fomlife777
Joined Sep 2008
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings17
fomlife777's rating
Reviews14
fomlife777's rating
Instead of going to the theater tonight to see 'The Hunger Games' with a mob of tween girls, I stayed home with my wife to watch a religiously based film on our old fashioned non-flat TV screen. Because it is Lent I wanted to stay away from secular films if possible until this season of fasting and sacrifice was over. I choice the narrow way of Jesus films and watched 1961's 'King of Kings' with actor Jeffrey Hunter as the Word made flesh.
The movie is one of those old fashioned spectacles of biblical proportion that you just don't see made any more. It has big huge crowds, grand locations and 50's versions of ancient wardrobes. As the custom of films of the period after hiking through the desert many miles the roman legion has not broken out in a sweat and their uniforms are all neat and tidy. It is similar to a remark my mother made about a 50's film about Lewis and Clark in which even the trees looked clean.
The historical background given by the narrator in the beginning of the film gives the biblical story a interesting historical setting in which to tell this tale of the Christ. When the movie sticks with the extra-biblical happenings with the surrounding players Herod, Pilot, Pilot's wife, Barabbas, and Lucius the roman soldier it is very interesting. The actual scenes portraying Christ and his mission are the weak and disappointing aspects of this film. The reason for this is that the biblical scenes are watered down and rushed through. Scriptural passages are spread out over several scenes having characters say things long after they should have said them. Certain details are skipped that would have given the movie more of an punch and other scenes that are not part of the biblical text are added.
John the Baptist (the most bland portal of JTB put on film, give me Charlton Heston any day) preaches outside Herod's temple, Jesus is appointed a court layer and the people who wanted him arrested and killed are not seen at his trial or on the hill side taunting him. The director put so much $ on scenes such as the Romans killing the uprising of Barabbas's army they didn't even bother with the dramatic impact and possibilities of the crucifixion. In films such as Ben Hur and The Robe Jesus stands out more because he is not filmed doing things he never did in such great detail. King of Kings was more about Barabbas and the political atmosphere then it was about Jesus and his mission of building the kingdom of God. It would be better to have Jesus totally in the back ground then to rush through and rearrange the biblical account in the scenes that He is in. You would never guess from this film that this man is the son of God and that there was any deep spiritual dimension to the story.
Mind you this is not a bad film. It's just that it is not a great one either. There is a list of unique touches and interesting aspects that make it interesting to watch which I will not mention here to keep this review short and not equal to the 3 hours it takes to watch this cinematic epic from the early 60's. It is best to stick with 'The Miracle Maker', 'The Passion of the Christ', or the 1927 'King of Kings' version by 'Ten Commandments' director Cecil B DeMille for a more authentic and entertaining version of the life of Christ or 'Ben Hur' and 'The Robe' for tales of Roman oppression with action and adventure. Kings of Kings ends up tripping over its robes and hits it's face on its celluloid thrown while still managing to look good.
The movie is one of those old fashioned spectacles of biblical proportion that you just don't see made any more. It has big huge crowds, grand locations and 50's versions of ancient wardrobes. As the custom of films of the period after hiking through the desert many miles the roman legion has not broken out in a sweat and their uniforms are all neat and tidy. It is similar to a remark my mother made about a 50's film about Lewis and Clark in which even the trees looked clean.
The historical background given by the narrator in the beginning of the film gives the biblical story a interesting historical setting in which to tell this tale of the Christ. When the movie sticks with the extra-biblical happenings with the surrounding players Herod, Pilot, Pilot's wife, Barabbas, and Lucius the roman soldier it is very interesting. The actual scenes portraying Christ and his mission are the weak and disappointing aspects of this film. The reason for this is that the biblical scenes are watered down and rushed through. Scriptural passages are spread out over several scenes having characters say things long after they should have said them. Certain details are skipped that would have given the movie more of an punch and other scenes that are not part of the biblical text are added.
John the Baptist (the most bland portal of JTB put on film, give me Charlton Heston any day) preaches outside Herod's temple, Jesus is appointed a court layer and the people who wanted him arrested and killed are not seen at his trial or on the hill side taunting him. The director put so much $ on scenes such as the Romans killing the uprising of Barabbas's army they didn't even bother with the dramatic impact and possibilities of the crucifixion. In films such as Ben Hur and The Robe Jesus stands out more because he is not filmed doing things he never did in such great detail. King of Kings was more about Barabbas and the political atmosphere then it was about Jesus and his mission of building the kingdom of God. It would be better to have Jesus totally in the back ground then to rush through and rearrange the biblical account in the scenes that He is in. You would never guess from this film that this man is the son of God and that there was any deep spiritual dimension to the story.
Mind you this is not a bad film. It's just that it is not a great one either. There is a list of unique touches and interesting aspects that make it interesting to watch which I will not mention here to keep this review short and not equal to the 3 hours it takes to watch this cinematic epic from the early 60's. It is best to stick with 'The Miracle Maker', 'The Passion of the Christ', or the 1927 'King of Kings' version by 'Ten Commandments' director Cecil B DeMille for a more authentic and entertaining version of the life of Christ or 'Ben Hur' and 'The Robe' for tales of Roman oppression with action and adventure. Kings of Kings ends up tripping over its robes and hits it's face on its celluloid thrown while still managing to look good.
A cars salesman. Football Players. Fireman and Marriage. And now Policeman and Fatherhood. 'Courageous' is the fourth cinematic courageous outing from Sherwood Baptist Church in which it chronicles the lives of several policeman who strive to become as good of fathers as they are policemen.
As Christian cinema goes it never gets too preachy and the acting is as good as the characters they portray. There is some real suspense and some genuine laughs mixed with some moments that made my wife cry. I love movies where my wife cries as it reveals how sensitive her heart is. I also laugh at her for being a typical woman. I also love to hear her laugh as she does so with more mirth then anyone I know. It fills me with joy. A movie where my wife laughs and cries is a good criteria of how to judge the worth of a film.
A movie that encourages men to be courageous in their responsibilities to their families when there are so many fatherless children is an important message that gets underplayed in a culture that does not value the foundation of the family with its glorification of non-committal relationships. I happen to be a blessed man by having a father who was there for me and taught me how to be a decent person. I hope that when my wife and I finally do get children I will be a courageous father who sacrifices for his children.
This film will appeal mostly to faith filled Christians. But because it is not just a sappy art deprived piece of Christian film-making, I think it could appeal beyond its target demographic, to all people who enjoy a well told story with an important message.
As Christian cinema goes it never gets too preachy and the acting is as good as the characters they portray. There is some real suspense and some genuine laughs mixed with some moments that made my wife cry. I love movies where my wife cries as it reveals how sensitive her heart is. I also laugh at her for being a typical woman. I also love to hear her laugh as she does so with more mirth then anyone I know. It fills me with joy. A movie where my wife laughs and cries is a good criteria of how to judge the worth of a film.
A movie that encourages men to be courageous in their responsibilities to their families when there are so many fatherless children is an important message that gets underplayed in a culture that does not value the foundation of the family with its glorification of non-committal relationships. I happen to be a blessed man by having a father who was there for me and taught me how to be a decent person. I hope that when my wife and I finally do get children I will be a courageous father who sacrifices for his children.
This film will appeal mostly to faith filled Christians. But because it is not just a sappy art deprived piece of Christian film-making, I think it could appeal beyond its target demographic, to all people who enjoy a well told story with an important message.