Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

dierregi A series about the events immediately after the crucifixion sounded daring and interesting, since there are way too many cinematic stories about everything that happened "before" and "during".I was therefore intrigued by the first episode and curious to see how the apostles were going to regroup. But episode after episode, I found the story unfolding in a most irritating way.Here we go with the usual brutal Roman repression (see Nazi in occupied countries or the evil empire) and Jewish plotting (don't even need to write more about that).The apostles seem stubborn, directionless, incapable of actually preaching anything that makes sense and still able to gather followers. Enter Saul and the show sort of pick up a bit, just to crumble miserably with the arrival of Caligula. History tells us that Caligula became emperor in 37 BC and did not start losing it until the following year. But the show needed the usual OTT villain and who better than the Roman emperor arriving in Jerusalem in 33 BC?On the other hand, if they just want to re-write history, why using episodes from the gospel? I refer especially to the very controversial one with Ananias and Sapphira. In this episode, an elderly couple sells a piece of land and gives part of the profit to the Christians to be allowed to live with them.However, they lie when they say they gave all the money, as they kept some aside just in case. But the holy spirit acts as a ruthless robber: "Give me ALL your money or I kill you" and the couple dies a horrible death for having dared keeping a little money aside (... actually.... maybe it was for lying, but it does seems a disproportionate punishment).Not the most endearing, loving statement from the newborn Christian movement...I am not surprised there was no a second series, since this one was bad in so many way...

singlecellorganism-34763 Fantastic camera work, audio, acting, sets and the entire production is top notch.BUT every single powerful speech from Peter / Paul / Stephen have been removed, for no reason; it's almost comical the "dumbing" the down the writers diverging from the text in Acts.Peter's defense of the 2000 YEAR AUTHENTICATION system of the Jewish people proving Jesus is the messiah was removed.Same with Stephen's.Same with Pauls.So I have to conclude this is actually a hit piece on Christianity as-per-usual.Too bad.

robertemerald I'm not immune to criticisms about this show being historically inaccurate. The heart of the problem between Rome and Jerusalem was always the Temple however, and in this the show captures something of the times with Caiaphas and Herod Antipas attempting to be good Roman subjects yet devoted to the Temple at the same time. I think the problem was fundamentally that Romans saw Temples as, well, temples, and the Jewish people saw the Temple as the essential church. This is, ironically, Jesus's problem with the Temple as well, knowing God to be everywhere. The show also, I think, gives us a good idea of the itinerant nature of the poor at that time, the various rivalries between factions, how dangerous it was to be out of favor at that time, and overall just how the city looked. A bustling Jerusalem has been created with some great aerial shot 3D to add authenticity. I get that the show is a tad politically correct as well, but there are so many very authentic touches, such as Roman horns announcing crucifixions or Caiaphas's purification baths or the attention given to costumes, that I tend to forgive this, although I found the depiction of the angel to be a tad warlike for me.And I was moved! Many times during this show I found myself closer to Jesus's message. Overall this show filled my heart with joy. I really liked watching it. I thought the cast, script and, yes, even the plot, to be totally engaging. Before I watched this show I didn't realize how much history happens with the disciples after Jesus goes to Heaven, and that's a very welcome eye-opener to me. This is good television and I definitely recommend this show.

Jock Lindholm Since when was any of the apostles colored? and Mary Magdalene was colored? This was in Judea, the apostles was Jews, the likelihood of anyone of them being colored is somewhere along the line of me being a pope. I am tired of politically correct movies, if yours going to make a movie or miniseries or whatever based on the lives of Jesus Christ or the gospel, then for the love of GOD, don't mix in PC crap into it.Next you will see a Mohammed thats Japanese. Or perhaps Buddha thats white.This series is so filled with inaccuracies that I was disgusted after the first 30 minutes and quit watching. do not waste your time with this.