Maria di Nazaret

The temptation to be very critic about it or to appreciate it very much are the basic traits. Few scenes are more than beautiful. The rhytm is too alert and it represents only a sketch. Paz Vega offers a splendid performance and the short portrait of Pilat of Pont , well acted by Remo Girone is a charming surprise .

Yes, it is a personal perspective about life of the Savior , with few serious licences.

No doubts, the clothes, rooms, atmosphere of first century in the Middle East are just seductive.

And the smile of Alissa Jung in the role of Mother of God or the clothes and jewels of Antonia Liskova as Irodiada are fundamental good points, like the powerful references to religious paintings.

It is a beautiful film. In fact, this is the only matters thing because it has the gift to offer a voice among so many adaptations of the life of Jesus. The perspective of Mother of God about His Son activity, sufferance and death, resurrection and words is not new and the temptation to compare with the work of Pernilla August is not strange.

But it gives more than a formalistic fresco. And this makes it more than interesting.

So, a voice, not bad at whole.

Not the actual story, but a cleaned-up version removing most of the things a modern audience would not wish to know about.

Quite nicely done.

Good day: The Father and the Son are the Parents of the Holy Spirit, if many churches are correct. The Trinity is a Family-- two Parents and an Offspring, if many churches are correct.In the Book of Job which is part of the bible,the Lord is compared to a father and also a mother with a womb. "From whose womb comes the ice? Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens"--Job 38:29. What is written in this paragraph (before this sentence) is compatible with Catholic Church doctrine. Saying that the "Father and the Son are the Parents of the Holy Spirit" is simply another way of saying that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son" which has been official Catholic Church teaching for centuries. Of course, The scriptures are vague if the Holy Spirit is the 3rd or 1st or 2nd Person of the Trinity--whichever of these is true,the First Person and the Second Person may be the Parents of the Third.

Those who have read about the story/history of the Virgin Mary know that her family's story is a remarkable one. Mary of Nazareth simply tells the story of Jesus Christ's birth to death all over again -- which of course anyone who wants to see that should watch the famous Zeffirelli version, where the actors, costumes and sets are more authentic. The leading actress seems rather fake in many instances.

The saving grace of the film is St. Joseph, who is relatively well portrayed as the humble and loving husband and father. (No spoilers, but this is literally the best part of the film.)

The film should have focused much more on the story of the title character... through her remarkable death, which does not happen at all. A very disappointing film.

I believe that much effort has been put into this rendition, but there are scenes with Herod's brood and entourage that are distracting and seem to be purely imagined rather than based on reliable sources. I think that extra-biblical sources were consulted, which is certainly ok but I sometimes had trouble distinguishing what came from a reliable source and what was made up.

The best character depiction, in my opinion, is that of Joseph. The least credible depiction, to me, is Jesus. While most everyone else seems to "fit" the region, Jesus looks purely "Anglo" or Germanic--anything but Middle-Eastern. Worse, as a baby he is somewhat dark; as a child he is much lighter; as an an adult, quite Aryan. I was thrown off by this casting.