'Greatest Story Ever Told' VS 'The Passion of the Christ'

[deleted]

I recall a review (a very long time ago) referring to this film which said "Never have some many great actors played so many small parts so poorly.".
My instinct is to agree. I adore Max Von Sydow (who plays Christ), however, I would never have chosen him for this role.
Aside from a rather large historical and cinematic liscense this film takes, I found it a very "sterile" version of the life of Christ.
I think it unfair to compare the two films (Passion of the Christ and Greatest Story ever told) as they are of two different eras and genres.
The Passion of the Christ is a more graphic telling of the last days of Jesus' life, beginning with his arrest. (it is) More a treatise of the arrest, trials, torture and crucifiction of Christ.
The Greatest Story Ever Told is more an overview of the Life of Christ, culminating in his death and ressurection.
just my two cents
[email protected]

I think we were lucky enough to see Jesus' face in both movies. All the ones before "Greatest Story", you never saw his face, or at least not clearly.

GSET is, without question, the most intensely HUMAN portrayal of Christ and his Message that has ever been presented.

Along with The Gospel According to St. Matthew, GSET give you the impression that you are watching actual people who lived and breathed; unlike films such as Ben Hur, The Robe, and especially King of Kings (and parenthetically The Ten Commandments) where the characters are just that -iconic characters. They never truly come across as human beings.

THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST is brilliant in that, while the action is more or less limited to the events of one night/day and the overall theological message gets downplayed, the actual human sacrifice Jesus made is driven home.

Unlike any other Jesus film ever made, PASSION drives home with brutal honesty the extent of the suffering one man was willing to make for those he loved.

Bottom line, GSET is far supior as an overall, family-friendly film that covers pretty much the whole Biblical story from an even-handed discreetly reverential point of view without turning the characters into plaster saints (come on, Carl Sandburg had a hand in it, it's GOT to be warm and fuzzy).

PASSION is my second choice in that it drives home the message and reminds us that death by crucifixion was unspeakably, hideously painful -and that one man believed enough in his mission to endure that for the rest of us.

I would also hasten to point out that whether you believe Jesus was the Messiah, a prophet or just a teacher ("Rabbi") -the great fact that gets lost amid the theology is that he believed enough in what he preached to die for it.

A thought to dwell on and to remember wherever men walk the earth.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

As some others have said, they are somewhat different movies, even if they are connected.

I prefer GSET, because it gives you more of Jesus' ministry, and more depth to more of the other people in the New Testament. However, in order to appreciate GSET, you have to appreciate the more subtle emotion that Max Von Sydow puts into the role of Jesus, and not everyone watching in the 2000s will get that.

The Passion has nothing subtle about it. That being said, it is a more intense look at the trial, beating and crucifixion of Jesus. So I will grant the Passion has qualities that GSET doesn't have.

But GSET has the most uplifting resurrection scene - brings tears to my eyes every time I see it (like it did this afternoon). You actually see joy and relief from the disciples and Mary Magdelene when they realize what has happened, and the Alleluia Chorus captures the hope we have as Christians, that as we die and are buried like Christ, we will also rise like Him.

In the Passion, the resurection is just a five-second footnote. I realize that the Passion wasn't suppossed to be about the resurrection, but since there is so little of it I found the ending to be a let down.

The Greatest Story Ever Told is far superior to Gibson's bloody, sadistic, gory film. There is absolutely no reverence whatsoever in Gibson's film. It's just an exercise in shallow sadism, almost like a hardcore wrestling match. The film really disappointed me.

Ironically, I saw The Greatest Story Ever Told shortly after seeing Gibson's film. David Lean directed some scenes in this film (the film was way behind budget, and Lean and George Stevens, the film's director, really respected each other, so Lean helped out), so I rented it on that basis. The overall film is beautifully shot, classically composed, and quite moving. There's excellent use of the opening strands of Verdi's Requiem during the crucifixion scene. As for the star cameos, Stevens said something really interesting about that. He said in a 100 years time, no one would remember the stars, and would just see the film without being a "star watcher". He's right. Unless you know a lot of Hollywood history, it won't distract you. Having said that, John Wayne's cameo as a centurion is really awful. It nearly ruins the film.

I really hated Gibson's film. There was no spirituality in it at all. There was in Stevens's film.

i think gibson's treatment was one of the worst. its was like the world wrestling federation flogging boring with no passion. It did not touch your heart. walked out of the theatre totally disappointed.. this george steven version is better. but i really enjoyed king of kings (don't know why it gets criticized)and like the gospel according to st matthew 1964 better.

I guess GREATEST STORY is better. For story, less gore and violence.

Think maybe they should be merged. PASSION is mostly the crusifiction, and his last hours. STORY is pretty much his life story, but I do think some is missing. Throw in some MARY, MOTHER OF JESUS.


For DEMONIC TOYS and updates on Full Moon Films:
www.freewebs.com/demonictoys/