King of Kings - MGM 1961 distributed by Warner Home Video 2003

Principal Cast: Jeffrey Hunter (Jesus of Nazareth); Siobhan McKenna (the Virgin Mary); Robert Ryan (John the Baptist); Rip Torn (Judas); Guy Rolfe (Caiphus); Frank Thring (Herod); plus a host of noted Spanish actors (not known to me); narrated by Orson Welles;

Director: Nicholas Ray

SYNOPSIS

When I first discovered I was to review “King of Kings” I was overjoyed - expecting that I was to see the 1927 silent classic directed by Cecil B DeMille - a movie that my sister and I looked forward to every Easter, many, many moons ago. Initially I was quite disappointed.

This version, a US/Spanish co-production, is a modern-day `epic’ with features to match - the Intermission, photography in 70mm, grand sets and scenes, a cast numbered in the thousands and a stunning musical score with separate overture, Entr’Acte and exit music sequences.

I should hope that I don’t have to provide a detailed storyline - it is of course the story of the life and death of Jesus Christ, set against the domination of Judea by the Romans, and the somewhat futile attempts by rebellious Judeans to free themselves of this oppression. The story commences about 50BC and finishes around 33AD, with much of the action occurring between (at times lengthy) narrations of background events.

It couldn’t be called an `epic’ without battle scenes - led by the Jewish patriot Barabbas (played by Harry Guardino). - heroism, romance (in this case devotion or self-sacrifice would be more appropriate words) and sweeping scenery. All these facets are covered quite adequately given the storyline.

Whilst it may be a film of deeply religious significance to many viewers, it remains a piece of cinematic entertainment with a largely docu-drama approach; the scriptwriters and Director HAVING attempted to document a major event of historical importance in an impartial `third person’ manner. At the same time, some of the `majesty’ of the central character is allowed to emerge, sometimes approaching mawkishness - they play on a pair of vivid blue eyes - but never going totally overboard. Some viewers (like myself) with a background knowledge of the central story will notice the absence of a few major `events’ we learned of or saw in films covering the same subject - the loaves and fishes, the raising of Lazarus, the clearing of the temple etc.

Nobly, the filmmakers have allowed us to see the central character’s `human’ side in terms of his suffering - we don’t see `glorious’ pain but mortal pain and anguish caused to a fellow human, and (at times) his resentment of it.

Being somewhat indifferent to the religious background in which I was raised, I was nevertheless pleased that I was occasionally moved by some of the scenes in this film.

Running Time: 171 mins

EXTRAS

? 2-page cast and crew list

? “The Camera’s Window of the World” a four minute B/W newsreel-type documentary on the staging of the Sermon on the Mount scene in the film

? A two minute newsreel briefly covering opening night celebrations in New York and Hollywood

? A further one minute newsreel (not narrated) noting a `who’s who’ of stars attending the Hollywood premiere

? 52-chapter scene selection menu

? Languages (English/French) and subtitles (English/French/Spanish) menu

OVERALL

The theme has been covered a number of times before - “The Greatest Story Ever Told” immediately comes to mind - but I found this quite entertaining and `non-preachy’. A definite bonus!

“King of Kings” is a film of truly `epic’ proportions. But I cannot call it an epic film in the same breath as the likes of “Ben Hur” and “Gone With the Wind”. Indeed, as an example, the biblical aspects of “Ben Hur” invoked more emotional response than any scene in this film. That said, it is much better than I expected and hence earns my praise as a well-told docu-drama of human interest on a grand scale.

The film is long - some might say overlong - but the subject matter (backed by sensible narration) does require lengthy coverage - I cannot suggest a point where editing to any great extent could be justified. I also note that contemporary reviewers were quite mixed in their reaction to this film. I sit on the positive side of reviews.