Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
The Eagle
Delivering American University's news and views since 1925
Monday, April 29, 2024
The Eagle

Movie Review: Son of God

Grade: D

It must have been tough to be Jesus. To date, the character of Jesus has been mentioned in some sort of television or filmic capacity close to 400 times and most of them eventually caused controversy, in one fashion or another, for their portrayals of the messianic subject.

Then again it also must be a sign of more laidback times when “Son of God” arrives with little to no fanfare or controversy. Most famously, Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” angered Catholics and Jews for its alleged defamatory storytelling and erroneous historical claims. “Son of God” managed to avoid such claims making it.

The story here remains the same to anyone familiar with biblical scripture. Jesus is born of immaculate conception, leads a flock of 12 disciples, tells them to be good, ushers a few aphorisms and finally gets into trouble in Jerusalem when his beliefs threaten to tear the city apart. Romans are nonplussed arbitrators. The Rabbi’s are angered by Jesus’s claims of being the one. Conflict ensues.

“Son of God” shouldn’t really be in theaters, considering that it is a highly edited alteration from the History Channel’s 10-part miniseries“The Bible.”

But while unerringly competent and unstintingly crowd pleasing in its efforts to be the greatest hits collection of Jesus’s most famous sayings and deeds, “Son of God” should be regarded as an lumbering Frankenstien. Washed behind the ears and placed in a clean tunic for a more presentable appearance, “Son of God” eventually falls apart due to its standards to please a cinematic capacity.

Its entertainment veers toward pornographic in its depiction of the crucifixion. But these scenes still leave the desired effect of uneasiness when the Romans plonk Jesus on a priapic cross facing the city of Jerusalem.

As for the cast, it’s a who’s-who of television actors who resemble other, more famous movie actors. And none so good they need to be mentioned in any other capacity as that. On a good angle, a viewer may find lookalikes of Terence Stamp, Candice Bergen, Jeremy Irons and David Cross (if you squint).

Brazilian sensation Diogo Morgado (“Mami Blue”), plagued with the indomitable task of the lead role, has a face that occasionally says Will Forte and at other times a very handsome and young Brad Pitt.

It should be said for the content that it is respectably directed by Christopher Spencer (“Stonehenge: Decoded”), whose experience lies mostly in National Geographic documentaries. However, you can’t shake the feeling that “Son of God” should have never left the small screen with its terrible visual effects.

Better entertainments can be found elsewhere since the only magic “Son of God” exudes is a paltry sum of Hollywood magic. Unfortunately, when it’s foisted upon the screen the film doesn’t muster enough effort to make a miracle happen.

dkahen-kashi@theeagleonline.com


Section 202 host Gabrielle and friends go over some sports that aren’t in the sports media spotlight often, and review some sports based on their difficulty to play. 



Powered by Solutions by The State News
All Content © 2024 The Eagle, American Unversity Student Media