What do you think?
Rate this book
Jesus of Hollywood
Since the advent of the cinema, Jesus has frequently appeared in our movie houses and on our television screens. Indeed, it may well be that more people worldwide know about Jesus and his life story from the movies than from any other medium. Indeed, Jesus' story has been adapted dozens of times throughout the history of commercial cinema, from the 1912 silent From the Manger to the Cross to Mel Gibson's 2004 The Passion of the Christ . No doubt there are more to come.
Drawing on a broad range of movies, biblical scholar Adele Reinhartz traces the way in which Jesus of Nazareth has become Jesus of Hollywood. She argues that Jesus films both reflect and influence cultural perceptions of Jesus and the other figures in his story. She focuses on the cinematic interpretation of Jesus' relationships with the key people in his his family, his friends, and his foes. She examines how these films address theological issues, such as Jesus' identity as both human and divine, political issues, such as the role of the individual in society and the possibility of freedom under political oppression, social issues, such as gender roles and hierarchies, and personal issues, such as the nature of friendship and human sexuality.
Reinhartz's study of Jesus' celluloid incarnations shows how Jesus movies reshape the past in the image of the present. Despite society's profound interest in Jesus as a religious and historical figure, Jesus movies are fascinating not as history but as mirrors of the concerns, anxieties, and values of our own era. As the story of Jesus continues to capture the imagination of filmmakers and moviegoers, he remains as significant a cultural figure today as he was 2000 years ago.
Drawing on a broad range of movies, biblical scholar Adele Reinhartz traces the way in which Jesus of Nazareth has become Jesus of Hollywood. She argues that Jesus films both reflect and influence cultural perceptions of Jesus and the other figures in his story. She focuses on the cinematic interpretation of Jesus' relationships with the key people in his his family, his friends, and his foes. She examines how these films address theological issues, such as Jesus' identity as both human and divine, political issues, such as the role of the individual in society and the possibility of freedom under political oppression, social issues, such as gender roles and hierarchies, and personal issues, such as the nature of friendship and human sexuality.
Reinhartz's study of Jesus' celluloid incarnations shows how Jesus movies reshape the past in the image of the present. Despite society's profound interest in Jesus as a religious and historical figure, Jesus movies are fascinating not as history but as mirrors of the concerns, anxieties, and values of our own era. As the story of Jesus continues to capture the imagination of filmmakers and moviegoers, he remains as significant a cultural figure today as he was 2000 years ago.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2006
2 people are currently reading
20 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
January 18, 2017
Adele Reinhartz's argument in Jesus of Hollywood is not one that I think most people familiar with ancient literature would take significant issue with. Her main thesis is that the gaps, vagaries, and contradictions found in the gospel accounts not only allow, but also offer an explanation for the huge number of vastly different portrayals in biographical films (biopics) about Jesus. I think you could apply the same argument to the Socrates corpus, the works of Homer, the Ramayana, or really any ancient work that people still find relevant today. I think the number of contradictions and gaps explain not just the different portrayal, but also why they've remained relevant for so long, as people infuse their own cultural sensibilities into the stories. This is also a key point for Reinhartz who examines how Jesus biopics reflect modern concerns about politics, sexuality and gender roles, and discrimination.
In order to make her point, Reinhartz compares different Jesus biopics from the silent era to contemporary films (including both international and American movies) to what the source material actually says. This source material is most often the gospels themselves, but when appropriate Reinhartz also brings up other books from the New Testament (Acts), Apocryphal Gospels (Gospel of Thomas), Josephus (The Jewish War, Jewish Antiquities), scholarly interpretations of characters, Christian artwork and traditional Christian beliefs.
She goes character by character showing how the films infuse modern societal values and how those values have changed over time. She also shows how filmmakers are forced to harmonize the different Gospels accounts, omit entire events, or pick from a single Gospel. For example, with the character of Mary Magdalene the early films from the silent era focus on her sexuality and are full of orientalist tropes, but later films treat her as a sympathetic character. When it comes to Joseph, he's most often omitted or treated as a minor character, which coupled with the focus on the virgin Mary, reinforces traditional gender roles of having the mother care for her children and the father away from home as the breadwinner. Some later films, though, portray Joseph as a loving father, reflecting a new societal understand of the importance of a father in the life of his children. Judas is also has a number of interesting interpretations, some of which are homoerotic. Some versions of Judas have Jesus commanding him to betray him to so that his destiny can be full filled, but most show him as being motivated by simple greed. Even supernatural characters like Satan and God are examines, with filmmakers taking Satan's role in the temptation as a literal struggle, and others portraying it as a symbolic spiritual one.
I think the most interesting part of Reinhartz's work comes when dealing with the villains like the Pharisees, Caiaphas, and Pilate. In dealing with these groups filmmakers have balance between using the Gospel sources accurately and dispelling charges of anti-semitism, especially after World War II. Some, like Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ actually emphasis the blood curse and the deicide. Others try to deal with anti-semitism by the simple addition of footnotes on intertitles, or by leaving out certain situations entirely. Some try and deflect from Jewish people as a group to Caiaphas (or other fictional characters) in the specific. Others show Jewish individuals as being manipulated by Satan, shifting the blame to him.
In order to make her point, Reinhartz compares different Jesus biopics from the silent era to contemporary films (including both international and American movies) to what the source material actually says. This source material is most often the gospels themselves, but when appropriate Reinhartz also brings up other books from the New Testament (Acts), Apocryphal Gospels (Gospel of Thomas), Josephus (The Jewish War, Jewish Antiquities), scholarly interpretations of characters, Christian artwork and traditional Christian beliefs.
She goes character by character showing how the films infuse modern societal values and how those values have changed over time. She also shows how filmmakers are forced to harmonize the different Gospels accounts, omit entire events, or pick from a single Gospel. For example, with the character of Mary Magdalene the early films from the silent era focus on her sexuality and are full of orientalist tropes, but later films treat her as a sympathetic character. When it comes to Joseph, he's most often omitted or treated as a minor character, which coupled with the focus on the virgin Mary, reinforces traditional gender roles of having the mother care for her children and the father away from home as the breadwinner. Some later films, though, portray Joseph as a loving father, reflecting a new societal understand of the importance of a father in the life of his children. Judas is also has a number of interesting interpretations, some of which are homoerotic. Some versions of Judas have Jesus commanding him to betray him to so that his destiny can be full filled, but most show him as being motivated by simple greed. Even supernatural characters like Satan and God are examines, with filmmakers taking Satan's role in the temptation as a literal struggle, and others portraying it as a symbolic spiritual one.
I think the most interesting part of Reinhartz's work comes when dealing with the villains like the Pharisees, Caiaphas, and Pilate. In dealing with these groups filmmakers have balance between using the Gospel sources accurately and dispelling charges of anti-semitism, especially after World War II. Some, like Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ actually emphasis the blood curse and the deicide. Others try to deal with anti-semitism by the simple addition of footnotes on intertitles, or by leaving out certain situations entirely. Some try and deflect from Jewish people as a group to Caiaphas (or other fictional characters) in the specific. Others show Jewish individuals as being manipulated by Satan, shifting the blame to him.
April 12, 2024
The title is misleading as the author does not exclusively analyze films on Jesus made in Hollywood, but a broad selection of American and European ranging from the first silents to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ released three years prior to the book. While standard Hollywood productions dominate the filmography, the author dedicates much more attention to the outsiders produced by Pasolini, Arcand, Scorsese, Mel Gibson and - yes - Monty Python.* Not in all cases this does reflect her sympathies. They lie clearly with the artsy films, whereas she discusses Gibson's film, which came out during her work on the book with obvious disgust.
While references to religious traditions are often quite superficial in much of the "religion and film" genre, Reinhartz is as a distinguished New Testament scholar well aware of the differences between the gospel (and other materials), what accounts for them, and which interpretations they had been underlying.
She makes use of this in her analysis which primarily focuses on the representation of main figures of the gospels in the respective films (Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Magdalene, the Apostles, Jude, the Pharisees, Caiaphas, Pilate**). In addition to the human actors she deals as well with God and Satan, primarily under the perspective how they are represented if at all. In this chapters aspects like miracles and Evil are discusssed.
Each chapter contains an analysis of salient examples, and concludes with general reflections. Reinhartz focuses on actions and dialogue, less on iconography although that aspect is not neglected. In the relevant chapters and in the conclusion she discusses extensively how the directors depicted Jews and their relation to Jesus.
An interesting book recommended to all interested in the history of film, and artistic representations of Jesus in the 20th and 21st century.
Fun fact: From the book I have learnt that the famous "What have the Romans done for us?" scene in The Life of Brian has a precursor in the Talmud.
* Although I find it surprising that Dreyer's Blade fra Satans Bog (Leaves from the book of Satan, 1918) has not been taken into consideration, not only due to acquired Danish cultural nationalism. It is apparently inspired by Griffith's Intolerance but the sober style is completely different from Griffith's drama and action. It has thusmost likely inspired the arthouse approach to Jesus.
** But not his wife, conventionally known as Claudia, whose alleged openness for Jesus features in some films.
While references to religious traditions are often quite superficial in much of the "religion and film" genre, Reinhartz is as a distinguished New Testament scholar well aware of the differences between the gospel (and other materials), what accounts for them, and which interpretations they had been underlying.
She makes use of this in her analysis which primarily focuses on the representation of main figures of the gospels in the respective films (Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Magdalene, the Apostles, Jude, the Pharisees, Caiaphas, Pilate**). In addition to the human actors she deals as well with God and Satan, primarily under the perspective how they are represented if at all. In this chapters aspects like miracles and Evil are discusssed.
Each chapter contains an analysis of salient examples, and concludes with general reflections. Reinhartz focuses on actions and dialogue, less on iconography although that aspect is not neglected. In the relevant chapters and in the conclusion she discusses extensively how the directors depicted Jews and their relation to Jesus.
An interesting book recommended to all interested in the history of film, and artistic representations of Jesus in the 20th and 21st century.
Fun fact: From the book I have learnt that the famous "What have the Romans done for us?" scene in The Life of Brian has a precursor in the Talmud.
* Although I find it surprising that Dreyer's Blade fra Satans Bog (Leaves from the book of Satan, 1918) has not been taken into consideration, not only due to acquired Danish cultural nationalism. It is apparently inspired by Griffith's Intolerance but the sober style is completely different from Griffith's drama and action. It has thusmost likely inspired the arthouse approach to Jesus.
** But not his wife, conventionally known as Claudia, whose alleged openness for Jesus features in some films.
August 12, 2023
This book was used as a textbook for an online course I took about Jesus in Film. Some of it was more interesting than other parts. I felt like the author did a lot of extrapolating and inserting her own opinions on the different "topics" ("character studies") of each chapter (my professor disagreed with me, but each to his own opinion).
It was amusing - she comments on how little is really known about Jesus apart from what is recorded in the four Gospels and some non-biblical sources, but the same can be said of many historical characters of the ancient world so I am not really sure what her argument or point was in that regard. However, what was even more amusing to me is how much she bases her "character studies" on movie portrayals because of the utter dearth of information in the Gospels. She has a chapter devoted to Joseph the "father" (step=father?) of Jesus; it is the shortest chapter in the book. Because of the lack of material in the Gospels regarding Joseph, she fills in the chapter with discussions about his portrayals in various films as well as the opinions of others. Then you have the chapter on Judas, who while mentioned sporadically in the Gospels plays a huge role in the final days of Jesus' life and ministry. His chapter is twenty-six pages in length, as is the chapter on Mary Magdalene. The author spends a good chunk of the chapter on Judas talking about his portrayals in the movies (which makes sense, based on how he is portrayed the-same-yet-differently in each movie); while it makes sense it also sometimes feels like filler because of the lack of biblical comparisons. The chapter on Mary the Mother of Jesus is only 20 pages long; it's hilarious to me how many pages Mary Magdalene gets when she is mentioned even less in the Gospels than either Mary, mother of Jesus, the Pharisees, or even Judas. The author focuses at length on how negatively Mary Magdalene tends to be portrayed in movies, but she also does do a nice job of comparing how Mary (and others) are presented in the Gospels versus in film (overall).
I think the saddest thing about Mary Magdalene's portrayal in movies is how she tends to be portrayed as a prostitute or a promiscuous woman (mainly the woman caught in adultery) when that is not how the Gospels depict her. It is said in one of the Gospels that Jesus cast seven demons out of her; it is also said that she helped support Jesus's ministry with her wealth. Not only that, but her faith in Christ was so strong, so solid, that she was one of the first persons to whom He appeared after His resurrection, and He also spoke with her briefly after His resurrection before anybody else. Yet we do not get that strength, that faith, in the movie portrayals of her (in my opinion). Granted, the church fathers a couple of centuries after she died also believed she was a promiscuous woman despite the lack of biblical evidence this was the case; I assume seven spirits being cast out of her had something to do with this, but it is still arrogant presumption on the part of the church fathers to think they knew better than what was recorded in the Gospels.
I think the author did make a solid point about how hard it is to portray Jesus in film. Christians want Him to be portrayed as accurately as possible and do not want the filmmaker to veer very far from how He is described in the Gospels. Yet those restrictions limit how He can be portrayed in film. In addition, a filmmaker plays with fire if he or she veers too far from what is considered to be acceptable behavior or portrayals of Jesus in film. Then you have the struggle of trying to portray Jesus as both human and God, as having the potential to sin and yet living a sinless life. How do you portray such a person in a relatable light, especially to the ever-changing tastes of the audience?
I believe that filmmakers also want to be as close to being as accurate as possible while still being able to breath their own vision into the life of Jesus. They are not stupid and know that if they veer too far from the expectations of how Jesus is portrayed they will lose money, and they do not want to make a film that is guaranteed to be a box office bomb. They are in this business to make money. So they have to face the challenge of putting a new spin on how Jesus is presented, in trying to present a fresh and new interpretation of the life of Jesus, in a film without veering into heresy and alienating enough of their target audience to guarantee the failure of the film.
I was going to give this book two stars, but I will give it three. I'd probably rate it 2.5 stars but am rounding it up. While I did not agree with a large number of points/observations the author made, I still felt that the author did make some good points throughout her book regarding Jesus (and others) are presented in films versus how they are presented in the Gospels. I might reread the book at a later time and see how much my mind changes (if at all) with a second reading.
It was amusing - she comments on how little is really known about Jesus apart from what is recorded in the four Gospels and some non-biblical sources, but the same can be said of many historical characters of the ancient world so I am not really sure what her argument or point was in that regard. However, what was even more amusing to me is how much she bases her "character studies" on movie portrayals because of the utter dearth of information in the Gospels. She has a chapter devoted to Joseph the "father" (step=father?) of Jesus; it is the shortest chapter in the book. Because of the lack of material in the Gospels regarding Joseph, she fills in the chapter with discussions about his portrayals in various films as well as the opinions of others. Then you have the chapter on Judas, who while mentioned sporadically in the Gospels plays a huge role in the final days of Jesus' life and ministry. His chapter is twenty-six pages in length, as is the chapter on Mary Magdalene. The author spends a good chunk of the chapter on Judas talking about his portrayals in the movies (which makes sense, based on how he is portrayed the-same-yet-differently in each movie); while it makes sense it also sometimes feels like filler because of the lack of biblical comparisons. The chapter on Mary the Mother of Jesus is only 20 pages long; it's hilarious to me how many pages Mary Magdalene gets when she is mentioned even less in the Gospels than either Mary, mother of Jesus, the Pharisees, or even Judas. The author focuses at length on how negatively Mary Magdalene tends to be portrayed in movies, but she also does do a nice job of comparing how Mary (and others) are presented in the Gospels versus in film (overall).
I think the saddest thing about Mary Magdalene's portrayal in movies is how she tends to be portrayed as a prostitute or a promiscuous woman (mainly the woman caught in adultery) when that is not how the Gospels depict her. It is said in one of the Gospels that Jesus cast seven demons out of her; it is also said that she helped support Jesus's ministry with her wealth. Not only that, but her faith in Christ was so strong, so solid, that she was one of the first persons to whom He appeared after His resurrection, and He also spoke with her briefly after His resurrection before anybody else. Yet we do not get that strength, that faith, in the movie portrayals of her (in my opinion). Granted, the church fathers a couple of centuries after she died also believed she was a promiscuous woman despite the lack of biblical evidence this was the case; I assume seven spirits being cast out of her had something to do with this, but it is still arrogant presumption on the part of the church fathers to think they knew better than what was recorded in the Gospels.
I think the author did make a solid point about how hard it is to portray Jesus in film. Christians want Him to be portrayed as accurately as possible and do not want the filmmaker to veer very far from how He is described in the Gospels. Yet those restrictions limit how He can be portrayed in film. In addition, a filmmaker plays with fire if he or she veers too far from what is considered to be acceptable behavior or portrayals of Jesus in film. Then you have the struggle of trying to portray Jesus as both human and God, as having the potential to sin and yet living a sinless life. How do you portray such a person in a relatable light, especially to the ever-changing tastes of the audience?
I believe that filmmakers also want to be as close to being as accurate as possible while still being able to breath their own vision into the life of Jesus. They are not stupid and know that if they veer too far from the expectations of how Jesus is portrayed they will lose money, and they do not want to make a film that is guaranteed to be a box office bomb. They are in this business to make money. So they have to face the challenge of putting a new spin on how Jesus is presented, in trying to present a fresh and new interpretation of the life of Jesus, in a film without veering into heresy and alienating enough of their target audience to guarantee the failure of the film.
I was going to give this book two stars, but I will give it three. I'd probably rate it 2.5 stars but am rounding it up. While I did not agree with a large number of points/observations the author made, I still felt that the author did make some good points throughout her book regarding Jesus (and others) are presented in films versus how they are presented in the Gospels. I might reread the book at a later time and see how much my mind changes (if at all) with a second reading.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews