Christ's Passion, he was mild, trying to avoid punishing him so far as possible. They depicted his wife, Claudia (St. Claudia) rather well, though not as clearly as they could have. Pilate seemed a mix of cruel and more kind. Gibson did a good job of balancing it out. Likely because he researched the oral traditions about Pilate and Claudia, who converted. There are a few accounts, generally positive, of this. The main point is that the whole trial is way off. It does not give the full account, and he was tried in private in this movie. Pilate asked the whole "what is truth" in some inner place in his palace. Totally off. How did the Gospel writers know this happened then? They wrote based on what they saw, which is why their are small discrepancies in the Gospel accounts, though yes they were guided by the Holy Spirit, etc.Then there is the Nicodemus thing. It's inaccurate how they depict his going to Jesus. He came a NIGHT according to St John, not day like in the film.Anyway, the good points. A thing many may not notice, but Mary is depicted in blue according the Catholic tradition--look at Marian art and notice this. Blue signifies her purity. Also, the bread and wine clearly are represented as literal body and blood.Some have said this is hippy love dovey. I do not think so. Maybe because they do not know the understanding of Christ according to the one, holy, catholic and apostolic tradition, but a fundamentalist one. They might do well to read the compassionate Desert Fathers, who though they lived strict lives, taught gentleness and love. There are many doctrinal accuracies in this movie first of all that the non-Christian watcher may not notice. Or the Protestant perhaps, that is someone who has no understanding of the Fathers of the Church. I do not see how Jesus was some hippy in this movie. I just do not see it. I think he is depicted accurately. I was very happy to see that this movie was not full of vile heresy. Hollywood's Jesus is often, well....Anyway, aside from the errors of Scripture on a superficial level, the substance of the Gospel and doctrine are followed. It is clearly a very Roman Catholic leaning film. Maybe that is why some Christians do not like it.