Opiniones de usuarios

I was a bit skeptic about the casting for the title role. Here we have Robert Loggia who has played a drug lord in "Scarface", Feech in "The Sopranos", Sallie in "Innocent Blood" and last but not least the Mr. Eddy/Dick Laurent in David Lynch's "Lost Highway". Can he really pull off the role of the second most important figure in Christianity? The answer is a resounding yes.

It's obvious that the production ran on a very low budget. You can count on one hand how many settings there are. However what it lacks in settings and special effects it makes up with acting and a solid script. Here we have Robert Loggia playing Peter in chains in Rome and the dungeon guard Martinius starts to converse with him about Jesus and his last days. Loggia gives a great performance as an old Peter ready to die, but still finding strength and joy in telling about his last days with Jesus. As mentioned before the production seems very low budget, there are no scenes where we see Jesus flogged, going through Via Dolorosa and get crucified and resurrected. So while it may have to do with a low budget, the fact is that Peter did not witness the flogging and crucifixion so from a historical point of view it seemed fine to leave out those scenes.

The title of the film really expresses who the film is about: the apostle Peter and his view, thoughts and feelings during the last days of Jesus and his teachings. A critique against it is that there are a couple of really unnecessary scenes where the Devil tries to tempt Peter in jail. Those should have been cut since they serve no purpose whatsoever. Thankfully, they are few and very short. I have to complain as well about the poorly made CGI shots of the city.

The acting from the supporting actors is done fantastic as well, especially Martinius and his wife. All in all this film is really about the message of Peter to the Romans. It's an interesting script with solid acting that really highlights and underlines the message -- not necessarily the content itself -- of Easter in the Christian tradition. I'd watch this film instead of "The Passion" anytime and I hope it picks up a following.

No histories, biographies, or other books record the exact conversations and daily details of people. Beyond the general overview and summary of the lives of someone, any story put into a book or film necessarily includes much dialog that is made up. Serious and honest writers and movie makers will research their subject thoroughly from the records available, and then write and create characters and situations as true to the person as they can imagine.

So it is with characters from biblical times. Beyond what we read in the Bible, who knows what the apostles did and said, or what their lives were like after the death and resurrection of Jesus? In telling a story of any part of a Bible character's life, one must imagine what scenes and dialogs would be like to fill in details and expand on the printed record.

The makers of this film did a decent job in portraying Peter in his jail time in Rome before his execution. We see a Peter as many Christians might have visualized him over the centuries. We see Peter as he likely responded to the inquisitiveness of his guards. And what he might have said and how it might have affected his guards. Of course, he would talk about Jesus and witness to his life.

So, this is a good film from that standpoint. Robert Loggia is very good in the role of the elderly Peter. The rest of the fictitious characters are so-so. The brusk head-jailer seems overly acted. But other than the role of Peter, there's nothing noteworthy about this production. As one other reviewer noted, the CGI scenes of rooftops looking down on a city are not helpful to the story. If anything, they are a distraction – a reminder that this probably is a cheap production. Why they couldn't have taken some stock footage of scenes shot on movie sets used before is beyond me. Or staged some scenes in old towns with people dressed according to the time. The still, misty view of CGI rooftops of a town look like something from a comic book. They are so phony that they detract from any effort to portray an authentic situation.

This film has a feel of staginess. How much might it have cost to have a couple of segues to show a street or alley scene with people coming and going outside the jail? With nothing else noteworthy about this film, I give it just six stars.

What can I say? It is a great Christian movie, made by secular people. It is indeed surprising how a director, who promotes artwork on his very own website which is clearly satanic, has the motivation for such a movie.

Does a director of a Christian movie need to be Christian? No, he doesn't, but it is hypocrisy to do something just for the money.

Should a director of a Christian movie be a Christian? Yes, that is what makes sense.

Can a director of a Christian movie promote the other side while doing this and several other popular Christian movies? Only in America ...

PROS

+ Great depictions of an extra-biblical story, which tells in parts biblical elements. Obviously, a great creative license is taken, but the movie does not equal to an apocryphal book which someone wants to insert into the Bible.

+ It is beautiful how they portrayed Peter, without the least of fear before his death.

+ Beautiful end with the conversion of two soldiers and one's wife.

CONS

• The movie tries hard to impress through extreme tonality in voices and by excessive music.

• The satan character is certainly not what the Bible describes as a wolf in sheep's clothing. He does not come anywhere close to a 'sheep' in human terms, but is the typical Hollywood scheme to make things appear more extreme ...

• It would have been nice if they would have made at least for some scenes their way out of the LA studios and filmed in an actual setting - be it in Israel or similar.

• The prayer 'you sanctified us with your commandments' shows a fundamental lack of Bible knowledge. We might walk on the road of sanctification while obeying commandments, but we are not sanctified with commandments ...

• When the two Roman soldiers become Christians under Peter's hand (which is beautiful), smoke comes up and eastern meditation music is played. It looks and sounds more like a conversion to Buddhism, if the words would not have been different.

• Peter could have only died in Rome long after the conversion of Saul to Paul. Nevertheless the movie states at the end that they have to empty the cell for a certain 'Saul of Tarsus'. That's why unbelievers should never do a Christian movie.

It is so refreshing to see a movie about Christianity that is well created and the acting is amazing. So many times you have to look past the acting and videography to enjoy the message of the film. Not in the case. You get it all.

Wonderful film. Barely any violence. I feel that even my smallest child could watch this and be just fine. You get the full impact of Christ's love and message without actually having to see the Passion (which those with small children try to avoid).

An absolutely gem. I would definitely recommend this film to anyone even wondering about God's love.

A movie obviously inspired by God and those who love Him. I stand amazed in the genius of the story, the layout, the timing, and the acting. As with all true messages about the Gospel, it tugs at you, draws you in and opens your heart to whatever the Holy Spirit would have you consider about your own walk. I have watched it several times, have ordered the DVD with the intent to show it to my entire church. However I truly believe that the true value of this work is getting it before the eyes and hearts of the lost around us. Thanks to all who played a part in bringing this beautiful account out into the open to truly enrich our lives.

I watch this minimum twice a month and I get so much out of it each time! I've watched it since it came out! The actors take you there as if you were part of the moment from beginning to end. Great movie, great performance, edifying to the heart, mind, and soul! Excellent illustration of the Gospel in a simple way. A treasure to have and pass on to the next generation. I recommend it to all who seek to understand the truth of a friend who laid His life down for LOVE.... Enlightens the true meaning of forgiveness, true love, grace, and a sovereign God who loves us. May all of you who choose to watch this movie be blessed with a closer relationship with God and an understanding of how much HE loves us...

Writing a review for this movie is like telling an uncoordinated kid who dreams of playing professional sports that they should consider computer science. The desire of this movie is to challenge people to consider Jesus Christ as Lord. I get it. I promote the same message.

The quality and resources of the movie do not deliver. Within the first minutes I find myself looking at the rooftops of blatantly obvious computer generated houses from 1990. It would have been much better to scrap those shots, instead of reminding viewers of the location and Biblical time setting it reminded me I was watching a low budget movie.

One low budget aspect I enjoyed supremely was the wig and beard choices. Wow! I cried from laughing so hard. One of the disciples looked like Confucius.

Much of the acting falls flat and is not nearly inspired enough to warrant viewing the movie, in which we spend 50% of the time in a jail cell(obvious set).

The worst part is that this "Biblical" movie has a lot of conjecture and lines you will not find in the Bible. I'm not referring to the jail scenes which is obviously the setup for our flashbacks to Jesus. The flashbacks add lines...for instance: at the last supper one of the disciples threatens to harm the betrayer. Not recorded in the Bible. Sure, it could have been, they were passionate guys...it could have been part of the murmuring BUT IT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE.

Even if you don't care at all about Biblical accuracy the movie is sub par. I couldn't get through it without fast forwarding much of it.

One of the finest Christians I have ever known used to say, "Little is much when God is in it." And that applies to Biblical movies. They should not be judged as ordinary entertainments, because their subject matter sets them apart, a priori, so that the usual standards and the ordinary expectations must be set aside. In reading the reviews, I see how easily one can say poor production, poor scenery, poor this and that. But I would suggest another standard, perhaps the only standard by which a film about Biblical events or Early Christianity can be judged: Did it give you a sense of deeper fellowship with the subject matter, and with those whose Faith has borne witness down through the ages to even touch us here and now? If it does, then it is a success. If it does not, perhaps that is less the movie's fault than the viewer's. I have been fascinated by the Early Christians (myself being what you might call a late Christian) since I was twelve years old---over half a century. When I watched this, my worldly cares, even my medical affliction, seemed to fall away and I was able to enter into a sense of fellowship with my spiritual ancestors. On that basis, the film is a resounding success, and nothing else from the mundane world of film reviewing matters.

it is easy to criticize it. low budget, not great performances, sketches of Biblical accuracy. but it has two great virtues - Robert Loggia as Saint Peter and the status of story for the child from yourself. Robert Loggia does an admirable role , proposing a Peter near the death , wise, vulnerable, strong and with the precious desire to birth his faith as only memory. a dialog in a cell. images from the past who represents only real present. and the build of message. the film propose only the feeling of faith. without dramatic scenes, without powerful images or special effects. and this mistake does it credible. because it is not an adaptation, not a religious film but rediscover of the delicacy of same message of Church. and that does it not a great film, maybe not memorable. but useful. for the rediscover of a pillar of our civilization.

The film is small scaled, necessitated by a minuscule budget, which brings some undeniably fake looking CGI and a production which basically spans just a handful of sets, most of them minimally dressed, trying too hard to be reverent. The smallest things are overly dramatized, while nothing can be subtle, yet all must be obvious. Dialogue is very pedestrian and it doesn't feel like real people are talking. The plot does not allow for good character development in any form, while the Jesus is portrayed in a very odd way - he is constantly obsessed with reading everybody's minds. Very disappointing.

My family watched this during Passover/Easter week. The movie takes the perspective of Peter, relaying his experiences to a jailer as Peter spends his final fee days in prison. Peter recounts his meeting Jesus, some of the events of the ministry years, the Last Supper, and the Garden scene.

We watched this with our 6 year old, and would have no problems showing it to other children. Satan does appear a few times in the film, but not too scary.

The acting is well done and the scenes varied enough that it keeps the interest of even the children.

We highly recommend this film for you and your family.

a religious film is not first an artistic matter. the basic purpose, the essence of message is for faith build/rediscover. in this case, the formula is little different. not only for admirable performance of Robert Loggia but for the manner to create the message. it is not exactly chronicle of events but remember of faith essence. a film about force, courage and vulnerability. with few small forced nuances but, in fact, convincing and deep touching. a film about delicate things. and beautiful lesson from a great actor to give entire brilliance and wise light to a special character. a religious film, off course. but not an ordinary one. because it has the gift to put/remind a lot of questions. because it is an example of measure and good work.

Worst Jesus movie ever. Robert Loggia is the main character. I kept thinking i was listening to a story narration from The Sopranos, or a cop show.

*Peter and the Last Supper* (2012), directed by Gabriel Sabloff and starring the venerable Robert Loggia, well-intentioned but ultimately flawed portrayal of Saint Peter's final days.

Peter and the Last Supper centers on the final days of Saint Peter (Robert Loggia), who is imprisoned in Rome and awaiting execution. As he reflects on his life, Peter recounts his experiences with Jesus Christ to his jailer, Martinian (Laurence Fuller). Through a series of flashbacks, the film explores Peter's journey from a brash fisherman to a devoted apostle. Meanwhile, Peter faces a final spiritual challenge as a demon (Bill Oberst Jr.) attempts to tempt him into renouncing his faith, testing his resolve and belief in the teachings of Christ.

Robert Loggia, in the role of Peter, brings his usual gravitas to the character, but even his seasoned presence can't fully redeem the film. His portrayal of an aged, reflective Peter carries weight, but the script doesn't provide him with enough dynamic material to work with, leading to a performance that feels more static than engaging.

Gabriel Sabloff's direction is serviceable but lacks the urgency and focus necessary to keep the audience engaged. The film's pacing is particularly problematic; it drags through extended monologues and flashbacks that often feel redundant. The narrative meanders, struggling to find a balance between introspective moments and plot progression. This lethargic pacing turns what could have been a poignant meditation on faith and redemption into a slog that tests the viewer's patience.

Visually, the film doesn't do much to elevate its story. The cinematography is competent but uninspired, often relying on close-ups and dimly lit interiors that emphasize the confined setting but fail to create a visually engaging experience. The production design, while adequate, feels more like a stage set than a lived-in world, which further distances the audience from the story.

Bill Oberst Jr. Stands out as a demon attempting to tempt Peter one last time to deny Christ. And Bruce Marchiano, reprising his role as Jesus, brings a familiar calmness to the role, but his scenes lack the emotional resonance needed to make them memorable.

Overall, *Peter and the Last Supper* is a film carried by the strength of Robert Loggia's performance, and he deserved better.

The movie aspires to be a deep, contemplative film about faith and redemption, but it falls short due to its poor pacing and lack of narrative momentum, dragging on too long and struggling to maintain interest. For viewers with a deep interest in religious stories, there may still be some value here, but for most, the film is more of a chore than a spiritual journey.