Cruciflicks: The Gospel of John receives mixed reviews from secular critics

By Matt Kelemen

When I was a pre-adolescent, my family attended a Reformed church in New York that took a fairly progressive approach to Christianity. There was no fire-and-brimstone preaching; the emphasis was on the teachings of Jesus Christ rather than literal interpretations of Old and New Testaments. By the time a child reached the age of 7 or 8, he or she was presented with the Good News Bible, subtitled Today's English Version. It was a translation generated by the American Bible Society, first published in its entirety in 1976 with a stated purpose: "To state clearly and accurately the meaning of the original texts in words and forms that are widely accepted by people who use English as a form of communication."

As intended, the books were presented in a "standard, everyday, natural form of English," ostensibly from the original texts. The idea was to overcome the obtuseness of traditional Old English translations, and perhaps to correct errors that had been made during nearly 2,000 years of translations. In History of the World: Part I, Mel Brooks satirized the story of Moses coming down from the mountain with tablets newly inscribed with the original commandments. "I bring you these 15 ... !" shouted Brooks before stumbling and shattering one of the tablets on the rocks beneath him. "Oy. Ten! Ten Commandments!"

Heady stuff for an 8-year-old. Getting exposed to the fact that the Bible was translated many times over, that the original meaning of much of the Bible has been in effect lost in translation due to long-lost understanding of cultural and historical contexts, was a mind-blower. What if a translator made an arbitrary decision to change the meaning of something? What if there were corrupt individuals involved in the process of translation, spinning the meaning at the behest of the powers-that-be?

The portrayal of Jesus in the modern film era has always been fraught with problems, and criticisms are often leveled at the choice to cast a Christ with European features. Adhering to audience expectations of a leading man, Nicholas Ray directed blue-eyed Anglo Jeffrey Hunter (John Wayne's whipping boy Martin Pawley in The Searchers) in 1961's King of Kings. Serene Swede Max von Sydow looked odd in 1965's The Greatest Story Ever Told and was totally outshined by Charlton Heston's John the Baptist (although von Sydow's performance was better than Hunter's). Robert Powell looked like he stepped right out of a Renaissance painting in the Franco Zeffirelli-directed 1977 television series "Jesus of Nazareth" (which was written by Anthony Burgess of A Clockwork Orange fame), as did Brian Deacon in 1979's Jesus, which was based on the Gospel of Luke. Willem Dafoe humanized a psychologically suffering savior in 1988's The Last Temptation of Christ, but that had more to do with Scorcese's skillful adaptation of Nikos Kazantzakis' novel that Dafoe's performance. It was Kazantzakis, the author of Zorba the Greek, who imagined a historical Christ tormented by the knowledge of his fate, creating art out of blasphemy.

The Gospel of John, which opens this week in Las Vegas, and Mel Gibson's upcoming Passion of the Christ make attempts at authenticity, albeit in vastly different ways. The Passion focuses on the final hours of Jesus' life, leading up to the crucifixion. The film's U.S. distributor has kept a tight lid on publicity material, although the film has been screened for numerous religious leaders. Gibson's went "method," filming in period languages (Aramaic, Latin) and unsparingly depicting the brutal torture and death of Christ. Gibson has also taken some flack for the film's treatment of Jews. More accurately, some religious leaders are concerned about the anti-Semitism that could result from the portrayal of Jewish leaders as responsible for Christ's death.

On the flipside is The Gospel of John, an attempt to make a literal adaptation to the fourth book of the New Testament as it appears in the Good News version. The Gospel made a big splash in September at the Toronto Film Festival, according to the film's publicists and various testimonials from people in attendance. While the film reportedly sold out at its festival screening and has been heaped with praise from the religious factions, it has received mixed reviews in the secular press -- and with good reason.

Despite claims to the contrary, The Gospel does come off as a three-hour long Sunday School lesson. As a cinematic effort, and an attempt to make a definitive realization of a historical and religious document, it is impressive. But as a film, the absolute adherence to a literal translation of the New Testament book that dealt with the divinity of Christ hurts. While Henry Ian Cusick as Jesus is interesting from a physical perspective (dark hair, dark eyes, possibly Roman features), his Christ seems tailored for the stage rather than the screen. His constant mile-wide smile and exaggerated enunciation seem influenced by his theatrical background. (Cusick has some film and television credits, but has worked extensively in theater.) The other actors give mostly unmemorable performances, the costumes seem like they came out of a church basement -- although apparently were the result of painstaking research -- and director Philip Saville seems to have difficulty directing crowds. Christopher Plummer provides gratuitous narration, keeping the film firmly in documentary territory. At 180 minutes, it seems as if the word-for-word adaptation idea sounded good in theory, but lost something in execution.

Still, the film seems to be striking a chord with audiences interested in its spiritual aspects, although it has received mixed reviews. "Clearly it's playing to an audience," says producer Garth Drabinsky. "We continue to get very strong reviews from both the religious world and the secular. There are some more controversial reviews from the secular world when you're dealing with writers who are not churchgoers, who are not Gnostic if you will. By and large, we've had some spectacular things written about this picture, from Variety in Los Angeles to the Cleveland Enquirer."

The filmmakers plan to turn their attention to the Old Testament next, according to Drabinsky, and plans are in the works to adapt the story of King David from Samuel 1 and Samuel 2. Whether they will repeat the relative success of The Gospel of John remains to be seen. The Gospel grossed $98,000 in its opening week, with the total gross adding up to $3 million to date. That may be chump change for average film with a limited release schedule, but for a faith-based feature playing alongside secular films, it can be considered a miracle.

Into thin air

The story of Joe Simpson and Simon Yates doesn't fall far short of a miracle either. The two mountain climbers at the center of Touching the Void had climbed to the summit of the Siula Grande in the Peruvian Andes in 1985, before Simpson fell and broke his leg on the way down, providing the basis for a best-selling book and director Kevin McDonald's subsequent adaptation.

McDonald introduces us to Simpson first, obviously indicating that he survived. But he frames Simpson in a tight close-up, enhancing the mystery of whether he survived fully intact. As Simpson recalls, a friend of theirs had recommended the particular destination. The two decided to climb "Alpine-style" -- the choice of purists that requires only a backpack, the most essential of supplies, and a lifeline to your partner. "There is no margin for error," says Simpson. "If you get badly hurt, you'll probably die."

From there, McDonald recreates the climb with actors Brenden Mackey and Nicholas Aaron in the roles of Simpson and Yates, respectively. What at first seems like a documentary suited for the Discovery Channel becomes something transcendent when McDonald aims his lens at the majestic, wind-carved summit, which we see as the climbers see it. Triumph turns to tragedy when Simpson slips on the way down and breaks his leg. Yates lowers him down the slope 300 painful feet at a time, until Simpson falls again, dangling helplessly over a crevasse. With Simpson out of sight, and no clear way to save him, Yates makes the agonizing decision to cut the rope and save himself.

McDonald's success lies in the empathy he's able to create. He makes you see and experience the climb, the accident and its aftermath. The mountain becomes a character itself, alternately beautiful, forbidding and horrifying, depending on the state of mind of the climbers. Blinding snowstorms and clear blue stillness trade places rapidly, contrasting with Simpson's persistent struggle for survival. But the sense of dread he feels when stuck in the crevasse is the most palpable shared feeling of the film.

"I really did think there was no God," he recalls. "When you die, you die. There is no afterlife. Nothing."

Nothing but the Void.

The Gospel of John and Touching the Void open Feb. 13.