Btexxamar I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

higherall7 This is a thoroughly satisfying version of the Life of Christ. More than subsequent versions of The Greatest Story Ever Told, the characters seem to my mind to be more vividly portrayed and developed. Mary Magdalene as played by Jacqueline Logan and Judas Iscariot as played by Joseph Schildkraut particularly come to mind. But of course the narrative must be carried by the main character, and the first appearance of Christ upon the scene, is a grand entrance that is riveting and revelatory. This scene alone is worth the price of admission, as it sets the tone of the film. Ernest Torrence also make a stalwart companion to the Son of God as Peter, and children make surprisingly effective entrances as statements to the true mission of Christ.I particularly appreciated how many of the scenes were accompanied by passages that were book, chapter and verse from the New Testament. The narrative is conveyed in thought-provoking ways that make you consider the full meaning of the acts and thoughts of Christ, and you are tempted to crack open the Good Book in order to see if it actually states what you behold up there on the screen. I felt as though I was being given a comprehensive overview of the Life of Christ and being lightly invited to find out more.When was the last time a movie stimulated you to do that?The scene where Christ intercedes on behalf of the adulteress at the Temple is the best that I have ever seen presented in Cinema. H.B. Warner, through the expressions on his face presents a Christ who is a gentle, compassionate healer and yet able to dispassionately view the sin in others as though they were naked to his gaze. The latter quality is what makes his Christ stand out to me among other things. I also think that the way he is lit so as to always be vividly distinguishable from the other characters is one of those touches that is outstanding and pleasurable to later reflection.This version of Christ does not appeal to the sensationalistic, as it would be so easy to do considering the extraordinary quality of many of the events. This, thankfully enough, is a version that is more a theater of ideas which meditates upon the elements and spirit of an enlightened society and how it might emerge out of a corrupt regime. Here, for the first time, I felt as though I viscerally understood the confluence of political, religious and commercial tensions as they cross currents and interplay in the drama. When Pontius Palate, played by Victor Varoni, finally relents to have Christ crucified whereas he would rather wash his hands of the whole messy backwater affair and return to his life of bored leisure, I finally understood the political and religious forces at work, bought and paid for with thirty pieces of silver from friends of the money changers. Varoni's Pilate appears to feel like a pawn who's being manipulated into the final gambit of a kind of Cosmic chess game, which indeed might not be far from the truth.There is an emphasis on making clear the meaning of Christ's sojourn with us mortals here on Earth that flows from the first scene where he appears right through to the end of the narrative. This emphasis on meaning over and beyond some baroque appeal to the emotions is owed particularly to the director Cecil B. DeMille, who successfully links and creates patterns of understanding with several key concepts regarding the nature of Spirituality and the Nature of Christ. Here, all the characters appear to be struggling with passions of their own that need to be worked out to some final conclusion. I was particularly engaged watching Mary Magdalene and Judas Iscariot wrestling to reconcile the worlds of carnality and materiality with the Universe of the Spirit and its matters.The scourging of Christ and his crucifixion is subdued and presented with a restraint that lends an eerie dignity to his final hours on the cross. We find ourselves witnessing a final battle between darkness, corruption and sin and Christ as an unearthly force that allows the director with his cast and crew to work his central motif of light triumphant to a grand finale.

sdave7596 I just recently viewed the original silent film "King of Kings" (released in 1927) for the first time. Needless to say, it is the kind of awe-inspiring epic that Cecil B. DeMille became famous for. At first glance, my big issue was that I thought H.B. Warner was way too old to play Jesus. Warner was already 50 when he played the famous man, who was supposed to be only 30 year old at the time of his death. Once you get past that, however, Warner is brilliant in the role. DeMille has a "glow" around Warner throughout the whole film, obviously to show him as s divine being, and it is very effective. Warner is able to bring amazing humility and wisdom to the part of Jesus -- all without dialogue, folks! DeMille uses scripture quite liberally in this silent epic, and it makes it wonderful for those of us not quite so familiar with them. The supporting cast is outstanding -- Joseph Schildkraut plays the handsome traitor Judas Iscariot, and his performance is excellent. Schildkraut is effective at being able to portray Judas' conflict, jealousy and hypocrisy. Dorothy Cumming as Jesus' mother Mary has a small role, but the emotions she exhibits on her face are heart-wrenching. The rest of the cast is great, and of course, the thousands of extras so common to DeMille's films. DeMille uses great lighting techniques and special effects that seem to be way ahead of their time. According to TCM host Robert Osbourne, DeMille was so powerful at this time in Hollywood he even insisted his stars be on their best behavior off the set and not get into any scandals. While this certainly seems silly by today's standards, it was DeMille's respect for his project that prompted him to reportedly keep tabs on them! Anyway, the film is amazing, and even if you think you do not like silent films, this one is a masterpiece.

Christopher Mercurio This may be one of the very best movies made about Christ. In the beginning I didn't really know what they were doing. It looked like they were making their own story up. But things got better and better as the movie went on. There were so many effective images in this movie that it is unforgettable.The magic starts when Jesus is finally introduced. What an entrance he makes. A blind girl goes to Jesus for help. There is a bright light and you can tell by the little girl's performance that something is happening. Our view gets blurry because we are seeing through the little girl's eyes. Then the picture comes into focus and we can see Jesus standing in front of her. From that moment on the movie was amazing.H.B. Warner is one of the greatest actors to portray Jesus. He has such a commanding presence in the movie. He does look a little old to be playing Jesus. At the time of Christ's crucifixion he was around 30. Warner was around 50. But this does not hurt the film at all. Warner does not look like an old man one bit and he had the perfect eyes and perfect face for the part he was playing. In the crucifixion scene when you see H.B. Warner without his shirt it's amazing how he has the perfect built to play Christ.There were so many things that amazed me. The movie was silent, but it didn't even matter. There were so many effective images. This is what people went to the movies for before there were talking pictures. The first amazing scene was the scene when Jesus cures the blind girl. That was very well done. Every scene of Jesus performing a miracle was amazing. The Last Supper scene was very well done. When everyone leaves the table, the cup that Jesus was drinking from is shimmering. That would later become the Holy Grail. Throughout the movie Jesus is a glowing image. This added to Warner's presence in the film. The scene when Jesus is condemned was very well done and accurate. I was glad they got Pontius Pilate right in the movie. Pilate did not want to kill Jesus. The film also shows you how his wife truly felt. In this movie you see Pilate send Christ to be chastised rather than put to death. After the scourging, you see the people condemn him. You even get to see Pilate washing his hands. People complained about how Gibson's Passion of the Christ made Pilate look, but no one complained when they did the same in this. It is widely known that Pilate was not a villain. The King of Kings that came later in 1961 failed miserably in how it portrayed Pontius Pilate, not to mention a lot of other things. Seeing this makes you wonder what King of Kings with Jeffrey Hunter would've been like if Demille made it. Too bad he didn't.My favorite scene in the movie would have to be the Resurrection. You will know why when you see the movie. Seeing everyone hugging Jesus in the end was so heartwarming. In the end you even get to see Jesus ascend into heaven. That was all very well done. The special effects in the movie were unbelievable. I was surprised how great they were. The movie was made in 1927. The storm after Christ commends his spirit is an awesome display. Amazing special effects. Seeing H.B. Warner on the cross is also a haunting sight. He really looked the part.The final thing that I must praise is the performances by the actors. Everyone was great. Every single person in the cast. Everybody looked the part that they were playing. It was amazing. Dorothy Cumming was the perfect choice to play the Virgin Mary. Ernest Torrence was great as Peter. Victor Varconi was great as Pontius Pilate. Joseph Schildkraut was great as Judas. I couldn't believe that was the old man I saw on the Twilight Zone. In this movie Judas is a handsome young man and it is also the first movie were I've seen Judas without a beard. Schildkraut's interpretation of Judas will be something very new to you, but it turns out great. His performance was especially good when you see him in agony over betraying Jesus until you finally see him hang himself. Jacqueline Logan was a great choice to play Mary Magdalene. She was very attractive and great in the scene when Jesus casts the seven deadly sins out of her. Great effects in that scene too. Joseph Schildkraut's father Rudolph Schildkraut was also great as Caiaphas. This movie shows him for the villain that he was. Again, nobody complained about that in this, but they complained about Gibson's movie. Finally, H.B. Warner was great. I couldn't believe that was Mr. Gower from It's A Wonderful Life.This is one of the greatest movies you will ever see about Jesus Christ. This is way better than King of Kings with Jeffrey Hunter. This movie was for the most part, very accurate. The special effects were great. The direction by Cecil B. DeMille was great. Again, too bad he didn't do the Jeffrey Hunter one. The performances by the actors were great. The King of Kings is an amazing movie and you will not soon forget the images that you see. Be sure to see this one. I promise you will not be disappointed.

Michael_Elliott King of Kings, The (1927) **** (out of 4) It's interesting that Mel Gibson was originally going to show The Passion of the Christ without any subtitles because he felt the story spoke loudly enough and that audience members would know the story well enough so words weren't really needed. With The King of Kings being a silent film the silence really adds to the story but on the other hand, unlike Gibson it's very apparent that DeMille wasn't quite sure whether the audience would know the story good enough and that leads to the film's one weak spot. The film probably would have lost a good twenty-minutes if it weren't for all the intertitles, which become quite annoying because it's easy to read the lips of what the actors are saying. Even with that one flaw DeMille created one of the greatest tellings of the story of Jesus.The first hour and half deals with Jesus (H.B. Warner) as he walks the Earth with his disciples where he cures the blind and helps the cripple to walk. The second hour then turns to the crucifixion and eventual resurrection and with each passing frame you can tell this is a film being made by someone very passionate about the subject matter. The great lengths DeMille went through to create this film have become somewhat legendary. The director would have ministers bless the film each day before filming and even made his actors sign papers swearing they wouldn't get into any trouble to where the audiences might not believe them in their part.I find it quite odd to bash a religious film for not staying true to the source material because no movie ever has and I'm sure one never will. DeMille adds some interesting changes including having Mark be a young boy who is cured by Jesus but the most infamous change is the romance between Judas and Maria Magdalene. According to the liner notes, this so-called romance was a German legend but why DeMille decided to use it is anyone's guess. DeMille also said that the Jews were the most unfairly treated in the Bible and to avoid any anti-Semitic controversy, it's made quite clear that Rome was behind the deeds of that certain day.As I said earlier, The King of Kings is epic in scale but DeMille thankfully never goes over the top and remembers that the story is the most important thing to make a movie work. Each and every frame is told in such loving care that it doesn't take any time for the film to transfer you back and make it seem as if you're actually there witnessing these events on your own. The lavished sets and thousands of extras also add a great deal of realism to the story and W.B. Warner, while a bit too old for the role, delivers a remarkable performance where he tells every feeling of Jesus with a simple look or body gesture.The film is also quite moving especially the scenes with Jesus working with a group of sick people. DeMille usually slows the pace down so that we can see the love these sick people felt for Jesus and that clearly jumps right off the screen. DeMille also makes sure to show Jesus as a mythical character who can work wonders and most importantly, the film allows Jesus to be seen as someone who knows what love is and knows his mission in life.When Jesus is working these wonders the director usually has a light shining on him, which would come off as camp but once again DeMille knew how far to push this and the effect works quite nicely. Another wonderful thing is that DeMille allows some humor to be thrown in with the off-screen violence. The best example of this is the guards getting ready to put the crown of thorns on Jesus but they keep hurting their hands trying to make it.Another wonderful scene has a little girl asking Jesus to heal her doll, which has had a leg broken off.Perhaps this was the showman side of DeMille coming into play but the director decided to film the resurrection with Technicolor. In the 1927 "Premier" version, Technicolor is also used at the very beginning of the film but soon fades to black and white when Jesus is introduced. The resurrection sequence with the use of color perfectly brings the detail of a life returning back to the Earth. It's rather hard to put it into words but when the B&W fades and the color comes shining through, with this little experiment DeMille is able to create some wonderful emotions and get his point across very quietly.There have been dozens of religious movies since The King of Kings (including a remake) but I feel this one here is a film that would appeal to everyone no matter what their personal beliefs are. This is classic DeMille, which shows his talent at storytelling as well as his showmanship of delivering a spectacle like no other.