Harvey Keitel Movie:

Editorial Review:
It isn't difficult to imagine why this 1988 retelling of the Crucifixion story was picketed vociferously upon release--this Jesus bears little resemblance to the classical Christ, who was not, upon careful review of the Gospels, ever reported to have had sex with Barbara Hershey. Heavily informed by Gnostic reinterpretations of the Passion, The Last Temptation of Christ (based rather strictly on Nikos Kazantzakis's novel of the same name) is surely worth seeing for the controversy and blasphemous content alone, but it's difficult to find in skittish chain video stores. But the "last temptation" of the title is nothing overtly naughty--rather, it's the seduction of the commonplace; the desire to forgo following a "calling" in exchange for domestic security. Willem Dafoe interprets Jesus as spacy, indecisive, and none too charismatic (though maybe that's just Dafoe himself), but his Sermon on the Mount is radiant with visionary fire; a bit less successful is method actor Harvey Keitel, who gives the internally conflicted Judas a noticeable Brooklyn accent, and doesn't bring much imagination to a role that demands a revisionist's approach. Despite director Martin Scorsese's penchant for stupid camera tricks, much of the desert footage is simply breathtaking, even on small screen. Ultimately, Last Temptation is not much more historically illuminating than Monty Python's Life of Brian, but hey, if it's authenticity you're after, try Gibbon's. --Miles Bethany

The Last Temptation of Christ [Region 2] Reviews:
Weak Performance by Dafoe Mars Story
2009-11-03 - I read "The Last Temptation of Christ" as a book and thought it was great - very thought-provoking novel on an alternate story of the life of Jesus. Unfortunately, Martin Scorsese's adaptation just isn't up to the level of the book. His greatest mistake was in casting Willem Dafoe in the lead role (Christ). Clearly, Dafoe was in way over his head. His acting is so bland and weak, there isn't much to admire in his performance of perhaps the most famous person in the history of the world. Supposedly, Scorsese first offered the role of Christ to Robert DeNiro, who turned it down. Now, this movie with DeNiro as Christ would have been worth watching.

What's all the debate about?
2009-09-24 - It shouldn't matter at all how "Jesus" is portrayed in any film, since he never actually existed in the first place. There is no historical evidence! He's as fictitious as Mickey Mouse; thus he is open to any and all interpretations. This film is great! A refreshing change from typical "Jesus" movies...

Scorsese Played With An Inferno...and Got Burned
2009-08-24 - In 1968, the novel was released and condemned by the Catholic Church because of its over-humanization of Christ. Then Martin Scorsese decides to take the historical Jesus and this "novel" and create a "Jesus" that not only has no comparison to the historical Jesus that we know, but turns Jesus into a mockery. He took a person known as the Son of God in Christianity and made Him into a fool. And this is what he calls "the Christ." Martin Scorsese played with fire indeed, as the Siskel and Ebert documentary stated, and indeed got burned. I have become far more open-minded than I used to be in regards to alternative views of the Christ, but this pushed me too far.

William Dafoe as "Jesus" made Jesus appear indecisive, whiny, argumentative, and also builds on the non-verified assertion that Jesus had a relationship with Mary of Magdelene. Scorsese, in a most burning dip into fire, even inserts a scene in which "Jesus" (I can barely make myself type this) has SEX with Mary Magdelene! I had a reaction of mixed horror, disgust, and I swear my heart almost stopped at one point. I don't believe I could digest this scene even if I were drunk!

In the end, Martin Scorsese blasphemes the single greatest figure in Christianity, shows blatant disrespect for religion in general, and appears to have no regard for even the PRETENSE of decency. I do not plan to see ANY MORE MOVIES directed by him. Scorsese took Jesus, made Him into someone He was not; someone whom I've never experienced, and this is what he calls "The Last Temptation of Christ." Rather, it should have been called "The Last BLASPHEMY of Christ."

outstanding, creative and artistic, to say the least
2009-07-09 - The Last Temptation of Christ brings to film a fictionalized story about Christ in a book by Nikos Kazantzakis. Specifically, in this film we see what might have happened if Jesus had been forced to struggle between his desires to be a family man with a home versus being Jesus the Messiah who dies for people's sins and who represents so much to those of the Christian faith. The story is beautifully told--not that it's always easy to take; there are numerous scenes in this film that disqualify it from "family" viewing--and Willem Dafoe's acting performance as Jesus is as good as it gets. The cinematography is excellent and everyone, actors included, worked so hard to make sure that the choreography was just right for just the right effect. The plot moves along at a very good pace; and although it's almost three hours long not including the bonus features you shouldn't feel bored. On the other hand, however, if you are uncomfortable with the idea that Jesus might have had these human temptations in his life, you shouldn't get this one because that's Scorsese's message.

Of course, we see many highlights of the story of Christ including people beginning to see him as the Messiah as he speaks, heals the sick, performs miracles, becomes furious when he discovers that people are doing business in the temple, partakes in the last supper when he knows he's going to be betrayed and his ultimate death on the cross. However, when Scorsese takes Nikos Kazantzakis's novel and essentially breathes life into it on film the fictionalized story is every bit as unforgettable. Dafoe deserves a millions stars for the giving one of the best performances I've ever seen on film; he portrays Jesus to perfection as he struggles with a desire to be a family man with a home versus a desire to shun romance with women and help the poor, preach the power of love and truly be the Messiah. Unfortunately, however, the important role of Judas was given to Harvey Keitel who manages brilliantly to rattle off many of his lines with a noticeable Brooklyn accent. Ouch! Barbara Hershey is outstanding as Mary Magdalene and Harry Dean Stanton is equally wonderful playing the roles of both Saul and Paul (with the role of Paul coming later in the film). Look also for a good performance by David Bowie as Pontius Pilate; and Juliette Caton does a flawless job as a guardian angel for Jesus even if she just might throw you a plot twist or two creating quite an effect at the very end of the film.

I'd love to tell you more but I'd also hate to ruin it for you; this is one outstanding film and the fact that it is part of The Criterion Collection proves it's quite noteworthy. Moreover, others have added spoilers already so if I add too much more you'd be getting the same information several other reviewers already gave you. What I can do, however, is tell you about the bonus features on the DVD. You get some footage Martin Scorsese personally filmed when they were on location in Morocco although it's not always in perfect focus; an optional running commentary (from 1997) with Martin Scorsese, Willem Dafoe and Paul Schrader; a small print gallery called "Scorsese's Visual Research;" a featurette on costume designs; production and publicity stills and more! These are marvelous extras.

The Last Temptation of Christ is an excellent film adaptation of a fictionalized story about Christ in a book by Nikos Kazantzakis. Scorsese and his cast and crew did a magnificent job with this project; my only relatively minor disappointment was Harvey Keitel in the role of Judas--he said some of his lines with a Brooklyn accent which sounded ridiculous. I highly recommend this film.

The Gospel according to Kazantzakis
2009-05-17 - Magnificent! This is a wonderful production that brings alive Kazantzakis' conception of Joshua the man destined to become the Christ for later ages. Jesus is portrayed here as a normal man who must come to terms with the mortifying fate that he knows awaits him. The book/movie is about Jesus's grapple with his true nature and the journey from being a reluctant messiah to embracing his place on the crucifix. The Jesus of the "The Last Temptation" is not a sectarian one (viz the "God is not an Israelite" exclamation at the Temple) nor even the familiar Christian deity of today.

I am aware that this work is considered a blasphemy by a section of the society for ostensibly including some intimate scenes of Jesus and straying from the agglomerated Gospel accounts. The real reason I suspect is that they are unable to come to terms with the idea of a mortal Jesus, a human Jesus, a Jesus who harbors doubt and conflict and delusion, a Jesus who is susceptible to temptation, and yet triumphs in the end over both doubt and temptation and embraces his destiny. But it is this very real flesh and blood portrayal that makes the viewer empathize with the Nazarene and feel the enormous burden that he carries in his heart. The real blasphemy I say is the inability to see beyond the superficial into the soul of Kazantzakis' tale. This work is straight from the heart and vibrates with spiritual energy.

Martin Scorsese has captured this energy well through great shoot locations, wonderful haunting music by Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan (a great Sufi singer) and Peter Gabriel, and great performances by Wilhelm Defoe and Harvey Keital. The choice of using the actors' natural accents works very well as it brings out the authenticity in their dialogues.

One last thing - the dream sequence in the end bears somewhat uncanny resemblance to the post crucifixion accounts of Jesus in the Islamic tradition and even as per the accounts of the Russian explorer Nikolai Notovitch (who discovered an account of Jesus in India within the Hemis monastery in Ladakh India)or even in the Bhavishya Purana (the Hindu book of prophecy). It would be interesting to discover if Kazantzakis was aware of these traditions and incorporated them into the more traditional account of the Gospels as a dream/hallucination sequence.

Do watch this movie with an open mind!!