Home > Drama >

King of Kings

King of Kings (1961)

October. 11,1961
|
7
|
PG-13
| Drama History

Who is Jesus, and why does he impact all he meets? He is respected and reviled, emulated and accused, beloved, betrayed, and finally crucified. Yet that terrible fate would not be the end of the story.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Platicsco
1961/10/11

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

More
Beanbioca
1961/10/12

As Good As It Gets

More
Maleeha Vincent
1961/10/13

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

More
Mandeep Tyson
1961/10/14

The acting in this movie is really good.

More
federovsky
1961/10/15

A retelling of the gospels from Samuel "more-studio-than-sense" Bronston - clearly this is the film that Python was lampooning in The Life of Brian. The Biblical humourlessness is to be expected, but it's also rigid and stylised, either by design or lack of imagination, which lends it the unfortunate feel of a primary school nativity play.The story is embellished on the political side, with Hurd Hatfield playing a camp and effete Pilate and Brigid Bazlen's Salome providing the most memorable scene, relieving us of Robert Ryan's tedious John the Baptist, for which those of us without religious scruples may be thankful. Jesus and the disciples come across as a kind of gay brotherhood, which it is tempting to presume was Ray's hidden agenda.Spiritually it fails to uplift, partly because of the artificiality of the presentation, partly because Jesus seems to be in an insensate trance the whole time which undermines any sense of actual suffering. Mainly though, it's the explicit implication that God is pulling all the strings that subverts the power of the story. Later adaptations have avoided those pitfalls, this film is rooted in them.

More
don2507
1961/10/16

I own A DVD of this film and try to watch it at Easter time about every second or third year. In my view, it's the best and most reverent depiction of Christ's life that I've seen with a wonderful score by Miklos Rozsa and excellent production values associated with the epics of the famous producer Samuel Bronston (El Cid, Fall of the Roman Empire). Moreover, Orson Welles' splendid narration conveys the right amount of solemnity and descriptiveness.I'm well aware that King of Kings was largely panned by critics when first released, and although it has gained much in stature in recent decades, it still has its share of critics. Much of that criticism seems to be based on the blue-eyed, heartthrob Jeffrey Hunter playing Jesus in the film, and it was reported that he was selected for the positive effect his looks would have on the box office. But he's grown on me; he has a very rich and charismatic voice and a penetrating stare that conveys an other-worldly look ("my kingdom is not of this world"). His performance in the Sermon on the Mount is commanding and when asked "teach us to pray", his recitation of the Lord's Prayer is soaring and emotional. There's sympathy in his depiction of Jesus: "woman, where are they that condemn you?"; there's steadfastness: "do not tempt the Lord thy God! (to Satan in the wilderness), there's fear: "take this cup from me!" and then there's inscrutable resignation: no responses to Pilate's "art thou a God?" The doctrine of the Incarnation must make playing Christ extremely difficult as you must convey divine attributes and very human emotions.For my money, the best scenes for staging, visual and sound / musical effects, reverence, and spiritual depth and intensity are the aforementioned Sermon on the Mount, the temptations in the wilderness, Jesus' the extinction on the cross followed by dark clouds and rushing wind and the final acknowledgment of God's presence by the cynical centurion, and finally the off-camera presence revealed by a lengthening shadow of Christ's final admonition to the disciples at the Sea of Galilee to "go and make disciples of all nations" amid the soaring music of Rozas. Very inspiring moments! My one criticism, and I thought of knocking the rating down to a 9 because of this but did not, was the over-emphasis on Barabbas and his mission to violently oppose the Romans and free Judea. Barabbas was interested in political freedom. Compare this to Jesus who tells the guards of John the Baptist, who remains in his dungeon, that "I've come to free John from within himself." I suspect the minutes of the film given to Barabbas and his cohort were an excuse to provide several superfluous battle scenes with the Romans, add some unneeded "action" and attract younger audiences. Jesus is not El Cid!

More
dougandwin
1961/10/17

Having seen this Movie again after so many years, I was still taken with the excellent production and the magnificent portrayal of Jesus Christ by Jeffrey Hunter. In the world of today, when Religion is facing so much turmoil, it was a revelation to see the sincerity of the producers in making this film. The locations were excellent, and a number of cameos by well-known stars made it great entertainment. Robert Ryan was a surprise as John, while Ron Randell, Hurd Hatfield, Viveca Lindfors were excellent. Frank Thring,in a small role as Pontius Pilate hammed it up as usual. While this movie was made before all the gimmicks of computerisation, it has been very well presented and stands up very well today. Worth a re-look.

More
k-hill
1961/10/18

This is an awful movie. The acting is wooden, the sets are unhistorical and the central drama of the gospels is missing. It is as if the movie makers set out to make a tableaux set meant to inspire piety rather than understanding. This is a Sunday School story of Christ. Hunter simply doesn't know what to do with the role so he does nothing. Robert Ryan turns John the Baptist into a boring figure, which is quite an accomplishment. Why is Barabbas so important in this rendering? What liberties did the film makers take to get some good old action scenes into the film. Why is the set for Joseph and Mary's house about ten times larger than a real house would have been at the time. And why does no one look Jewish in the movie?Rip Torn as Judas Iscariot and Brigid Bazlen as Salome give a good effort in a lost cause. The score is superb but how much more interesting it might have been if they had used music contemporary to the time of the gospel instead of the lush Hollywood epic style of the late fifties?

More