Strange, rough-around-the-edges film (like Cassevetes filming The Holy Book). I'm not a religious guy, though I'm sure that's not enough reason as to why I was lukewarm with this one. Maybe it was the terribly awful camera-work. Actually, that was hilarious, might've been the best aspect of this dreary film.

Oh come on, this film is a pile of crap. Nowhere near the austere purity of something like a Bresson film, the whole thing is just laughable and inept.

Saint Matthew is a liar. Pasolini should've written his own gospel.

I'm sorry but this is just boring - yeah it is nice to link Jesus as this proto-Marxist character, but that's it. Amateur cast and you can figure that out by watching it yourself. Stupid editing. Everything sounds great on paper, that is to say in theory but the practice is where you fail or not, and this does not succeed.

Ascetic and austere masterpiece from Passolini. Blew me away.

181

A decidedly odd, though great, experience. Jesus is kept at arm's length and his psyche unexplored, but he's also not deified or glorified at all. He feels almost like a force of nature. His miracles, such as when he walks on water, somehow feel realistic rather than, well, miraculous. It has a mood to it best encapsulated by Pasolini's quote, "I am an atheist with a nostalgia for belief".

A great looking picture, with extremely stark black and white photography that make that period of time look that much more real. Pasolini's use of the unknown and unprofessional actors is one of a seemingly natural beauty. The Gospel According to St. Matthew is an epic film with Italian Neorealist qualities that make it just that much more beautiful.

I'm all for neorealism and as far as that goes this is very good, but as for the content it's really just a bloke going around spouting his opinions to anyone who'll listen, which gets old after a while.

#179

Bored me to death. I think if I were the slightest bit Christian, I'd have gotten more out of it, but ... to me, it was just a boring story in which nothing happened. Beautifully shot, but ... YAWN

The frantic pace, the dizzling cinematography and the relentless action might be off-putting to some, as Sam Jackson's band of fierce 'pogo-stick-police men' chase Terrence Stamp's chilling hyppo-riding hippie-baddie through downtown Pola... wait. I most have dozed off. Oh no! That movie is still on! oh GOD! YOU'RE JESUS FUCKING CHRIST FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE!!!! DOOOOO SOOMETHIIIIING!!!

I've heard about it being Marxist, so I hoped Pasolini would add something to the table, but it's just a faithfull retelling of the story without all the later Christian romanticizng about virgin Mary etc. If I were objective I would probably have to say that it's a very good film, but I'm not and personally I found it quite boring, probably based on the fact, that I've heard the story like 100 times. If aliens visited Earth I would probably recommend it to them, though.

The bold realism and utter lack of Hollywoodization gives the film an undefinable quality, but a powerful one. The handheld work was especially effective in bringing the story to life. The music and editing is quite bold, too. Pasolini wastes no time, nothing is superfluous. There are no loving, lingering shots of a perfectly groomed Christ bathed in a beam of light. Irazoqui's performance is stern and determined, his portrayal of Jesus is far from the typical gentle, saintly one we're used to.

IF you consider all of Matthew to be only of one writer. IF you don't follow the German Critical Method then well... you might buy this. And there is a whole bunch of stuff in there that would make you very uncomfortable if I said it so hey.. take it at face value. You can see I did.

# 157

Not terribly exciting, but extremely accurate portrayal of the Gospel.

Full of lyricism and beautiful images, this is easily the best (or one of the very best) movies about christ ever made.

love it !

Leave it to a gay atheist to make the best Jesus film of all time.

I can't really point to anything wrong with it, it's very well shot, well acted, well paced and is apparently faithful to the source material. Despite all this something felt really odd about it, possibly due to Pasolini's beliefs. While Christ is the clear centre of the film, and of many shots, there's a detachment that doesn't quite fit what you'd expect. I'm not sure this is bad, in fact intellectually I like the idea a lot, it's just that it was distracting in that I really didn't expect it.

It can be difficult to enjoy neorealistic works due to their nature, but the appreciation for the style always wins over when a vision rings as true as this.

159

pasolini's masterpiece