NOTE IMDb
5,2/10
8,4 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
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.
6Nozz
The script is hokey and some details are improbable (and I don't mean the supernatural ones) but the actors deserve a lot of credit. Someone among the reviewers here remarked that you can't properly act out a New Testament story if you don't believe in the New Testament; but after all, an actor in a ghost story doesn't need to believe in ghosts and an actor who plays Stalin doesn't need to be a communist. "Mary" has good actors capable of selling unusual situations. Even if their accents aren't coordinated.
Recent movies have milked the motif of the Chosen One for all its worth. This movie, although comes by that motif naturally, hammers a little hard at it, while also playing with the tired motif of the young woman who is anachronistically feisty in olden times.
I understand that the apocryphal Gospel of James and the Quran have Mary working in the Temple as a child. From this item of questionable history, the "Mary" movie generates a whole sisterhood of youngsters who belong visually in The Handmaid's Tale. The Temple, meanwhile, operates in tense coexistence with the Roman rulers, and that tension provides relevant and ample, if melodramatic, filler material for the script.
Joseph, who is sometimes thought of as elderly, is young and energetic here. Maybe not agreeable to all followers of the religion, but good for the movie.
What is this Mary movie trying to tell us? Does it have a particular spin to sell? I'm not quite sure. It spends quite a bit of time on Herod, and a little time on Satan as well, and my impression is that besides (of course) promoting the positive historical role of women and of men who respect and defend them, it wants to reassure us that in the battle between good and evil, those who defy the foul fiend will ultimately win out.
Recent movies have milked the motif of the Chosen One for all its worth. This movie, although comes by that motif naturally, hammers a little hard at it, while also playing with the tired motif of the young woman who is anachronistically feisty in olden times.
I understand that the apocryphal Gospel of James and the Quran have Mary working in the Temple as a child. From this item of questionable history, the "Mary" movie generates a whole sisterhood of youngsters who belong visually in The Handmaid's Tale. The Temple, meanwhile, operates in tense coexistence with the Roman rulers, and that tension provides relevant and ample, if melodramatic, filler material for the script.
Joseph, who is sometimes thought of as elderly, is young and energetic here. Maybe not agreeable to all followers of the religion, but good for the movie.
What is this Mary movie trying to tell us? Does it have a particular spin to sell? I'm not quite sure. It spends quite a bit of time on Herod, and a little time on Satan as well, and my impression is that besides (of course) promoting the positive historical role of women and of men who respect and defend them, it wants to reassure us that in the battle between good and evil, those who defy the foul fiend will ultimately win out.
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.
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.
It is not a faithful adaptation of the Bible, but it is entertaining, with ups and downs such as the somewhat terrifying adaptation of the Archangel Gabriel, there may also be controversy with the Immaculate Conception, and it can divide Catholics. However, as a film it is entertaining and enjoyable, and it maintains the essence of complete trust in God, something that the world needs. If you are able to discern between what is an apocryphal gospel and what is really in the Holy Scriptures, I recommend it. If you're worried that it's a Netflix adaptation with modern messages, I'd say it's free of that, it has a mostly Jewish cast, and this is an opportunity to spread the gospel, the actress is being over-hated. If you're interested in the apocryphal gospels and the early church I highly recommend it.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn Matthew 1:18, we are not told about Mary's age, yet it is told that she was a virgin and was pledged to be married to Joseph. During this time in history, Jewish girls would have been betrothed to their husbands as early as the age of 12 years old. Scholars believe Mary would have been somewhere between 12 to 16 years old when she had Jesus. Other scholars say that ancient Jewish women would marry on average between their mid-teens and early twenties. It is therefore also possible that Mary was 18 when was betrothed to Joseph.
- 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
- Durée1 heure 52 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant