NOTE IMDb
5,2/10
8,5 k
MA NOTE
Dans cette histoire intemporelle de passage à l'âge adulte, Marie est rejetée suite à une conception surnaturelle et obligée de fuir lorsque la soif insatiable de pouvoir d'Hérode déclenche ... Tout lireDans cette histoire intemporelle de passage à l'âge adulte, Marie est rejetée suite à une conception surnaturelle et obligée de fuir lorsque la soif insatiable de pouvoir d'Hérode déclenche une poursuite meurtrière pour le nouveau-né.Dans cette histoire intemporelle de passage à l'âge adulte, Marie est rejetée suite à une conception surnaturelle et obligée de fuir lorsque la soif insatiable de pouvoir d'Hérode déclenche une poursuite meurtrière pour le nouveau-né.
Ait ben Azzouz Brahim
- Market Protester
- (as Brahim Ait Mazouz)
Marie-Batoul Prenant
- Joseph's Mother
- (as Batoul Marie Prenant)
Aïssam Bouali
- Messenger Priest
- (as Aissam Bouali)
Avis à la une
"Mary" (2024) had the potential to be a powerful and moving portrayal of one of history's most significant figures. While the film boasts stunning visuals and a reverent tone, it ultimately falls short due to a lackluster screenplay and missed opportunities to delve deeper into Mary's emotional and spiritual journey.
The film chronicles Mary's life from her childhood to the birth of Jesus, touching upon key events and challenges she faced. While the production design and cinematography are commendable, creating a visually immersive experience, the narrative itself feels flat and uninspired.
The screenplay lacks depth and nuance, failing to fully explore Mary's internal struggles, her unwavering faith, and the profound impact of her experiences. The dialogue often feels stilted and lacks emotional resonance, preventing the audience from truly connecting with the characters and their journey.
The performances are adequate, but the actors are hampered by the weak script, preventing them from fully embodying the complexities of their roles. The film's pacing also suffers, with certain scenes feeling rushed while others drag on unnecessarily.
Despite its shortcomings, "Mary" (2024) offers glimpses of what could have been a truly powerful and inspiring film. The film's reverence for its subject matter and its stunning visuals are commendable. However, its lackluster screenplay and missed opportunities to explore the emotional and spiritual depths of Mary's story prevent it from reaching its full potential.
The film chronicles Mary's life from her childhood to the birth of Jesus, touching upon key events and challenges she faced. While the production design and cinematography are commendable, creating a visually immersive experience, the narrative itself feels flat and uninspired.
The screenplay lacks depth and nuance, failing to fully explore Mary's internal struggles, her unwavering faith, and the profound impact of her experiences. The dialogue often feels stilted and lacks emotional resonance, preventing the audience from truly connecting with the characters and their journey.
The performances are adequate, but the actors are hampered by the weak script, preventing them from fully embodying the complexities of their roles. The film's pacing also suffers, with certain scenes feeling rushed while others drag on unnecessarily.
Despite its shortcomings, "Mary" (2024) offers glimpses of what could have been a truly powerful and inspiring film. The film's reverence for its subject matter and its stunning visuals are commendable. However, its lackluster screenplay and missed opportunities to explore the emotional and spiritual depths of Mary's story prevent it from reaching its full potential.
My family and I were really looking forward to this movie.
Too bad it was awful. It came across almost kind of like Vikings or with game of thrones type characters. Do get me wrong, I loved Vikings. The angel Gabriel was creepier than the devil.
While I know they needed to take some "artistic freedom" with some of the unknown parts of the story, this film completely ignores things that are known. I'm not claiming to be a Bible scholar, but come on folks.
Mary was thought to be about 3 when she went into the temple, not 10-12 as in the movie. Her parents are believed to have died while she was in the temple, when she was about 8-9 years old. This is according to the Apostle James' writings.
The whole story around the entire town knowing Mary was pregnant was ridiculous to say the least. It actually contradicts what the Bible does say.
I could go on, but the film isn't worth my time.
Too bad it was awful. It came across almost kind of like Vikings or with game of thrones type characters. Do get me wrong, I loved Vikings. The angel Gabriel was creepier than the devil.
While I know they needed to take some "artistic freedom" with some of the unknown parts of the story, this film completely ignores things that are known. I'm not claiming to be a Bible scholar, but come on folks.
Mary was thought to be about 3 when she went into the temple, not 10-12 as in the movie. Her parents are believed to have died while she was in the temple, when she was about 8-9 years old. This is according to the Apostle James' writings.
The whole story around the entire town knowing Mary was pregnant was ridiculous to say the least. It actually contradicts what the Bible does say.
I could go on, but the film isn't worth my time.
I'm born a catholic, not into any specific relegion nowadays, but still feel a special connection to the person Mary and where she stands for. This movie didn't feel right.
Okay, i don't know much or better said anything about the childhood of Mary, but how it all went with Josef I think is better told in The Nativity Story (2006). I can'tt say many much further then... before I was half past through I stopped seeing the movie further. It wasn't my thing I believe is the story of Mary.
The part of the movie I've seen I liked only Anthony Hopkins as Herod, but also think he better watch out stopping acting before his decline. Also the temptation of Mary by Lucifer was splendid done in directing and the acting of Eamon Farren.
Okay, i don't know much or better said anything about the childhood of Mary, but how it all went with Josef I think is better told in The Nativity Story (2006). I can'tt say many much further then... before I was half past through I stopped seeing the movie further. It wasn't my thing I believe is the story of Mary.
The part of the movie I've seen I liked only Anthony Hopkins as Herod, but also think he better watch out stopping acting before his decline. Also the temptation of Mary by Lucifer was splendid done in directing and the acting of Eamon Farren.
CONS:
For Bible-study Christians this movie is going to disappoint. This is "Hollywood's" version of the story of Mary. I no longer practice any religion but I was raised Roman Catholic and did not see any similarities to what I was taught in Catechism. But alas, I realize the Catholic church's teachings may also be inaccurate. Also, the dialogue is rudimentary at best and storyline is rather choppy and rushed.
PROS: Great cinematography; visually stunning. It's other redeeming quality is Sir Anthony Hopkins as King Harod and other fine actor. A good thing, because only good actors could pull off the slow, awful dialogue and awkward moments in this film.
Overall, the film is entertaining albeit overly-dramatic and corny at times. If you're willing to just view it as entertainment, you may enjoy it more.
PROS: Great cinematography; visually stunning. It's other redeeming quality is Sir Anthony Hopkins as King Harod and other fine actor. A good thing, because only good actors could pull off the slow, awful dialogue and awkward moments in this film.
Overall, the film is entertaining albeit overly-dramatic and corny at times. If you're willing to just view it as entertainment, you may enjoy it more.
When I watched this movie, I found myself constantly checking the facts against Jewish, Christian, and Islamic history. The film claims to have been made with thorough research, but the result was deeply disappointing! While it's true that the historical account of Mary is limited, the writers could have drawn from various religious sources to paint a more accurate picture.
In Islam, Mary (Maryam) is depicted as a woman who gave birth alone, suffering from hunger and thirst in a state of exile, giving birth in a sheep's stable. According to the Islamic narrative, her baby even spoke to defend her against false accusations. Christianity also recounts how Mary and Joseph fled to another country to escape King Herod's mass killing of babies. But the film chose to overlook these crucial aspects, instead focusing on unnecessary dramatizations, like battle scenes and raids, which added nothing meaningful to the story.
Moreover, Islamic tradition highlights that Mary's family was deeply faithful and connected to Prophet Zechariah, a figure in both the Bible and the Quran. Yet this connection was not explored in the movie, missing another opportunity for a richer narrative.
There's also a significant issue that was pointed out by someone else- "the actress playing Mary appears to have lip fillers", which is an important detail. Given that this story takes place in ancient times, beauty standards were completely different, and women were naturally portrayed. It would have been far more fitting to cast an actress whose appearance was more in line with the era's natural beauty, instead of incorporating modern cosmetic alterations like fillers into the portrayal of such a historical and religious figure.
Additionally, the costumes, particularly in the temple scenes, felt very out of place. They looked more like something from a futuristic film, resembling the attire from *Dune*, *Star Wars*, or similar genres. This disconnected look only further detracts from the historical setting and the overall atmosphere of the film.
What I was hoping for from this film was the opportunity to enjoy the journey of Mary, to witness her faith, the struggles she faced while carrying her child, the dynamics of her family, and the birth of Jesus from multiple religious perspectives to enrich the narrative. Instead, the filmmakers missed the chance to deeply explore these themes, opting instead to focus on action scenes and distractions that didn't add value to the story.
In conclusion, "Mary" is a film that could have been a powerful portrayal of faith and adversity, but unfortunately, it falls short due to a lack of historical accuracy, miscasting, and an over-reliance on unnecessary action scenes.
In Islam, Mary (Maryam) is depicted as a woman who gave birth alone, suffering from hunger and thirst in a state of exile, giving birth in a sheep's stable. According to the Islamic narrative, her baby even spoke to defend her against false accusations. Christianity also recounts how Mary and Joseph fled to another country to escape King Herod's mass killing of babies. But the film chose to overlook these crucial aspects, instead focusing on unnecessary dramatizations, like battle scenes and raids, which added nothing meaningful to the story.
Moreover, Islamic tradition highlights that Mary's family was deeply faithful and connected to Prophet Zechariah, a figure in both the Bible and the Quran. Yet this connection was not explored in the movie, missing another opportunity for a richer narrative.
There's also a significant issue that was pointed out by someone else- "the actress playing Mary appears to have lip fillers", which is an important detail. Given that this story takes place in ancient times, beauty standards were completely different, and women were naturally portrayed. It would have been far more fitting to cast an actress whose appearance was more in line with the era's natural beauty, instead of incorporating modern cosmetic alterations like fillers into the portrayal of such a historical and religious figure.
Additionally, the costumes, particularly in the temple scenes, felt very out of place. They looked more like something from a futuristic film, resembling the attire from *Dune*, *Star Wars*, or similar genres. This disconnected look only further detracts from the historical setting and the overall atmosphere of the film.
What I was hoping for from this film was the opportunity to enjoy the journey of Mary, to witness her faith, the struggles she faced while carrying her child, the dynamics of her family, and the birth of Jesus from multiple religious perspectives to enrich the narrative. Instead, the filmmakers missed the chance to deeply explore these themes, opting instead to focus on action scenes and distractions that didn't add value to the story.
In conclusion, "Mary" is a film that could have been a powerful portrayal of faith and adversity, but unfortunately, it falls short due to a lack of historical accuracy, miscasting, and an over-reliance on unnecessary action scenes.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe movie is partially based on the apocryphal Gospel (or Protoevangelium) of James. It depicts Mary's miraculous conception and birth, as well as how she was offered in marriage to Joseph. The part where Herod the Great hears news from Bethlehem from his emissaries and describe how everything went motionless in that small town right after Baby Jesus was born is also contained in that apocryphal gospel.
- GaffesMary's mother Anne is blonde, or at least fair-haired. This is extremely unlikely in Israel at that time.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Relatable: Joel Osteen's 'Mary' Movie Gets the Gospel Wrong (2024)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Durée
- 1h 52min(112 min)
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant