Judas

Sadly disappointed the acting was not convincing at all. The film does not sit together and is very inaccurate, it seems to lose focus on the main title character Judas, which by result misses out the point of the film in the first place.

This film does not leave you with any memories at all. There are a few laughs by the choice of dialog, You ask yourself several times 'Did they really say that? The plus side was the soundtrack was undoubtedly the best part of the film. Jesus of Nazareth still runs tops in the *Easter Must watch* joined by the more recent *superb* Passion of Christ.

Blaze

Jesus appears to be a surfer who's searching for but can't find the beach to go hang ten. Judas, dressed in black, is an emo who wants to get like totally rad against the Romans and hang ten all over their face. The rest of the cast are card board cut-outs; it's hard to figure out who is playing whom.

The movie appears to be well meaning, but it just goes all wrong. First of all, it takes all its source material from forgotten scripture, the Gospel of Gnarly. The writers come up with stuff that doesn't fit with known scripture, and to say the writer took poetic license is being nice. Jesus comes across as confused, wimpy, and suffering from severe sleep deprivation. Judas just yells and screams at him, so that they can launch a military campaign of two men to overthrow the Roman Empire.

Judas is always mad, and it makes no sense that Jesus would have called this guy as an apostle in the first place. From then on they bicker, with Jesus always sounding like a 1st grade teacher, and Judas sounding like a cross between Fred Flintstone and General George Patton. The fact that the acting is weak makes these awkward characterizations even more bizarre. Events from the passion are tossed and turned, out of context, and out of logical chronology.

This should only be viewed as a novelty, as a case study of just how far a story can stray from source material.

This well-written film by Tom Fontana uses colloquial English to weave together the theme of power against the humble. Judas vs. Jesus. It is difficult to imagine how the disciples went out two-by-two, but it all seems reasonable in the humorous, but inspiring story of Judas and James bringing a lady back to life. The music underscores the power of God in scenes like the call of Matthew when Jesus pays a poor man's taxes and asks Matthew to follow Him.

The film explains why Judas originally took the money by giving Judas a mother who needed a funeral. It was clever signal to Judas when Jesus says, "Did you come with swords to capture me, as though I were a common thief?" Many things are explained by the expanded role of Pilate's wife and Flavius. For example, Claudia knew about the custom of releasing a prisoner for the Passover and because Flavius was under arrest, Judas had to identify Jesus.

How can a person get a video of JUDAS? I hope it will be shown next Easter and with more advertising than last March.

One critic said it best when he wrote, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. I am of course referring to the producers of this drivel." "JUDAS", although dealing (or attempting to deal with) a Christian theme, is a terrible waste of film whether watched from a Christian or non-Christian viewpoint. Besides terrible acting, an awful script, laughable dialogue, an unmoving score, C.G. effects that seem to have been created ten years ago, and a story about as biblically accurate as "MONTY PYTHON AND THE SEARCH FOR THE HOLY GRAIL", it was very hard for me to even imagine what effect the filmmakers were thinking this film would have on it's audience.

The characters actions are motivated by events that contradict what actually took place according to the four gospels and with the acting as it is we really do not know what the characters actions are motivated by at all. The acting in "JUDAS" is something I have never before seen in my life. Not one actor in this movie was even believable – forget compelling and in the filmmakers attempt to "humanize" Jesus He ends up being played not as God enrobed in flesh, savior of the world, or even a wise teacher, but more as a young hippie who is far from all knowing; so far from it, in fact, that throughout the movie we see him constantly confused over what move to make next. (Some scenes with Jesus are so unintelligently done that they border on blasphemous.)

I could continue to write in detail on how terrible this movie was at every level, but to list everything would take hours. Some films just needed a better director, some just need better actors; this film is proof that some should have never been made.

Excellent films concerning the life of Jesus: Mel Gibson's "THE PASSION OF THE Christ." Philip Saville's "THE GOSPEL OF JOHN."

Its good intentions are obvious. New perspectives about familiar events, a nuanced story and a subtle portrait of Judas . The only sin - it is not exactly credible. it seems an improvised project and , after so many films about same subject, a too cool Savior can be a great mistake. And, unfortunately, it is it. Sure, many reserves about script and acting, about not the inspired dialogue, but the error remains something perceived as a sort of superficiality looking for give a decent image of a friendship and a controversal character. It is not a rehabilitation, not a good explanation. It is only an exercise, not bad, to define obscure aspects . The story has not exactly coherence. The resurrection of Lazarus is awfull .The effort of Johnathon Schaech works not very well, the temptation to give a modern version to a sacred story is , at the end, not the most inspired idea. And the Lord, he seems too much with a young hippie or a rock star in early career. The good point - Bob Gunton as Caiaphas. But, sure, the film remains a nice try.