MovieChat Forums > The Young Messiah (2016) Discussion > First of a planned trilogy?

First of a planned trilogy?


I saw it tonight and it really seemed to end as the first chapter of a trilogy.

If you don't want any spoilers stop reading...

So it ends with Mary finally telling Jesus that he's the son of God. Satan never does MUCH and it seems like there's more planned for him. The story with Sean Bean and the king doesn't really seem to end and is just kind of left open.

So there are a lot of loose threads. I think they plan on making it a trilogy, maybe every 3 or 4 years watching this kid grow up and seeing Jesus in different stages of his life.

reply

The movie is based on a book by Anne Rice. There is in fact another that follows and there was a plan for a 3rd book , which Anne Rice seems to have abandoned (she's fallen out with the Church again). So the writes to the first book where sold. Not sure what will happen with the second book becoming a movie, but technically it is an unfinished series.

reply

oops...rights. lol. should have proof read.😳

reply

she's fallen out with the Church again

I do not understand that. A good writer does not need to believe in the truthfulness of the concepts he/she is exploring, the goal is just to craft good stories. She surely does not believe that vampires really exist, does she?
Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

reply

Actually, it is some what relevant if you know the context. Anne Rice has a very tumultuous relationship with her faith and the church. She did in fact write about vampires partially to "rebel" or explore a "darker" side (for lack of a better term). I have read interviews were Anne says that she has gone back to the church and this was when she planned to, and started writing the Christ the Lord series. Anne then publicly split from the Church and started writing Vampire novels again. If you look on her website you will see that the timing is perfect. She stopped writing the CTL series when she split with the Church. Apparently, no longer inspired. So, as I do understand your point, there actually was context to my statement.

reply

The story of the Roman soldier and the king pretty much looked complete to me. Herod's kid was pretty much rendered irrelevant when the Roman soldier discovered Jesus's identity. On an unrelated side note, the concept of the crucifix makes sense when you interpret it not as a bizarre symbol of torture but rather a symbol that demonstrates that God was more powerful than the Roman establishment. It's a symbol of mockery of the Roman system. The Roman soldier's relationship with Herod's son was made irrelevant.

reply

as someone said its based on an Ann Rice Novel titled "Christ The Lord Out OF Egypt"

"Touchdoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooown Auburn"

reply