A Filmmaker's Review: 'The Last Temptation of Christ' (1988)

Welcome to the filmmaker's reviews. This is a series of articles where I watch random movies, whether I've seen them before or not and I review them for your benefit. If you would like more technical articles about filmmaking then please head to my profile to witness "The Filmmaker's Guide..." instead.

This article contains spoilers.

The Last Temptation of Christ directed by the legendary Martin Scorsese is based on the magical, yet blasphemous novel by Nikos Kazantzakis, writer of Zorba the Greek and Report to Greco. That should give you enough overview of what you expect from the writer. When we look at Scorsese alongside this writer, you can't really believe that he would direct such a novel that is so far from his usual requests for movies.

The first time I watched The Last Temptation of Christ, which was near on four or five years ago, I admit that I didn't finish it. The second time I watched it, last week, I finally found out why. From start to finish, there seems to be a dulling down of Nikos Kazantzakis' novel, making it strangely bland to watch and the dialogue almost clanky to listen to. The movie begins with persecution and ends with it as well, keeping the theme from the book alive but, I believe, so much so that it is almost too obvious.

The cinematic experience varies throughout the film. Many close-ups of Willem Dafoe means that you'll be scared into believing every single word he's saying whether you like it or not. Something that actually plays to the film's strengths when talking about Jesus Christ. But, when we look at the overall experience, I believe there are far too many close-ups of him. We know what he looks like, we know what he's trying to do and after a while, these random close-ups wear off and begin to get tiresome. We, as the audience, now expect them entirely. It loses its effect.

But, as I said before, the cinematic experience varies throughout. The montage which includes a snake, a lion and a tree in which Jesus is sitting in a circle which seems to come to him in a state of dreaming or hallucination is cinematically excellent. The film excels here, making the audience anticipate Jesus' reaction. It isn't just because of the way in which it is filmed but it is also because at this point in the film, we are aware Jesus is a man—divine he may be—but he is a man and so, we anticipate he will do what a man would do. Yet, he resists the temptations and moves on. With some violence in his person, he keeps resisting and resisting until everything goes from him and he is allowed peace to cut down the tree of temptation.

From there, the cinematic experience declines. We don't get the thrill as we did before but, there is one instance that seems to shock audience even today. This scene is the part in which Jesus carves out his heart and holds it out to his disciples. He looks grave, but is speaking with great love and this section of the film is an excellent example of prime cinematography. There's no real close-ups and everyone in the scene who is involved is visible. It is the last great moment in the film and from then on, it drones almost as dull as physically possible until an ending which is slightly anti-climatic.

The characterisation of the film is actually brilliant. The actors that Scorsese had to work with consist of some of his best cast choices to date. But the way the characters act is normally overshadowed with shoddy dialogue and blunt, repetitive cinematography. There are moments in the film that are very well thought out, such as the scene where they bury the dead man in the sand near the beginning of the film, the snake and lion montage scene and the scene with Jesus taking out his own heart. But there are also moments in the film that almost entirely ruin it. These include Jesus saving Mary Magdalene from being stoned by a crowd. The cinematography is choppy and the dialogue is cringe-worthy, it almost doesn't fit with the rest of the film.

So, in conclusion, three out of five stars is appropriate for this film since though the performances and cast are brilliant, the dialogue and cinematography in some places loses this movie some serious points.