Rating: 
Summary: Hunter is an Understated but Stirring Jesus
Review: Jeffrey Hunter's good looks were a metaphorical enhancement to his portrayal, not a drawback. There is nothing wrong with representing Jesus as a beautiful man, though Hunter's piercing blue eyes and blonde hair were blasted by many critics and were a factor in keeping this film from being taken seriously. After all, a movie communicates its message visually and one look at Hunter in this role evokes perfectly the physical image of Jesus that millions of the faithful, influenced by Renaissance paintings, have formed in their minds. Though I agree that the Barrabas subplot is distracting, the film is well-paced, reverent, and moving. It is Nick Ray's "Rebel WITH a Cause."
Rating: 
Summary: Jeffrey Hunter is very beautiful.
Review: This movie is very beautiful.
Music is gentle, Jeffrey's jesus is very charming.
And all characters in this movie, are very cute.
Jesus in this movie, is gentle and beautiful.
Jeffrey Hunter is No1 beautiful acter, in the world.
He is very beautiful,pretty,smart,charming,and cute.
This is my favorite movie.
I have been watch this movie one hundred times.
New testament will be happiness hundred-fold.
I love Jeffrey Hunter.
Rating:
Summary: EPIC OF FAITH
Review: For its time "King of Kings" was exceptional.This was the first color and sound film in which the face of Christ is seen.Because
the film was heavily edited and time constraints were put upon it
many of Christ's teachings and miracles were not shown ,many were only mentioned,this was unfortunate .Sermon on the Mount
though was very well done. The music by Miklos Rozsa is glorious
and now the entire score ,after 40 years,appears in a new 2 CD
album by Rhino Records.The film tries to portray Jesus as a figure bounded by history and tradition therefore emphasis is placed on Zealots and their hatred of all things Roman.
Had time not been a problem,perhaps more of the human
personality of Jesus could have been explored as in the current
video "Matthew" and CBS miniseries "Jesus." All in all Jeffrey Hunter gave a credible performance and did not deserve the insults of the critics of the time calling him a "Teenage Jesus." I feel there should have been more emphasis placed on the Jewish scribes and Pharisees and the fact that they wanted Jesus put to death for blasphemy and that they were the ones who
precipitated his death.Under Roman occupation they could not put
anyone to death so Jesus is turned over to Pilate and he condemns Jesus for sedition for wanting to be king.Failure to blame the Sanhedrin is not historically accurate.Now I wish
Warner Bros would wake up and release this on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: An Underappreciated film.
Review: "King of Kings", directed by Nicholas Ray ("Rebel Without a Cause"), is an underrated film that is marked by some dazzling cinematic moments (Pompey's desecration of the Temple, the death of Herod, and an extended Sermon on the Mount). Miklos Rozsa ("Ben Hur") is responsible for the moving score and Orson Welles provides some tasteful narration at the film's beginning. Jeffery Hunter delivers an adequate portrayal of Jesus although the cynical critics at the time savaged his performance. Robert Ryan and Siobhan McKenna are too old to play John the Baptist and Mary respectively and Royal Dano is ridiculously miscast as Peter. However, film buffs will delight to see a young (and thin) Rip Torn as Judas Iscariot and Harry Guardino as Barabbas. Fans of Nicholas Ray should see this film as should students of epic cinema. As a portrayal of Jesus' life and mission, "King of Kings" falls far short of "Jesus of Nazareth". However, "King of Kings" was made for the large screen and I think that lovers of the cinema will appreciate its strengths and overlook its faults.
Rating: 
Summary: buy it if you like sci fi
Review: These is the worst film I have seen and I didnt finish it neither. The producer makes so much use of his imagination , in side stories like the time that Jesus Himself went to visit John the baptist at prison? This is a perfect example of someone who had all the resources to make a wonderful scriptural exact movie and decided to go sci fi , hollywood bologny instead.
I started to watch it in christian homeschool with my kids and had to stop it and tell the children this was all incorrect.
Not for educative purposes and definitively a turn off if you are looking for some veracity.If you like fantasy this is your trip!
Rating:
Summary: Much better then I expected!
Review: Jeffrey Hunter is amazing in his portrayal of Jesus; he seems to have really captured the spirit of the son of God. The music (composed by Miklos Rozsa) in the movie is very well written and it adds a layer of emotion to the movie that is rarely seen in most modern movies. Rip Torn also does a very comendable job as Judas Iscariot. The sermon on the mount scene is amazing in its breadth and depth and definetely is a keeper. Being very close to three hours long one would think that the movie would seem longwinded; however, this is definetely not true; in fact, one feels that there is not one minute wasted in this movie. Highly Recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: But it DID seem profound and accurate in the 1960s
Review: With all the memories that I have of viewing this film (on television) each Holy Week in the 1960s, it remains a popcorn and Milk Duds guilty pleasure in which I annually indulge. Most baby boomers would love to have this one on their shelves, though, be forewarned - if one has not viewed it for a time, the elements of accuracy, adherence to scriptural texts, and power are nothing like what we imagined they were as kids.This film has been scripted, rather oddly, to focus on the story of the Roman conquest of Palestine - certainly a relevant area to the general plot, but so overly staged that it takes away from Jesus's message... though perhaps that is providential, since little of Jesus's words or mission come through anyway. There are few miracles or parables shown, no fathomable reason for Jesus's arrest, and the odd device of an omnipresent Roman soldier (who goes from leading the slaughter of infants in Bethlehem to eventually serving as the silent Jesus's defence attorney) who recounts such deeds as are reported about Jesus, but which are seldom shown. Handsome, youthful Hunter (who makes one marvel that the racial mix of Galilee included the English and Irish) seems very remote, and, except for the Sermon on the Mount sequence, silent. One wonders if he knows what he is about. It became highly irritating that Jesus's mother Mary seems the only one, including the Son of God, who knew "where it was at," and she assumes the role of prophet, knowing before Jesus does that he is about to be crucified. For unfathomable reasons, some of Jesus' most memorable words from Scripture are uttered by the character of Mary. Unlike in, for example, the glorious Zeffirelli "Jesus of Nazareth," acting is of poor quality in this film, and the supporting characters seem more like Sunday-school posters than people responding to the highly challenging message of the gospel. (Though whether Jesus has any notion of this himself is doubtful.) The scenery, battle scenes, and score are so intense as to be occasionally overwhelming, but the dialogue and characterisation are shallow. This enduring favourite is poorly acted and scripted, theologically deficient, and far from a powerful theatrical experience. But it is enjoyable, and one hardly knows one's mind is filling in the blanks with the parts of the tale that are left out. Pass me some more popcorn!
Rating:
Summary: An adequate portrayal
Review: This is one of the many movies made about the earthly ministry of Jesus. There are many good elements to this film. The Scriptural accuracy is pretty good. There were some scenes that do not portray Jesus correctly. For example, Jesus visits Mary before going to Jerusalem here. He said he would mend the chair later and Mary said they chair will never be mended. The movie inadvertantly made Jesus a liar in that scene because he was either hiding the truth from Mary (not possible because she knew from the angel who foretold his birth that he would die for sins and because Christ himself repeatedly told those around him that he would die and rise again) or intentionally was trying to mislead her. But these problems are forgiven given that the movie as a whole is (when it relates to Jesus) generally in harmony with Scripture. I just wish that there was a Jesus movie that portrays his betrayal by Judas according to Scriptural truth and not artistic monkeying. A lot of time is spent on inventing a back story to Barabbas and his dealing with Judas and how he and Jesus cross paths now and then. There are some historical inaccuracies here, too. In the movie Pilate is called the son in law to Tiberius. Not true. He was an equestrian rank who was recommended to the post by the Senator Sejanus who was later executed by Tiberius for treason and conspiracy. The acting here is a little stilted. At times it seems they were more focused on creating an ethereal effect than on establishing human connection. It's an understandable mistake, but it detracts from the life of Jesus who was really a man (as regards to his earthly nature) who connected with people and yet was still God. If you're debating on whether to get this movie, go ahead and get it. It's worth watching. I've watched it several times and own it. Just don't derive your theology from it.
Rating:
Summary: I love it!
Review: Watch it and be mesmerised, first by Jeffrey Hunter's good looks. Then be captivated by the story of Jesus.
Rating:
Summary: I love this film
Review: Jeffrey Hunter gives an excellent performance in this movie about Jesus' life. The best scene is during the Sermon on the Mount.
|
