Son of God (2014) Online

Jumps are an absolute sin in cinema! That movie has quite a few of them. The music sounds ripped off from "I am" in "music inspired by the story" album. The acting is not at all convincing. This movie was released in 2014! I mean seriously? Jesus of Nazareth was better than that AND IT WAS RELEASED IN 1977! Special effects could be done by Arabs 20 years ago, and I hate Arabic cinema, it is truly awful.

About the story itself... Well, it goes against the bible itself!

-Every visitation from the angel looks like some kind of hypnotism. -Joseph's nightmare is so wrong -The call of Peter was way off. Why does Jesus call him peter right then anyways? Why aren't any other disciples there? -There are quite a few time line mistakes. I mean... Paul's conversion 40 days after the resurrection for instance. For that to happen, Paul must be known as a persecutor, the disciples must be filled with the Holy Spirit, and must have started preaching and converting people for quite a while, and have started reaching out to far away places. Damascus is not right next to Jerusalem you know. -John the baptist's story is wrong. Way off.

The whole story felt like a whole Jewish plot to take the blame away from Jewish leaders and put it on the Romans. Judas, the son of perdition, is not the son of perdition anymore. He is a good guy that was tricked by religious leaders for the sake of the nation. The leaders are against Jesus not because of the challenge He poses to their authority, but because of political tension with the Romans.

All miracles and acts of love during Jesus' time on earth have been removed. And the one he does looks like Disney witchcraft. In the movie, His prayer in the garden was not to follow the father's plan, but to be spared, and that prayer was rejected basically. Jesus feels like a helpless peaceful dude at the hands of religious leaders forced to act as they do because of oppression. All key phrases in the bible have been removed. In communion, he just says he is gonna die, then "this is my body. This is my blood." I mean, nothing else, no proclamation, all places where he was shown as the son of God were removed. Except for one instance: The trial (too cliché).

This movie is also trying too hard to please the Jews, focusing on feasts, rituals and such. Poor threatened guys can't take much more, especially when Jesus threatens to destroy the temple, by "jokingly" saying that no stone will remain upon the other to a little girl.

There are so many details wrong, so many core principles that were twisted! The whole story looks like what happened could be a machinery by Jesus.

I get angry thinking about this movie because people who watch it without reading the Bible will have a wrong picture of Jesus, of the father, of the bible, of Christianity. It is like all real contact between Jesus and the Father was cut off. Jesus became a helpless but really clever poor man who relied on supporters to avoid death, until a point where it became too much.

Too many places where it tries to copy the passion of the Christ but fails epically.

This movie is not worth watching! Unless you are a Jew or engaged in freemasonry and need consolation after "the passion of the Christ" or really want to get people lost. It adds nothing to cinema, to religion, to entertainment, or anything else.

For those who are expecting a repeat of the Mel Gibson movie, then prepare to be disappointed ... or pleasantly surprised. This movie is the sanitized version of the Gibson extravaganza. It is the movie that Gibson would have made if he had decided to ease off on the gratuitous depictions of violence. Depicting violence in a movie about Christ is unavoidable; it is part of the story. The violence has to be shown. The question is: how, without the violence itself becoming the main theme? This movie sticks to the story about Jesus; the violence is a part of the story. He is beaten, mocked, scorned, discredited, tortured, crucified and murdered. The story is told in its entirety. Yet, the director succeeds in telling the story in a straightforward non-sensationalist manner. By emphasizing Christ's humanity he brings the audience into the story. Regardless of your religious beliefs, one can relate to Jesus, his ministry and what he is trying to accomplish. His actions are plausible and understandable. His preaching is simple, sensible and comprehensible. His suffering and anguish is pitiful; his resurrection miraculous. Here the movie is strongest. Unlike the Gibson film, the resurrection is given full treatment and concludes the movie on a positive note, which is appropriate. The story of Jesus Christ requires no embellishment; it speaks for itself. Jesus was born, conducted his ministry, was betrayed, and was sacrificed. This is how the story is depicted in this movie. What more should anyone expect?

In case you don't know, "Son of God" is a spin-off of the successful History Channel mini-series, "The Bible." The movie was filmed at the same time as the show. In fact, it's the extended footage of the Jesus section of the series. But there was a reason all of that footage was cut. If it wasn't good enough for television, how can this possibly be good enough for the cinema?

Well, it's not. This movie is a bore. With an unnecessary 138 minute run-time, the film drags through dialogue delivered at a pace slow enough for the slothful to keep up. Even then the script isn't interesting. The selections of the gospel that get quoted are mercilessly butchered. And that's another thing, if not the most important criticism of a movie of this caliber -- the filmmakers had no respect for the source material.

The story misses on minor and major elements. Anyone with anything better than a felt-board understanding of Sunday school Bible stories will be able to identify the inaccuracies. And they are many: from theology to dialogue to locations to the people involved and the list goes on. If the filmmakers don't care for even simple and easy details, how can we believe that they care about the more complicated matters addressed by the gospel of Jesus Christ? Sadly, they don't.

Truth be told, creators Roma Downey and Mark Burnett are New Age believers. They soak up multiple forms of paganism, mysticism, and spirituality -- like a lot of celebrities do. It doesn't take more than a little bit of Googling to know what any celebrity believes. Yet the American church has been duped into promoting this trite, vapid representation of the Bible to make the Downey/Burnett couplehood a fishing boat-load of cash.

It's no surprise that Joel Osteen, K-Love, T.D. Jakes, and Rick Warren gobbled this thing right up. But Mark Driscoll, Louie Giglio, Focus On the Family, Liberty University, and the Women of Faith conferences should have done their research and known better. "Oh, she was in 'Touched By an Angel' and he made 'Survivor' and they claim to be Christians and God told them to make this! Let's promote the hell out of it!"

The Jesus portrayed in "Son of God" is not the Jesus of the Bible. In the vein of the film being just downright boring, Diogo Morgado puts forth one of the worst depictions of Jesus I've ever seen. He's pretty passionless, as is the rest of the disciples and the attitudes of the crowds who follow him. The climax and resolution of the story don't resonate because the previous hundred minutes of the movie haven't given us any reason to care.

Whether you're arguing from a theological standpoint, or just as a movie-lover, the film is devoid of content. It's worthless. There's nothing redeemable about this film. Save the money, save the time. And for heaven's sake, know your Bible. As long as the church is out there ready to promote anything with the word "God" on it, we're going to get horrible material like this.

Wowsers! If you're interested in a TV movie on the big screen than this is the movie for you. Featuring a Portuguese actor playing Jesus (because Son of God forbid that an actual Middle Easterner played Jesus in a Jesus movie, lest the Faithful go wild) it is literally the Jesus part of The Bible miniseries that played on cable last year with some extra scenes. The production values are exactly what you'd expect for a TV movie - horrible.

They were hoping for a Passion of the Christ like hit, but the movie is almost gone from theaters and it's not even Easter. Ticket sales fell 61% in it's second week , even though it expanded into more theaters.

If you want a good movie about Jesus, Passion of the Christ is where it's at.

I do have to take exception with the reviews that declare this movie 'boring' because it didn't go all out with special effects – or quote entire passages of the Bible. I thought that this movie was trying to portray a humble man who was simply going about the business of living out his destiny. Which is exactly who Jesus was. I found it refreshing not to have a slam-bang all-out special effects, miracle exploding on the screen, drama-in-you-face version of this life. The important points were there. In fact, just the important moments and quotes that were needed and wanted. I kept thinking as I'm watching, how could anyone have doubts about this Son of God when it was all such a life as usual, normal people time and yet….and yet…here we are 2014 years later, and this is still the most important person who ever walked on this earth. And everyone knows His name and what He did and who He was. No. This movie was precisely what it needed to be and no more. I took extra tissue, but still it wasn't enough. Watching the end of the earthly life of My Lord was so painful, so heart-rending that, indeed, I cried as much as I feared I would. Maybe more.

This movie is an embarrassment. A wimpy, insecure Jesus spends two hours wandering around in a long, hippy-esque robe, hitting the high points of the Gospels and not even getting them right! I was mentally correcting Jesus the entire film, as only half the quote would be correct: The "Our Father" (you know, the quintessential Christian prayer...) left out the final line: "lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil." Not surprising, as evil was a completely non-existent theme in this movie about Christ- Who came to save us from sin and evil. Kinda a huge deal that was totally skipped over. Most striking to me of all was that you never sensed that Christ had a Presence. He seemed like a total wimp. And yet in His time, the people said, "What manner of man is this, that even the waves and sea obey Him?" Christ was strong, and His presence was compelling: men left family and livelihood and followed Him, such was the force of His personality. The Jesus of Son of God- honestly, I wouldn't even want to grab a beer with Him, much less be crucified upside down rather than denounce my faith in Him (Peter's death). Bottom line: if you are a practicing Christian and/or very familiar with the New Testament, don't go. The constant misquoting/leaving out key portions/ totally missing the entire point of a dialogue will drive you batty. If you're not Christian, definitely don't go. It's embarrassing to us Christians.

I've always been fascinated by people who write historical fiction and fan fiction. I like the idea of taking either characters from history or established characters of fiction, and creating new stories or extended back-stories about them. It's the creative license granted to writers that allows them to use their imagination to conjure up new stories. It breaks my heart to say Son of God might as well be historical fiction.

I premise everything by saying I am by no means a Biblical scholar. I am proud of how far I have come in my faith journey having read the Bible more in the last three years than I had in all my time previous to that. Furthermore, I am light-years away from being where I'd like to be in terms of being versed in Scripture, and every day I discover something new and different about the Good Book. That being said, it was surprising to me how much I knew and recalled about the story of Jesus. In the context of viewing the film, I found myself questioning lots of points along the way.

The movie begins with a voice over. The narrator is John, author of one of the four gospels. From that moment on, I assumed - and maybe this is where I went wrong - the movie is a portrayal of Jesus' life as told by the Book of John. Not exactly.

For starters, there are changes in chronology from the movie to the Gospel of John. Jesus going to Jerusalem and chasing out the merchants occurs early in John (John 2:13-21), but in the movie, that scene is presented much later. The movie also omits what I consider to be major moments in the life of Jesus, such as the performance of His first miracle at the Wedding in Cana, and the testimony of John the Baptist.

Another example: In the movie, Jesus learns of Lazarus' death, is taken to his tomb, whereupon He enters the tomb, declares to Lazarus, "I am the Resurrection," and brings Lazarus back to life. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus declaration about being the Resurrection was made to Martha (John 11:25), and Jesus never entered the tomb of Lazarus. Instead, He called out to Lazarus from outside the tomb, "Lazarus, come out!" (John 11:43).

The arrest of Jesus gets overly complicated if we're again expecting the movie to be told from the perspective of John. When they come to arrest Jesus, Peter lashes out, grabs a sword, and slices off the ear of one of the high priest's servant. In the movie, Jesus tells Peter, "He who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Jesus then proceeds to heal the ear of the servant. Biblically speaking, this did happen. However, the matter of the sword is accounted in the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 26:52), and the healing of the ear in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 22:51). John's telling of the arrest of Jesus is completely different.

Pivotal in the story of Jesus' arrest is Peter's denial of Jesus. We all know the story: Peter declares his loyalty to Jesus, a loyalty for which he is willing to die. Jesus replies, ""Die for me? I tell you the truth, Peter—before the rooster crows tomorrow morning, you will deny three times that you even know me." (John 13:38). Peter did go on to deny Jesus three times, with a time gap between the first and second denials. In the movie, Jesus tells Peter he will deny Him 'before the sun comes up tomorrow'. In the next scene, it's already daylight, and Peter goes on to deny Jesus in one, quick, thirty second scene.

One final criticism is the portrayal of Pontius Pilate as a blood- lusting, brutal, and barbaric governor who couldn't care less about the Jewish people he was governing. Growing up, I only knew of Pilate as the reluctant one who did not want to condemn Jesus to death. The phrase "I wash my hands of this" is derived from Pilate's reluctance as accounted in Matthew 27:24. The writers of the movie chose to portray Pilate as an over-the-top and cruel prefect with only selfish intentions and ambitions. To make matter's worse, the film makes the character of Pilate's wife a somewhat pivotal figure. She's mentioned in scripture only once (Matthew 27:19) and not by name. In the film, she has a recurring presence that is based solely on the imaginative interpretation of the screenwriter.

This brings us back to the issue of creative license. I understand many of my points can easily be dismissed as nitpicking. As I discussed the movie with my friends, they brought up valid points about the positive message of the film and how Jesus is portrayed as loving and courageous. I get that, and I agree the film has its merits. However, my concern is that in the end, the movie is deceiving anyone who doesn't know Jesus and confusing those who do.

Taking creative liberties with former presidents or characters from a vampire series is wholly inconsequential. We the audience understand it is fiction. As followers of Christ, however, we believe God's Word to be the living truth, and I recoil at the idea of re-writing the gospels for the sake of theatrical gain. What's worse, there's no need to do it. The story of Jesus is a beautiful and inspiring story. What the producers of this film have done is, instead, to present Jesus in a cartoonish manner. The writing comes across as if someone put together the script not with a Bible in hand, but rather with a series of Cliff's Notes of the four gospels.

"I am the way, the truth, and the life." (John 14:6). Those are Jesus' own words. When telling His story, it's my personal opinion that is should be as close to the truth as possible.

Since so many so-called "Christians" are reviewing this movie and ripping it to shreds, I thought I should write a review to give a more balanced opinion. There will be spoilers in my review, so let me just start by saying that it was entertaining and it had its moments. If you are the kind of Christian who thinks that "Only the King James Version" of the Bible is correct, or anybody else who doggedly clings to their own "Traditions" then do not go see it, this movie is not for you.

The movie is, however, for the masses of people who have never heard of Jesus, or who have only heard about Jesus, but they've never read the Bible. About half the material in the movie comes from quotes from the Bible, sometimes juxtaposed around so they are not correct in a strict temporal sense (as most of us would put things in some timeline sense anyway) but it's alright, I won't fault the movie makers for that. The point is they put all that material in there and tried to get quotes accurate, whether they be from King James, or other translations is somewhat beside the point. Some are a bit liberal, and there a few minor issues with other claims made in the movie.

What else they threw in, generally, is the historical struggle between the Jews of Judea with the Romans at the time of the historical Jesus. My opinion is they did a credible job of adding drama and historical fiction (extrapolated dialog) between the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin (the Jewish ruling Council) and the Romans, as well as the betrayal of Jesus by Judas Iscariot. They also threw in another shady character which at least adds another dimension to the story, again based on a historical person named Barabbas.

While the movie was not "Epic" in scope or proportion, and certainly not in cinematography, I gave it a relatively high score (8/10) for its effective acting and tender moments. If you are a Christian, you better ask yourself: "Could I act and play Jesus?" Any Christian certainly had better answer "No!" first, and then say, well I could try. And I'm here to tell you that the fellow in the movie did a credible job. The book of Isaiah tells us that "We esteemed him not" and the meaning is that Jesus had nothing to distinguish Him as God. We could look at Him and see a perfectly ordinary person. It's only once you have met Him and gotten to know who He is that you worship Him.

So, in that sense, I believe this movie will introduce a lot of folks to the real Jesus, the Jesus of the Bible. I believe it will make them thirsty for more, which will make them want to read the Bible and get to know Him for who He really is. He is not dead, He is alive, and any person on this earth today can come to know Him.

All of the most palatable servings heaped onto one plate. Perfect for cafeteria Christians everywhere. YAWN. This is certainly not Ten Commandments. I suppose having a miniseries chopped up and served as a two-hour sacred cash cow with modern production values is going to be a breath of fresh air for the kneeling masses. You've likely seen it before, and the story never changes(that's the spoiler). Now, don't dismiss me as some bitter atheist, panning a flick you will hold dear to your heart. I love biblical epics, but I prefer to stick to the classics. Son of God is nothing new; it is just HD. That's likely enough for the mega-church crowd. One reviewer stated, "Don't over-think it". That is the sum of the parts for Son of God. Pay your cash, stop thinking, and gush about how you feel even closer to Jesus after watching it. Mark Burnett will thank you for it. I'm going to go watch the Lego Movie. ...because Lego is real.

So the film is an adaption of the Bible Series on the History Channel. A lot of new scenes, some smooshed together. It is obviously not a Word-for-word reading of the Gospel of John, although it generally tries to follow the Gospel of John. For a two hour movie it does a good job of telling the story. You cannot tell the Gospel story word for word in two hours. So please stop criticizing this movie for not doing that.

A lot of folks are knit picky on this film, and rightfully, if you're evaluating it as a theologian, you can. It's inaccurate.

HOWEVER, if you're evaluating this movie from the angle that someone who hasn't read the Bible, you will realize that they will actually for the first time hear the Gospel Story. Did the real Jesus say it exactly the way he did in the movie? Actually, no. He said it in Aramaic.

If you're looking for a great film taken WORD-for-WORD from the Gospel of John, I highly recommend watching "The Gospel of John - Visual Bible - 2-DVD set (2005)" you can search on Amazon.com. It is 315 minutes long... That's the unabridged version.

I recommend this film, "Son of God" for those who love Jesus, and love the story of what Jesus did. I recommend this film for people who have not read the Bible.

If you're a theologian, stay home, read the Bible.

Over two hours of random quotes from the Bible, incorrectly tied together to form an incoherent story. Bad Romans. Good Christians. Every scene, including those with the ultra fake looking city-wide views, is blown out of proportion. All have Jesus, in some weird pseudo-accent, spewing famous quote after quote all amounting to nothing more than a colossal waste of money. Produced by two people who think themselves biblical scholars, but come off as juvenile frauds. The Passion of the Christ was far superior. This was just wrong. If the idea was to bring the story to the masses, all that was accomplished was an insult to the masses intelligence and piety.

It was bad, but not nearly as bad as Noah (2014), which was really stupid and painful to watch. I'm glad I have a theater that only charges $5 for a new movie. If the script would have followed one of the gospels, it could have been better. Jesus ministry was much about his disciples, which were essentially omitted in this story. Some people must have money to burn and don't mind duping audiences, cause this was a waste of millions of dollars, and countless hours of production time. I feel sorry for all of the churches who flocked to see this movie as congregations because they must have felt very disappointed--like myself.

From beginning to end the movie is moving. The acting was amazing, the soundtrack was beautiful. Son of God impacts people all alike whether they're true believers or not. People left the movie in tears because the impact was so great and tissues were constantly being pulled out because everyone couldn't stop crying the movie was that awesome. Without hesitation I would pay to go see it again and take people with me over and over. Each person portrayed was exact, and the tension and the emotions that carried left people watching from the edges of their seats. Son of God reminds believers of how they should be impacting the world.

This was by the far the worst 132 minutes of my life. I enjoy many types of movies and have even enjoyed some bad movies. You know the kind that are so bad they are good. Well this was just BAD... After leaving the theater I felt angry, and like my brain was molested by born again Christians. I feel cheated into paying money to watch this crap, if i had known what was to come I wouldn't have watched this movie if someone had paid me. This is not a gripe against religion, but against the movie itself. There was no depth to this movie what so ever. There was no dialogue besides literal quotes from the bible. The acting was terrible everyone was so 1 dimensional. The filming was terrible. The CG was awful. I cannot honestly say one good thing about this movie. Save your money, your time, and your brain and skip this one.

Yup folks! This is no "King of Kings"! In fact, this is no "King of Comedies" either! It is an embarrassment to the art of cinematography and Dramatic acting as anyone knows it! At least no one could be accused of being a ham! Devoid of emotional content, but never hammy! In fact, the best comparison I could make is that of humongous Train Wreck! All you can do is watch and gawk at the lack of humanity! Or character portrayal of any shape or form!

The movie is absolute dribble! Devoid of any real character portrayals on anyones part! Everybody there act's like it is a nine to five job, with two breaks and a lunch! And they act like they did all of the above! I don't really blame the actors! I blame the director and all of the people around him that didn't convey that this thing is worse than anyone could have intentionally imagined! The only purpose for this movie now is to be an example for up and coming cinema students as to what they should avoid and never do in creating a film! The Actors are all moving about as if they are taking their lines from the teleprompter! And Jesus looks as if he is in on some private joke half of the time! His responses to the dialog are at best fractured and devoid of any real understanding of what exactly is the emotion and motivation in every scene he's in! Oh well! Goes to show that you can get people to make anything into a film if you have access to the funds and are willing to promote it based solely on ...........Mythos! I am sad to see that they would pick up the clippings off of the cutting room floor and go "Hey dudes! We got enough clippings here for another movie! Hick!"! Because they would have had to have been drunk, stoned, and beyond all recognition of what is and isn't factual or even believable!

After reading numerous reviews on this movie where the reviewer is more interested in telling us how "loving " God is rather than reviewing the portrayal, acting or indeed movie. In a nutshell if you have ever sat through Sunday school lectures as a child this movie like many of it's followers is more interested in preaching than taking this fiction and viewing it from another angle as everyone already knows the basic story. Despite having no real talented/well known actors i went to see it with an open mind but after watching it the only wonder was why it cost £25m dollars to make as all decent actors gave it the swerve. Christians (as shown in some of the reviews) will enjoy this movie as it encompasses everything they believe in which is why movies containing the very slightest of religious themes always make money. One reviewer actually said God had blessed this movie making it beautiful! Hilarious.

My experience of this film is that it was like a "mini-retreat" in which I was touched by the love of Jesus Christ. If you go with an open heart, this film will be a healing, inspiring experience, and will renew you in a way that very few movies can do. You can go to the theater to be entertained, and this movie will entertain you, but how often can you go to a movie that will renew your spirit? This is like consuming a healthy meal that will nourish your body instead of consuming junk food that temporarily fills you, but has really done nothing to nourish you. Seeing Son of God will feed your mind, heart and soul if you let it.

Let's get this out of the way first. I was raised Christian right through until my adult life and since then...well I don't consider myself a "Christian." I am however well versed in the bible and am a long standing student of history, so this is where my review comes from. I HATE when a film like this comes out only to read the endless drivel from people who think this offends their very atheistic nature so they have to trash it based on only that. I am a film lover so I approach this as I do every film from a film perspective. Son of God is not the biblical epics of yesteryear. It is a toned down, much lower budgeted TV film that they ported onto the big screen with both added footage and removed footage. I have not yet seen the mini-series this came from but I look forward to checking it out. Was it necessary to port it to the big screen? No. Some of the set design and especially the long shots of the various ancient cities (Jerusalem etc) look awful...they're video game quality at best. However, the film does lay out the Jesus story in a step by step fashion and doesn't try to go outside of the box. That is both a good thing but also a hindrance. There isn't anything here that someone who knows the story won't recognize, Son of God plays it very safe.

Diogo Morgado (and for all of those wonderful nagging atheists that troll IMDb he's not white...he's Portuguese) is our title character, Jesus. He does a decent job. Its not brilliant but it certainly serves a purpose. He looks the role and his intensity is certainly well done in the end scenes of his eventual crucifixion. He is portrayed as charismatic and HAPPY which I enjoyed because many portrayals of Jesus have him looking stoic and brooding. Morgado is a decent safe choice for this role. Greg Hicks is quite good in a small role as Pontius Pilate. I actually really enjoyed the direction and the details they put into his character and his relationship with his wife. That was an added bit of depth I wasn't expecting. The supporting cast is large but there were some particularly good performances from Darwin Shaw as Peter, Joe Wredden as Judas, Fraser Ayres (in a very small but effective role as Barabbas), and Said Bey as Matthew. I thought the performance from Amber Rose Revah was mostly unnecessary as Mary Magdalene, she was there a lot but really had no direction or purpose and it felt like she was in the way more than anything. I also wasn't a huge fan of Roma Downey played the older Mary. Seeing her on screen was distracting when we had only just seen a much younger, prettier actress playing Mary at the beginning of the film. Downey seemed to overact even with her facial expressions and she was trying too hard to be angelic. The role wasn't right for her.

The film is a little long, I know that Jesus' story is epic in nature and there have been plenty of long films about his life that were deservedly lengthy but as long as Son of God is it felt like they rushed a lot of the stories to try to cover everything. Still, I enjoyed their iteration of his various miracles and the inevitable crucifixion scene at the end was brutal, hard to watch, and very well directed. Documentary film maker Christopher Spencer is no slouch as a director. He's had plenty of experience but I think he could have benefited from some help from someone who knows storytelling is more than just laying out the facts. Still the story does a lot to make us understand the person that Jesus was and as a student of history I was impressed with how many accurate details were shown about the Roman empire and the time period this takes place in. I'm not defending the film per se but I think people are being too hard on it. It was made with the church community in mind and they will adore it. It tells the story very well and does not ruffle any feathers. Angry atheists will hate it because...well...anything with "Christian" on it deserves flogging and ridiculing don't you know? The average film goer (me) will likely find it decently entertaining without being mind blowing. It tells a good story at its own pace with a few potholes but nothing that ruins the experience. Its the definition of average. 7/10

A very powerful film. Absolutely loved it! Despite some inaccuracies, it was fabulous the way they really showed Who Jesus is, especially at the beginning of the film.

This film brought me to tears and conviction again of what my Savior did for me. I rededicated my life to Jesus again before the ending of this film.

It's unrealistic to expect 100% accuracy in a movie. I would love to see a Bible movie accurate according to the Bible, but I enjoyed it just the same. This film reached a lot of people and I remember reading about how a man who never was interested in the Bible began asking questions after watching. That's a wonderful thing.

This was an exceptional portrayal of the life of Jesus. I appreciated that it showed all sides of the story and incorporated Jesus' main followers into our hearts. It showed how much they truly believed in loved in Him and how they were human when they messed up or questioned their faith.

Would be very easy to follow if watched by someone who has not been exposed to the Bible or heard about Christ. I feel this movie will bring much peace to those who have a desire to know Him and bring more people closer to the Word.

Was sad when it was over and wanted it to continue on. Would love to have seen the movie branch in other areas and explain more of the story that was obviously cut to provide adequate viewing time (2 plus hours is a good stretch of time!); would be great to see more of these come out in the near future!

I am a Deacon, and Elder Commissioner, and have been BLESSED with the gift of healing. From the very beginning Jesus the Christ and The Holy Spirit were present! I am taking a guess that those with an open heart were truly BLESSED. I know I was.

Maybe the time had come for "Christian Films" to return! I also read O'Reillys 'Killing Jesus' and together I KNOW Easter with be quite different for the rest of my like. A life serving as HE would have me serve, even until death.

Our Lord came in the flesh and was denied by many, yet followed too. After many years, millions have given their lives and hearts to HIM.

If I were rich, I'd rent theaters so rich and poor alike could be blessed by this masterpiece.

Bob

Watching this movie was an awesome experience. The Bible passages I've been reading and hearing all my life were right there in front of me, being acted out with the ultimate realism. My emotions ran the gamut from happy to devastated to compassionate to joyous. The casting was excellent, as was the acting. The location was perfect. It must've been difficult to choose which Bible passages to include and which ones not to; for if all the writings in the Bible about Jesus were included, it would've been a very, very long movie. Instead, it was just right. They made intelligent choices. I love it when Hollywood brings out movies like this.

Yes, I would have loved it if this movie cited more scriptures and highlighted more of His miracles but what was there was anointed, inspirational and will motivate people to learn more about the Son of God. I really liked how this film captured His interactions with the disciples after the resurrection and up to His Ascension into heaven 40 days later. I also thought Jesus appearing to John at the very end was powerful and moving. Indeed, Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, The First and The Last, The Beginning and the End, The Lion of the Tribe of Judah, and The Bright and Morning Star! Now, I really hope a big Hollywood studio makes a movie about how Saul of Tarsus became the great Apostle Paul. That movie would be something to behold, especially if it covers all of Paul's adventures, travels, trials, tribulations, and victories using today's special and visual effect capabilities!

OK so this movie was kind of hard to watch being Christian that is educated in there faith. Now I'm not saying that anyone who likes this film is a dumb Christian but to me it was very weak. This film is perfect for a Christian who is just starting in their faith or just looking for a light film to feel good about. We have to take into account that this film was made by TV producers who have had excellent success in TV. But I just wish that Jesus was a bit more real in this film, besides some of the factual errors (Jesus going into the tomb of Lazarus and raising him instead of commanding him while standing outside). Sometimes he just seemed very cheesy and weak. CHRISTIANS! IT IS OK TO GIVE THIS FILM A BAD RATING, IT DOES'NT MEAN YOU HATE Christ! Im very appreciative of the users who were bold enough to call this film out. Hahaha P.S. It cracks me up that there's spoilers on some reviews SPOILER ALERT: He dies but then comes back 3 days later!

I saw this movie opening weekend. I really enjoyed it. A lot of the reviews I read, especially the more negative ones, seem rooted in the writer's resistance to anything pertaining to Christ more than a pure review of the film itself. Whether it be Son of God or The passion of the Christ there are those who will condemn it out of hand. But then Jesus had that effect in his day as well as now.

The movie itself was very interesting. It portrayed a version of how things may have played out without being too heavy handed or following any one religious approach. Having it as part of a series was not enough. It needed to be released as a single unit, a film that will keep intact the story of a historical figure who so impacted the work that the calendar is divided around his life.

Thank you Mark and Roma for simply telling the story without melodrama, over dependence on special effects or cinema tricks. Thank you for a film easy to follow, suited for everyone and true to the story of Christ.