c. 2000 Religion News Service
NASHVILLE, Tenn. _ From Cecil B. DeMille’s “The King of Kings” in 1927 to Denys Arcand’s “Jesus of Montreal” in 1989, films about Jesus have sought a middle ground between the filmmaker’s message and the figure described in the Gospels.
Scholars from the Society of Biblical Literature explored the implications of two books examining the “Jesus genre” in a special session in November during the society’s annual joint meeting here with the American Academy of Religion. Thousands of academicians attended the joint meeting.
The discussion centered on two new books: “Savior on the Silver Screen” by Richard C. Stern, Clayton N. Jefford and Guerric DeBona and “Jesus at the Movies: A Guide to the First Hundred Years” by W. Barnes Tatum.
Jesus movies reflect the goals, desires, even the theologies of their filmmakers, scholars said. Some strive to inspire, others to entertain.
Some focus on the Jewishness of Jesus, including footage of his boyhood and events related to Judaism. Others portray him as savior, stressing Jesus the Christ.
On some theatrical sets, a Jesus film means movie-making as usual. On others, such as Cecil B. DeMille’s for “The King of Kings,” prayer was encouraged.
Studying the history of such films offers insights into cultural and historical trends, said Adele Reinhartz of McMaster University, one of several scholars who reviewed the two books on Jesus movies. She noted that such films reflect the changing roles of women, the “growing unacceptability of anti-Semitism” and the tendency of the films to omit problematic points in the story of Jesus as told in the Bible.
The extensive scholarly study of Jesus in this century, including the controversial work of the academicians and theologians in the Jesus Seminar, is generally absent from these films. Reinhartz predicted “strong interest in the historical Jesus will be expressed not in feature films, but in documentary films” in the future.
Makers of Jesus films usually have similar problems, including artistic, literary, historical and theological difficulties, said Russell W. Dalton of United Theological Seminary. “The primary problem with Jesus films is they treat the gospel as we do in the church,” Dalton said. “The Gospels are seen as scattered collections of events and sayings.”
Even Jesus films that are well-done cinematically and artistically have problems translating the written word, our source of information on Jesus, to a visual medium, Walsh said. But because viewers often have a personal stake in the portrayals of Jesus, Tatum’s book, “Jesus at the Movies,” may help us “understand our own image of Jesus.”
“The operative word (in such films) is Jesus, not Christ, not Jesus Christ, not savior,” said Tatum, who teaches at Greensboro College.
He said Jesus story films narrate the life and ministry of Jesus, usually in its 1st century setting. In contrast, Christ-figure films use a much more contemporary setting and explore different themes.
Such films continue to perform a vital function in culture, said Guerric DeBona of St. Meinrad School of Theology. DeBona, a co-author of “Savior on the Silver Screen,” said that in Cecil B. DeMille’s era, “The King of Kings” became an icon for an immigrant culture. Today, when Jesus and other biblical figures are subjects of television mini-series, people may watch those programs and then discuss their content with friends at a shopping mall.
(Cecile S. Holmes, longtime religion writer, teaches journalism at the University of South Carolina. Her e-mail address is: cecile.holmes(at)usc.jour.sc.edu)
DEA END HOLMES
