Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #15582 in DVD
• Released on: 2003-04-14
• Rating: Suitable for 18 years and over
• Aspect ratio: 1.85:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Full Screen, PAL
• Original language: German, French, Italian, Spanish, English
• Subtitled in: German, English, Danish, Finnish, Polish, Turkish, Hungarian, Portuguese, Bulgarian, French, Dutch, Norwegian, Swedish, Czech
• Dubbed in: English
• Number of discs: 1

Amazon.co.uk Review
It isn't difficult to imagine why this 1988 retelling of the Crucifixion story was picketed so vociferously on its release in the US--this Jesus bears little resemblance to the classical Christ, who was not, upon careful review of the Gospels, ever reported to have had sex with Barbara Hershey. Heavily informed by Gnostic reinterpretations of the Passion, The Last Temptation of Christ (based rather strictly on Nikos Kazantzakis's novel of the same name) is surely worth seeing for the controversy and blasphemous content alone. But the "last temptation" of the title is nothing overtly naughty--rather, it's the seduction of the commonplace; the desire to forgo following a "calling" in exchange for domestic security. Willem Dafoe interprets Jesus as spacey, indecisive and none too charismatic (though maybe that's just Dafoe himself), but his Sermon on the Mount is radiant with visionary fire; a bit less successful is method actor Harvey Keitel, who gives the internally conflicted Judas a noticeable Brooklyn accent, and doesn't bring much imagination to a role that demands a revisionist's approach. Despite director Martin Scorsese's penchant for stupid camera tricks, much of the desert footage is simply breathtaking, even on small screen. Ultimately, Last Temptation is not much more historically illuminating than Monty Python's Life of Brian, but hey, if it's authenticity you're after, try Gibbon's. --Miles Bethany

Customer Reviews

Good grief
The idea of the film I have to say is a remarkable one. An examination of Christ as a man, a human being who struggles to come to terms with being granted prophet hood. A man who while rejecting this and all that comes with it is compelled to act in accordance with a mission he has been sent with.

Interesting idea and one that would be well worth watching problem is 1. The choice of actors for the film 2. The roles they are given.

With such a film you need a cast who are strong enough to carry it out in its correct historical context this film sadly does not have it. What comes off is not a historical reading of the life of Jesus examining an otherwise overlooked aspect of his life but rather "Jesus goes gangster"

Take the scene where Jesus visits Mary Magdalene in a brothel. After Jesus sits for a while amongst her clients (most of whom seem to be black (as well as the local slaves) more of Scorsese's odd obsession with black people but that's another issue) after they all depart they debate on how he has his calling to dwell in the desert, Mary feels abandoned and they argue. The argument (both language and context) would be more suited to a 40s Al Capone flick or better still the episode of the Simpson's where he thinks back to his days raising the kids in "Little Italy" The body language, the terminology used everything was just so out of place.

Take the scene where Jesus speaks with one of his disciples, the disciple says to him "I will follow you but if you stray this far from the path..... (As he holds his hand up in trademark Gangster fashion)I'll kill you" Or the scene where he first speaks to the people after saving Mary "He told me stand up and here I am" With arrogant head back, eyes half closed, arms stretched out looked more like 'King of New York' than 'Jesus the Messiah'

The disciples come together more like 'wise guys' joining a 'crew' than followers of a prophet. There is even a bit of slow motion Reservoir Dogs style strut to the camera with music played over!

Why on earth has Scorsese done this? Did he think it would bring Jesus closer to the moder audience? Did he think the protests would be too busy....well protesting to even bother watching the film and examining weather it was actually a good film or not to criticise its quality rather than its context? Who knows.

The idea behind the film though is excellent. Its almost ironic that someone who is religious would probably get a lot of benefit from the film. The meditation and temptation of Jesus both from within and beyond him. This part of the film is remarkable I only wish the so called 'critics' could have watched this part as it really shows what separated the prophets from the normal man, the need of God and religion and the simplicity of faith.

For the idea of the film I would give it 5 stars if only Scorsese had not destroyed it with this monster of a film!

Feed my lambs, but don't give them LSD
Having seen this I am puzzled why it provoked such an outcry, a little to the discredit of the Church. It is quite clearly presented as "NOT BASED ON THE GOSPELS" but on a fictional exploration of spiritual issues. Perhaps the Church does not choose its spokesmen well.

The main non-scriptural premiss is that Christ made crosses for the Romans and that is why he wanted be crucified. This certainly simplifies the theory of the Atonement, so I wonder it isn't more popular!!! It obviously involves presenting Jesus as a sinner, but then some theologians accept this, though it goes against some phrases of Paul. The crucifixion is thus partly a sacrifice for individual sin and partly an act of love. I think only the last part is orthodox.

Like most films on Christ, Scorsese has to take a line on miracles, but his main issue is how to present the dialogue or teaching. I feel this could have been done better, as Christ's words aren't really torn out of himself enough: there isn't enough humanity in that sense.

All in all, it's thought provoking, though it's not Martin Scorsese's best film. The theology is a bit American 1960s (only they would have imagined someone being cricified daydreaming about sex) but I guess there were worse generations.

The dvd works fine and there are some standard additional features.

Controversial for the wrong reasons?
Great cinematography, but it really needs to be seen on a big wide screen at the cinema I think personally. Most of the story is your normal bible stuff - OK a little strange at times, but near the end it went completely bonkers. I thought I was getting an LSD flashback it was that weird. There he was having sex with anybody called Mary and married to a child! It did have a lovely twist at the end though that puts everything back in place and order so don't fear. Nice cameo from David Bowie as Pontius Pilate - Strange! Lots of other faces - too many to name. All in all worth watching.