Jésus de Montréal
- 1989
- Tous publics
- 1h 58m
IMDb RATING
7.5/10
7.8K
YOUR RATING
A group of actors put on an unorthodox, but acclaimed Passion Play which incites the opposition of the Catholic Church while the actors' lives themselves begin to mirror the Passion itself.A group of actors put on an unorthodox, but acclaimed Passion Play which incites the opposition of the Catholic Church while the actors' lives themselves begin to mirror the Passion itself.A group of actors put on an unorthodox, but acclaimed Passion Play which incites the opposition of the Catholic Church while the actors' lives themselves begin to mirror the Passion itself.
- Director
- Writer
- Stars
- Nominated for 1 Oscar
- 18 wins & 12 nominations total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
10James B.
"Jesus of Montreal" is one of my two favorite films...it's tough for me to decide on one or the other (the other is "With Honors"), but it's one or two. This film has meant so much to me over the years, with its simple, powerful messages of artistic freedom, personal redemption, perseverance during a personal quest...and how heartbreaking the world, and reality, can be.
The male lead has a beautiful Zen-like quality about him during this film...meaning the character as well as the actor. I'd love to see more of his work.
I can only watch this movie once in a while, as it moves me to tears too easily. It's very funny in places, too.
The male lead has a beautiful Zen-like quality about him during this film...meaning the character as well as the actor. I'd love to see more of his work.
I can only watch this movie once in a while, as it moves me to tears too easily. It's very funny in places, too.
A priest in a large Catholic church in Montreal thinks the church's annual passion play is getting stale and needs updating. He hires Daniel, an actor, to accomplish this task. Daniel takes his assignment seriously, thinking and studying and putting together a cast of talented actors. The quest for the cast is quite humorous - one actor is dubbing an adult movie, another is appearing in a perfume ad (where she is seen walking on water), and so forth. The actors indeed come up with a play that has the play's audience moving from location to location for the performance of each station.
The passion play performed in this movie gave me a better appreciation and understanding of the power and significance of the Jesus myth than anything I have ever read or seen. As a lifelong atheist I can say it is wonderful. Lothaire Bluteau gives a powerful (even passionate?) performance as Jesus.
I was uncertain where "Jesus of Montreal" was going after the performance of the passion play. But that is where things really got interesting. Performing the play has had a marked effect on the cast and Daniel's life starts to take on certain aspects of the life of Christ. Director/writer Denys Arcand is clever in the way he presents the parallels.
Daniel is tempted by a publicist who tells him he can make him rich and famous and details some of the techniques. One suggestion is that Daniel write a book, and when Daniel says he doesn't have anything to say the publicist retorts, "Some ways of saying nothing go over so well. Think of Ronald Reagan." And there are plenty of writers who could write the book and, at the least, Daniel could publish a cookbook, since they always sell.
There is a parallel to Christ's running the moneychangers out of the temple, healing the sick, and even the crucifixion. The play is too avant-garde for the Church and they try to shut it down - refusing to desist Daniel is arrested in the middle of the play while he is on the cross. The movie is filled with such pointed commentary.
In passing Arcand touches on the deficiencies of the Canadian health care system (an emergency patient is told to take number forty-eight and wait in line), a topic that he would expand on in "The Barbarian Invasions." As a subtle commentary in the context of the story, Saint Mark's Hospital is seen as hopelessly chaotic whereas the Jewish hospital is shown as professional and efficient.
As Daniel and his troupe of actors take on more and more of a modern day version of Jesus and his disciples the question arises as to what the reaction would be to Jesus in our modern society. The answer seems to be that he would be regarded as a nut case except by the few who knew him closely and identified with his message.
Arcand's talents as a director are not to be underestimated. The staging of the passion play is beautifully done and some of the camera angles used in the church scenes are very creative. As in other Arcand films he uses music by Francois Dompierre mixed with some classical compositions (in this case Pergolesi) to great effect.
I came to this movie after having seen and enjoyed Arcand's "The Decline of the American Empire" and "The Barbarian Invasions." After now having seen "Jesus of Montreal," I think I can say I am an Arcand fan.
This is a clever, humorous, satiric, and absorbing film.
The passion play performed in this movie gave me a better appreciation and understanding of the power and significance of the Jesus myth than anything I have ever read or seen. As a lifelong atheist I can say it is wonderful. Lothaire Bluteau gives a powerful (even passionate?) performance as Jesus.
I was uncertain where "Jesus of Montreal" was going after the performance of the passion play. But that is where things really got interesting. Performing the play has had a marked effect on the cast and Daniel's life starts to take on certain aspects of the life of Christ. Director/writer Denys Arcand is clever in the way he presents the parallels.
Daniel is tempted by a publicist who tells him he can make him rich and famous and details some of the techniques. One suggestion is that Daniel write a book, and when Daniel says he doesn't have anything to say the publicist retorts, "Some ways of saying nothing go over so well. Think of Ronald Reagan." And there are plenty of writers who could write the book and, at the least, Daniel could publish a cookbook, since they always sell.
There is a parallel to Christ's running the moneychangers out of the temple, healing the sick, and even the crucifixion. The play is too avant-garde for the Church and they try to shut it down - refusing to desist Daniel is arrested in the middle of the play while he is on the cross. The movie is filled with such pointed commentary.
In passing Arcand touches on the deficiencies of the Canadian health care system (an emergency patient is told to take number forty-eight and wait in line), a topic that he would expand on in "The Barbarian Invasions." As a subtle commentary in the context of the story, Saint Mark's Hospital is seen as hopelessly chaotic whereas the Jewish hospital is shown as professional and efficient.
As Daniel and his troupe of actors take on more and more of a modern day version of Jesus and his disciples the question arises as to what the reaction would be to Jesus in our modern society. The answer seems to be that he would be regarded as a nut case except by the few who knew him closely and identified with his message.
Arcand's talents as a director are not to be underestimated. The staging of the passion play is beautifully done and some of the camera angles used in the church scenes are very creative. As in other Arcand films he uses music by Francois Dompierre mixed with some classical compositions (in this case Pergolesi) to great effect.
I came to this movie after having seen and enjoyed Arcand's "The Decline of the American Empire" and "The Barbarian Invasions." After now having seen "Jesus of Montreal," I think I can say I am an Arcand fan.
This is a clever, humorous, satiric, and absorbing film.
"Jesus of Montreal" is a beautiful film about the real meaning of spirituality. Pitted against the inflexibility of religious institutions, Daniel (played wonderfully by Lothaire Bluteau) shows his rag-tag disciples the real meaning behind the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. The story-within-the-story works well. Director Denys Arcand subtly begins to blend the story of the biblical Jesus with the day-to-day lives of a group of actors performing in a play about the last days of Jesus. The turning over of the tables in the Temple, the temptation of Jesus overlooking the city of Jerusalem, being abandoned by the male disciples, and many other tales of Jesus find their parallel in the lives of Daniel and his friends. The resurrection scene at the end of the film is a particularly moving overlapping of the two stories. In the hands of a lesser writer/director, this could have all been really trite. Instead, the film becomes in the truest sense of the term a parable in which we see how great truths from a great teacher really do apply in our own lives. Every performance is pitch perfect, the pace is just right, and the message is, as always, what we all need to remember: Real happiness lies not in what we have but in what we give. A ten out of ten film.
All of us knows who Jesus is, right?
This movie brings to light a concept of Jesus that most people do not know is a topic of serious academic scholarship. The question is, "What can we reasonably say about Jesus based solely on historical sources?" Of course, the Bible is the primary source, since Jesus is referred to only in passing by nonreligious sources of his time. And, because this is an historical pursuit, one goal is also to separate those things which are clearly matters of faith from those which do not require a religious faith in the man. Therefore, we are left with a Jesus who led an iconoclastic life and was killed for it. The historian cannot say in an historical journal that Jesus was divine, walked on water, or was raised from the dead. This portrait is called "The Historical Jesus".
The historian can, however, make a personal statement of faith-- "I believe Jesus is the Anointed of God, who saves us from our sins". This is not the statement made by "Jesus of Montreal". Masterfully, the cast and crew of the film weave a tale which demands several viewings to fully consume. Both explicitly and through the use of metaphor, Jesus is depicted as a revolutionary teacher of great charisma and whose life was one of tragedy. But this film is not about the traditional Christian concept of Jesus; rather, it illustrates only the human aspects of the man who is, to me, God incarnate. This is the story of Jesus, the man-- not Jesus, the Christ. Christians may be disappointed by it, or outraged, but I encourage us all to remember that where that where faith (trust in that which cannot be observed) begins, there the historian (or scientist) must stop. Believers go further. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who wants to think, be they a believer or not.
This movie brings to light a concept of Jesus that most people do not know is a topic of serious academic scholarship. The question is, "What can we reasonably say about Jesus based solely on historical sources?" Of course, the Bible is the primary source, since Jesus is referred to only in passing by nonreligious sources of his time. And, because this is an historical pursuit, one goal is also to separate those things which are clearly matters of faith from those which do not require a religious faith in the man. Therefore, we are left with a Jesus who led an iconoclastic life and was killed for it. The historian cannot say in an historical journal that Jesus was divine, walked on water, or was raised from the dead. This portrait is called "The Historical Jesus".
The historian can, however, make a personal statement of faith-- "I believe Jesus is the Anointed of God, who saves us from our sins". This is not the statement made by "Jesus of Montreal". Masterfully, the cast and crew of the film weave a tale which demands several viewings to fully consume. Both explicitly and through the use of metaphor, Jesus is depicted as a revolutionary teacher of great charisma and whose life was one of tragedy. But this film is not about the traditional Christian concept of Jesus; rather, it illustrates only the human aspects of the man who is, to me, God incarnate. This is the story of Jesus, the man-- not Jesus, the Christ. Christians may be disappointed by it, or outraged, but I encourage us all to remember that where that where faith (trust in that which cannot be observed) begins, there the historian (or scientist) must stop. Believers go further. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who wants to think, be they a believer or not.
A robust, inventive parallel to the life of Christ. This film seems to display utter commitment and genuine integrity. It is moving without being sentimental, and tells its tale with rigour and without too many contrived plot developments. The performances are splendid. You don't have to be religious to appreciate this one, since it stands up in its own right, even if the parallels are ignored. Deserves to be better known.
Did you know
- TriviaMore instances that mirror the life of Christ as recorded in the Gospels: - Daniel recruits actors to work with him similar to the way Jesus recruited his disciples. The first, Constance, is found working charitably in a soup kitchen, and Daniel says simply, "I came for you." - The judge (like Pilate) sends Daniel to a second-opinion person (the psychologist is like Herod) who finds nothing wrong with him and sends him back to the judge/Pilate.
- GoofsAround 1:46:21. Boom mic enters the shot twice above Constance when she's talking to the ambulance paramedic at the hospital.
- SoundtracksPritouritze Planinata
Performed by Les Voix Bulgares
- How long is Jesus of Montreal?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- Jesus of Montreal
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $1,601,612
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $20,388
- May 27, 1990
- Gross worldwide
- $1,601,612
- Runtime
- 1h 58m(118 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content