← Back to Reviews
in
The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 1964
This film follows the life of Jesus (Enrique Irazoqui), from his birth to his death and eventual resurrection.
A neorealist approach to Christ’s life makes for a refreshingly human look at one of the most famous stories ever told.
I started watching this film about a year ago and just completely bounced off of it. I turned it off after about 15 minutes because I was totally failing to connect with it. I’m not sure what was different this time around, but I was captivated by the film from beginning to end.
The entire approach to the story is understated---bordering at times on a feeling of distance---and that light touch allows for really lovely moments of nuance and humanity. The challenge of telling the story of Jesus in a film is that your audience already knows exactly what to expect. How do you surprise or innovate when every story beat is already overly familiar?
The answer is in that subtle approach, where fleeting expressions or brief flares of emotion become the story as opposed to the actual narrative logistics. As Jesus travels the countryside attempting to spread his gospel to an audience that is, at times, willfully obtuse, I loved seeing irritation and impatience pass over his face. He is a very special, very important person . . . but he is still a person.
This humanizing of the characters extends to the supporting cast as well. One of my favorite moments involves a distinct breaking point for Judas. Having a meal with Jesus and others, Judas notes that the ointment a woman applies to Jesus should be saved and given to the poor. This sounds, of course, like the correct sentiment for a good person. Ah, but Jesus instead chastises Judas, saying that the woman knows Jesus will die and that the ointment is a proper gift from her. Embarrassed and angry at being undercut, it is immediately after this that Judas betrays Jesus. The film is not justifying Judas in his choices, but it is putting them in a relatable human context.
Most powerfully, for me, is the portrayal of Mary (Susanna Pasolini) as she bears witness to the crucifixion of her son. Powerless to stop the death of her child, all Mary can do is be a witness, be with her son in his darkest hour. As he is nailed to the cross and lifted in the air, Mary wails on the ground. She looks at her child in disbelief, then must look away, but then must look back again. It’s heartbreaking, and makes something that could have felt rote---it’s hard not to be a bit desensitized to the crucifixion when you literally see it in images every day of your life---absolutely shattering by giving it to us through the eyes of a disbelieving, devastated mother.
I can appreciate that the understated vibe might not be for everyone. I personally found it very impactful.
The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 1964
This film follows the life of Jesus (Enrique Irazoqui), from his birth to his death and eventual resurrection.
A neorealist approach to Christ’s life makes for a refreshingly human look at one of the most famous stories ever told.
I started watching this film about a year ago and just completely bounced off of it. I turned it off after about 15 minutes because I was totally failing to connect with it. I’m not sure what was different this time around, but I was captivated by the film from beginning to end.
The entire approach to the story is understated---bordering at times on a feeling of distance---and that light touch allows for really lovely moments of nuance and humanity. The challenge of telling the story of Jesus in a film is that your audience already knows exactly what to expect. How do you surprise or innovate when every story beat is already overly familiar?
The answer is in that subtle approach, where fleeting expressions or brief flares of emotion become the story as opposed to the actual narrative logistics. As Jesus travels the countryside attempting to spread his gospel to an audience that is, at times, willfully obtuse, I loved seeing irritation and impatience pass over his face. He is a very special, very important person . . . but he is still a person.
This humanizing of the characters extends to the supporting cast as well. One of my favorite moments involves a distinct breaking point for Judas. Having a meal with Jesus and others, Judas notes that the ointment a woman applies to Jesus should be saved and given to the poor. This sounds, of course, like the correct sentiment for a good person. Ah, but Jesus instead chastises Judas, saying that the woman knows Jesus will die and that the ointment is a proper gift from her. Embarrassed and angry at being undercut, it is immediately after this that Judas betrays Jesus. The film is not justifying Judas in his choices, but it is putting them in a relatable human context.
Most powerfully, for me, is the portrayal of Mary (Susanna Pasolini) as she bears witness to the crucifixion of her son. Powerless to stop the death of her child, all Mary can do is be a witness, be with her son in his darkest hour. As he is nailed to the cross and lifted in the air, Mary wails on the ground. She looks at her child in disbelief, then must look away, but then must look back again. It’s heartbreaking, and makes something that could have felt rote---it’s hard not to be a bit desensitized to the crucifixion when you literally see it in images every day of your life---absolutely shattering by giving it to us through the eyes of a disbelieving, devastated mother.
I can appreciate that the understated vibe might not be for everyone. I personally found it very impactful.