The Centurion: Truly, this man was the son of God.
his accent and delivery of this line is astoundingly funny, worth sitting through the whole film just to hear it
"Dozens of people spontaneously combust each year. It's just not really widely reported."
Just as I've said elsewhere, I truly, sincerely doubt the truth of the famous "AWWW truly..." anecdote associated with Wayne's part in this film.
"If you don't know the answer -change the question."
Pat Boone as the angel at the grave was an even more inspired choice.
Telly Savalas is excellent as Pilate; of course you recognize him (in particular with *that* skull, though the film was made years before Kojak), but he's also totally convincing as a ruthless Roman official who knows his business.
I read in a book that Telly, shaved his head for that role, but he decided to keep it that way, because chicks found it sexy!
shareYup. That's true and Telly sure got that one right!
Regarding the John Wayne scene, all I can say is thank goodness I am not alone in thinking his delivery of that line was hysterical.
You must do the thing you think you cannot do. Eleanor Roosevelt
Hey, let's give the Duke a break here. If blame is to be found, it must be laid at the door of the director. John Wayne was (is) an icon. If anyone else had said that line just as Wayne said it, I doubt there'd be a thread on this site devoted to its criticism. John Wayne is to American pop culture as Winston Churchill is to British history. You can't make Churchill chief of pest control in Sussex, even for a day, and expect that nobody will notice.
shareIf blame is to be found, it must be laid at the door of the director.
[deleted]
This reply is awfully late, I realize. You make an interesting point, but I don't agree.
Actors have limits (well, there are a few exceptions -- but very few). Directors looking at actors must make a selection based on what they see as that actor's capabilities and, sadly in some cases, a public's long-held "perceptions" of that actor. Wayne brings with him not only his own identity but an identity the public has given to him based on a very long history, as you acknowledge. I mean, what is THE "proper tone" for a Centurian -- played by Wayne? We GOT that in the film. The "proper tone" for a Centurian played by, say, Dustin Hoffman would be entirely different. What would we have gotten with the line - "... as sure as the turnin' of the earth." - had, say, Dennis Hopper played Ethan Edwards in "The Searchers"?
If the producers insisted on Wayne's playing that role, Stevens could have insisted he not. Maybe he would have been summarily overruled, fired, etc. But . . . it's still his responsibility, and, as Brando said in "Mutiny on the Bounty" ('62) -- "it's an unjust world".
I was rofl when I saw that!
shareI had never seen all of this film, since I was always mesmerized with the superior "King of Kings" production, but I did find some parts of this film to be excellent. However, I had no idea that John Wayne was even in this film before seeing it fully thru on a local Christian station tonight, and I have to admit---when he delivered that line I instantly cracked up as well...and believe me, I almost felt afterwards because he seemed to be trying so hard, rofl.
As far as not believing the "AWWwww truly..." coming from him, why not?? Lets face it, as great as he was in Westerns, he was a one-dimensional actor. I can totally picture a director having a problem with his acting here, considering how bad that line is that actually MADE it into the film! So likewise, I can imagine John Wayne getting annoyed and doing something sarcastic, because he thinks nothing is wrong with his acting; or doing something funny because he knows this is not his strongsuit!
As funny as it was though, imho it should have been removed entirely for that reason. It was anti-climactic to say the least! If it would have been something buried in the middle of the film, it could have been forgotten, but that was just a BAD spot for a John Wayne cameo to take place. I bet everyone was a bit afraid to insult Wayne, hehe. Anyone else agree, it should have been cut??
"Why does the Earth have CLRS?" - Pocahontas in 'The New World'(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0402399/)
I have to agree that John Wayne's cameo was the worst thing about this movie. I watched it again tonight just to get the right kind of mood for the season but that line and his appearance always snaps me right out of the movie. I've been reading the reviews I can find on the film and all the critics hate the fact that it has so many cameos but I actually liked them especially Poitier, Savalas, and Ferrer's. Good movie, not great, but exceptional because of the great scenery shots and Von Sydow's performance. Can't wait to pop it in again on Easter weekend.
Merry Xmas and all that jazz.
I agree that John Wayne's cameo is a blight on this great movie. Von Sydow gave the best portrayal of Jesus that I have seen so far. I really liked Donald Pleasance as Satan/the dark hermit. I felt they really handled the temptation of Jesus in a novel and effective manner. Ferrer was really good. I liked how his Dad Claude Rains (excellent actor) dropped dead after hearing the news from his soldier that all the baby boys in Bethlehem had been slaughtered. God didn't waste time ,did He. Merry Christmas to you too.
shareAt least John Wayne took the odd risk in an attempt to shed his typecast. He was totally miscast in this film, however it wasn't the worst role he ever played; that honour goes to his portrayal of Genghis Khan in "The Conqueror". What were they thinking?
shareI heard this without seeing it.
A couple of decades ago, while flipping channels, I caught the very tail ending of the movie, at the cruxifiction. I understood that John Wayne was in this somewhere.
I had decided not to watch the movie (if you are at the cruxifiction you've missed most of the movie) and had turned my attention somewhere else when it dragged at one point. Perhaps I was checking the papers to see what else was on or had started reading a book --
-- when I heard the "Tru-ly this was the Son of God" line and instantly recognized Wayne. By the time I got around to take a look the movie was switching, so I didn't get much of a look-see at all.
Given that there are no cowboys or cowboy hats in the story, I can't think of any other role to give him. Of course, he's hysterically, horribly out of place, but I guess that in 1965 if you could get John Wayne into your all-star movie, you did it.
And, of course, you still leave the movie with a renewed look at the life of Jesus Christ.
tomtac
[deleted]
STORY was released in 1965, lefty -- although director Stevens had been filming it off-and-on for several years.
"Mr. Holmes, they were the footprints of a gigantic hound!"
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
What were they thinking by having western superstar John Wayne as the centurion supervising the crucifixion of Jesus and uttering that ultra serious line of dialogue in the most side-splittingly hilarious fashion? "Trewly this maan wuz the sun of gawd". Which makes this well mounted and beautifully photographed sequence unintentionally funny (which I'm sure was not the intention).
The only culprit here has to be DIRECTOR AND PRODUCER George Stevens as this is "George Stevens Presents The Greatest Story Ever Told--A George Stevens Production". Stevens was THE BOSS of this production being both DIRECTOR AND PRODUCER with final say on the cast and crew. As this was a very costly Cinerama film (a wide-screen process similar to the large screen IMAX films of today) the usual practice for these films was to have numerous cameos or "guest stars" appear for a few moments in the movie (as with "It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" and "How The West Was Won"--both Cinerama films) to ensure box office success. Great for a comedy or an epic western (John Wayne was a "guest star" in "How The West Was Won") but definitely not for an ultra serious version of the life of Jesus. So it wasn't Stevens being over-ruled by the film's producers in having John Wayne in the movie--George Stevens WAS THE PRODUCER of the movie!
So basically it's George Steven's fault that John Wayne's role in the movie makes this part of the movie into an unintentional comedy. Far better to just show Wayne and delete his awful line of dialogue from the soundtrack (by the way his line of dialogue WAS post-synchronized or added in later--his lips don't move in the sequence). Or better still cut his cameo part in the film altogether or just show a few seconds of him so he is unrecognizable. So the person who had final editing control over this and every other sequence in the movie was DIRECTOR and PRODUCER George Stevens. His fault.
This film is wonderful. I adore it. It's a beautiful, painterly, gorgeous, reverential film about the Christ.
But I wholeheartedly agree that Wayne's cameo nearly ruins the film. It's that bad.
I have to agree that John Wayne's cameo was the worst thing about this movie. I watched it again tonight just to get the right kind of mood for the season but that line and his appearance always snaps me right out of the movie. I've been reading the reviews I can find on the film and all the critics hate the fact that it has so many cameos but I actually liked them especially Poitier, Savalas, and Ferrer's. Good movie, not great, but exceptional because of the great scenery shots and Von Sydow's performance. Can't wait to pop it in again on Easter weekend.
I laugh just thinking about it. Two years ago, my dad died. At his funeral, we were all heartbroken and crying. Then for the reading they read the passage that ends with, "Truly this was the Son of God." Me and my family all went from crying to giggling in a matter of a heartbeat, and I know that somewhere, my dad was laughing too.
shareIt's one of those great movie lines that you never forget - inspired casting; I also like John's stance as he delivers the line - like he's just hopped off his horse. Makes me laugh every time :-)
share[deleted]
experienced damm heathen, you may do 50 stations of the cross, 5 thousand hail marys, a trip to Lourdes, and a new member of the wailing wall, sheeesh
I have to agree. The first time I watched this scene was about 30 years ago with my sister. If I remember correctly you only see the centurion from the back so it may not have been Wayne on the screen, and he just "phoned in" his lines. So we didn't know it was Wayne until the line was delivered, it was so incongruous to the scene, we both turned and looked at each other, totally stunned by his delivery. We couldn't stop laughing with tears in hour eyes for severeal minutes. Classic!
shareI just came across this and had to go look for it myself...
http://www.youtube.com/v/HK-OzjAoDHs&hl=en
And boy... it sounds like he's drunk when he says it... LOL, poor JW.
He sounds like he was drunk....
I just love how its just him alone in the dark. Boom! Now that's what I call a cameo!
John Wayne should have played other parts than the centurion:
Satan tempting Jesus in the wilderness: "Wull, Pilgrim, why dontcha come on in and have some of this grub - there's plenty..."
Pontius Pilate: "Aw... if this man's guilty I'm a monkey's uncle. But just to keep you polecats happy, I'll rough 'im up a little for ya."
Jesus: "Wull... Love your enemies and do what's right in this ol' world to them that hatecha. Or, punch 'em in the nose."
John Wayne should have played other parts than the centurion:
Satan tempting Jesus in the wilderness: "Wull, Pilgrim, why dontcha come on in and have some of this grub - there's plenty..."
Pontius Pilate: "Aw... if this man's guilty I'm a monkey's uncle. But just to keep you polecats happy, I'll rough 'im up a little for ya."
Jesus: "Wull... Love your enemies and do what's right in this ol' world to them that hatecha. Or, punch 'em in the nose."
Why, thank you, rocket - glad you liked it, Pilgrim (or Baby Sister, whichever works).
:)
It could have been worse, Carol Channing could have delivered the line.
I just watched this one for the first time. I had read reviews of it, and always assumed Wayne was being kidded for just being out of place. Well, he might have been, but the reading of his one line was about as poor as it gets. It is not the drawl. It is that he gets nothing into the line--no wonder, awe, emotion, understanding--just nothing.
If I had to pick the all time worst delivery of a line of dialogue I have heard, this one would top the list.
Other than John Wayne, I thought the movie was long and slow, but not nearly as bad as I had been led to believe. The American southwest doesn't look anything like the Holy Land, however.
If I had to pick the all time worst delivery of a line of dialogue I have heard, this one would top the list.
I think it's dubbing, but perhaps done deliberately, i.e., maybe Wayne's lips don't move because we are to understand that he is thinking to himself that Jesus is "truly the Son of God".
shareDespite my being a life-long Catholic, why would the centurion (out of the blue?) claim that Jesus truly was the Son of God solely from watching him die (seemingly like every other convict - though much sooner than expected - followed by lightning, thunder, & earthquakes)?
What am I missing?
You're gonna need a bigger boat.
Mark's Gospel wants to show that belief in Jesus as savior-messiah is passing into the Gentile world in the person of the Roman soldier. He alone among all the onlookers "gets" that Jesus is "truly the Son of God". His conclusion does not derive from the action on Calvary, as you mentioned. However, Mark's community and Mark's readers would know that, as they themselves are Gentile believers, the soldier represents their "father in faith". That is, the soldier is not a historical figure, but a pre-figuration of the believing Gentile Christians in Mark's community, for whom he was mostly writing his Gospel. A literary device, not literal history.
share