Add a Review

  • Cineanalyst20 February 2009
    This is an interesting film in a few respects, if not necessarily a very good or entertaining one. It's an early filmed passion play and chronicle of the life of Jesus Christ and is of both religious and film history interest. It becomes more of curio because of its length and extravagance for a film made in the early 1900s. It seems to be the longest story film made to that date. There had been some actuality, or documentary, films already made that were longer, including some boxing matches and a series called "Army Life" (1900) by R.W. Paul. Nevertheless, film subjects lasting near or longer than 40 minutes were rare until the 1910s.

    Jesus has been a popular subject throughout film history, perhaps nevermore so than in the beginning of its history. Before this film, quite a few passion plays had already been filmed. Moreover, these films were generally longer and more elaborate than were other subjects. In 1897, when the cinema was barely more than a year old and when nearly every film was one shot-scene and under a minute in length, a Frenchman named Léar filmed a passion play of 12 scenes, which received popular distribution in Britain and the US, as well as in France. George Hatot's "La Vie et la Passion de Jésus-Christ" (1897/1898), produced by the Lumiére Company, had 13 tableaux. An American passion play, featuring Horitz villagers, was supposedly even grander and longer. Shortly thereafter, "The Passion Play of Oberammergau" (1898), which probably didn't have much of anything to do with the plays performed in the village of Oberammergau, contained over 20 scenes. Sigmund Lubin also made a passion play claiming, but lacking, authenticity to the Oberammergau performances. With a lecturer and magic lantern slides, these films would provide as long an entertainment as does the modern feature-length film. In 1899, Alice Guy made "La Vie de Christ" in 11 tableaux for Gaumont, and again, in 1906, made a passion play of, reportedly, 25 scenes. Pathé, in fact, had made a film on Christ before this picture; their 1900 release consisted of 16 scenes. They, too, would go on to make another one after this, in 1907.

    According to film historian Richard Abel ("The Ciné Goes to Town"), there were a few versions of this film sold to exhibitors, and exhibitors may have had the option to purchase individual scenes and may have further edited various passion plays together (these were common practices back then, when exhibitors retained much editorial control over films). Abel says Pathé filmed this over three different periods; others say this production lasted from 1902 to 1905. Actors and styles changed during shootings. The version available from Image Entertainment seems to be complete, if not more than (with the title of "Passion and Death of Christ"). Abel says the longest version was 32 tableaux. Yet, I counted 35 tableaux separated by title cards and 46 total shots in the version from Image Entertainment.

    In the beginning of the history of cinema as an international business, Georges Méliès was the most popular and innovative filmmaker, and, consequently, his films were the most often imitated. Supposedly, this film avoided any reference to prior theatrical productions, says Abel. Upon a second viewing of this film, however, I noticed that this Pathé production, like so many other Pathé films, significantly copies the féeries/fairy films of Méliès. This is especially evident in the soft, fanciful set designs, and the device of female angels guiding characters and events being a variation of the female fairies in Méliès's fantasy pictures. Additionally, the use of stop-substitutions and superimpositions for trick effects, moving props, and dissolves between scenes and trick effects were trademarks of Méliès adopted religiously by Pathé. The use in this film of many actors or extras to fill and decorate some scenes, which often serve no narrative purpose or biblical fidelity, was also done in Méliès's féeries. This imitation of Méliès's films makes this passion play stand out from the drab, realist set designs that seemed to have been used in other such early passion plays and the location shooting used in later films such as "From the Manger to the Cross" (1912) and the Christus films made in Italy. They're also in stark contrast to the more realist painted sets used by Ferdinand Zecca, the co-director of "The Life and Passion of Christ" and Pathé's studio manager for a time, in "Historie d'une crime" (1901).

    Most of the technique and style in "The Life and Passion of Christ" is common of film-making in the beginning, but there are some notable exceptions. Not many prints from this period exist with tinting, which doesn't seem to have been a prevalent practice yet ("Scrooge; or Marley's Ghost" (1901) is another early example). It's also an early example of Pathé's patented stencil coloring, and their use of bold, red lettering and the rooster logo in the title cards. Pans are used often, including in the Nativity scene, where a pan and tinting changes move the scene between the indoor action of the nativity and the outdoor action of the approaching wise men and gang. Another example of three scenes in one via panning is the Mount of Olives/Kiss of Judas tableaux, where the camera follows Jesus into and out of the woodlands. I haven't seen this kind of extensive panning anywhere else in story films this early in film history (extensive panning was widely done by actuality filmmakers). The use of a window to show outside action is another example of early alternatives to scene dissection (of which there is very little here or in most early films). There's also a match-on-action shot in The Holy Family at Nazareth tableaux, and two medium insert shots later in the film, which are rather unexpected departures from the film's mostly fixed camera, head-on long shot framing tableaux style. I certainly recommend this for those interested in the history of Christianity and cinema.
  • With the invention of a new medium of narrative and communication, it was inevitable that the story of "the life and passion of Christ" (the film's original title) would immediately attract the attention of those seeking to dabble in the nascent enterprise. This primitive artifact is of historical value not for being the very first film to deal with these events but because it was later considered to be the first feature-length film ever released...despite the fact that, running just under 45 minutes, it isn't one technically and besides, it was originally shown in segments in serial-like fashion!

    What I find more important, however, is the fact that for the next few years after its making, rather than setting up newer and more elaborate productions, it was being exploited by exhibitors by getting re-edited and distributed under various aliases. The version I watched, subdivided into virtually split-second re-enactments of the most famous incidents in Christ's life on Earth, was predictably bland on a technical and artistic level with the usual drawbacks of overly emphatic acting and stagey movement. What to say, then, about the extremely hirsute and curiously chubby actor chosen to portray the all-important central role?

    Even so, it proved pleasant enough to watch given the sheer ingenuity (hand coloring specific objects, like angels' wings or soldiers' robes, for added effect) utilized to straightforwardly convey familiar material for mass consumption. Occasionally there was also the odd sparkle of inventiveness, with the angel literally obfuscating the Holy Family from Herod's pursuing soldiers in the land of Egypt. Also, I have to say the print was in much better shape than a century-old footage has any right to be. Divine intervention, perhaps?
  • This film must rank as one of the most important of its time, even though it doesn't occupy the same place in the public consciousness as other early landmarks such as Melies' Voyage to the Moon and Porter's The Great Train Robbery. At 44 minutes long it is one (if not the) earliest example of a near-feature length film, even though it was often sold as individual scenes so that many audiences in 1903 never actually got to see the film in its entirety the way we do today. The use of stencil colouring is effective and enlivens what otherwise becomes a rather dull series of tableaux from the life of Jesus, all filmed with a static camera that captures the 'exaggerated gesture' school of acting that was considered outdated long before the age of the silent movie was over.
  • DrezenMedia30 January 2004
    This is not exactly what you'd expect to see in an average film from 1905. First off, the length, which was utterly bizzare for it's time (44 minutes) made it worthy of the title of a "feature-length-film", of which it was the first, at least as far as we know. Moving on, the nativity scenes were extremely well done. I actually did a stop motion animated version of my own using this film as a template. Also by watching this film I finally learned how to do a few photographic dissolves, although the filmmakers of this one did a much better job on te dissolves, fades, etc. than I ever would. This film also offers a glimpse at the elaborate Pathe hand-coloring process in it's early stages of development. It also proved that you can certainly do a lot with only four colors. It took three years to make this picture, now God only knows how long it will take to uncover a list of the cast. But even without it, this is the best telling of the story of Christ I have ever seen.
  • vvp_142 February 2017
    This is one of the earliest versions depicting the life of Christ. And what a film it is! It's partly colourised (but only parts of most frames). So you get a movie made over a hundred years ago hand coloured and 44 minutes long which is much longer than the average films of the time (1-5 minutes). This was made to last, you can tell - the effort it took to hand- colour hundreds of feet of film and shoot that length with so many decorations.

    The opening scene - The Annunciation is clearly made in a setting inspired by the Italian Renaissance art, just like the Last Supper scene later in the film. And if you put yourself back in those days where film was just coming out of its embryonic state, as it were, people were used to seeing paintings, pictures and frescoes, and of course, those films were made to look like those paintings only moving, which was in a way a miracle of a painting coming alive. Static camera shots (there was no zooming or panning of camera at the time) only add to that effect. In this film, however, they used camera panning in two of the scenes.

    As I mentioned, it's whopping 44 minutes long and the director managed to fit the events of entire life of Christ into it - from Annunciation to Ascension (Mel Gibson had 2 hours of running time and managed to fit only a quarter of the events - just teasing). So it is like a visual Bible reminiscent of those stained glass windows in cathedrals called the Poor Man's Bible made not only for beauty and inspiration but also for those who couldn't read (which was the vast majority of the population as books were rare and very expensive). So the film is also made of stand-alone parts or scenes, just like those windows. The other thing to mention is that it is made in a fashion of passion plays (hence the English name of the film). In good old days those were very common throughout Europe for many centuries wherein actors performed scenes from the life of Christ and saints in towns around the holy days. So, clearly the settings in this film look very much like open theatre stage decorations. However, the progress, it seems was made in shooting some open air scenes as well. They also used special effects - combined shots. Some are really incredible for the time, like the walking on water in the catching of fish scene or transfiguration scene or or the scene with lightning on Calvary. And so... the development in film-making continues...

    The film runs at normal speed so there's no fast moving comic effect everyone is used to. And the actors face quite a difficult task: there was no speech possible as they were used to in theatre and had very limited use of facial expressions (there were no close-up camera shots at the time, although they made two here), so they only had to make use of their body language and arms, which looks a bit over the top at times. There are no title cards in the film apart from the scene titles, so the viewer is meant to know at least the basics of the four Gospels, which was, I'm sure, a lot more common back then than today. Enjoy, highly recommended.
  • I have always been fascinated by silent films. There is something about seeing actors and actresses from 100 years ago performing. Jaded by today's high-tech special effects, I always try and imagine what it was like to watch a particular film at the time of it's original release. It helps to appreciate the crudeness of early cinema.

    "The Life and Passion of Jesus Christ" is a very charming production from Pathe, originally filmed in 1902, but expanded and finally released in 1905. Imagine a series of famous religious paintings coming to life, separated by title cards, and you will have a pretty good idea of what this film is like. For example, the scene in which Mary and Joseph rest as they are escaping to Egypt, is almost identical to Luc Olivier Merson's 1879 painting "Rest on the Flight to Egypt", right down to Mary sitting on the famous Sphinx. While some might find these "living paintings" an unimaginative cop-out, I found them to be very charming, and very nostalgic.

    The sets and costumes appear to be right out of a stage production of the life of Christ. Possibly from and elaborate passion play of the day. The make-up on the cast is very theatrical, so much so that a close-up of Jesus is almost comical. Again, where others might be bothered by the cudeness of them, I was quite charmed.

    Having been filmed over a period of 3 years, the continuity isn't too bad. The biggest flaws are in the casting changes made over that time. The characters of John the Apostle and the 12 year old Jesus change in mid scene, much to the audiences surprise!

    The best unintentional humor, of the film, is in the Birth of Jesus scene. The baby LITERALLY appears, as if by magic, in the manger between Mary and Joseph. Maybe it was simply my frame of mind at the time I viewed it, but I laughed out loud! If only child birth were that easy!!!! To top it off, the actress who plays Mary looks bored through the whole scene (actually, through the whole movie), as if this sort of thing happens every day! My, how times have changed!

    As simplistic as this film is, compared to today, it's really a wonderful window into the past. I recommend it!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "La vie et la passion de Jésus Christ" or "The Life and Passion of Christ" (and there are a handful more titles) is a French silent film from over 110 years and it has an action that is much more important than most of the films from that era because it is about the religious story of the Christ. Lucien Nonguet and Ferdinand Zecca, especially the latter, are both fairly famous and prolific filmmakers from the very early days of silent cinema and this one here is among their more known works for sure, probably because of the topic. I must say I did not find the story too interesting, but then again I am generally not too much into religion-themed films. What I liked the most about this one here, is the use of color which really added a whole lot to this movie and made it actually a decent watch at times. But still, it cannot make up for the not so interesting story and my overall verdict is negative. Not a great choice to start getting into silent films.
  • mart-4525 February 2007
    Warning: Spoilers
    Definitely not a film to revolutionize the industry or introduce any new techniques of film-making, this is a very handsome and solid production. It's miraculous that we can today enjoy it in superb quality on DVD - probably most of the viewers about a 100 years ago saw a black and white copy, as the stencil tinted de luxe edition was available only at the very best theaters. Even if you are not fascinated by this film or the subject of it, you can't but marvel at the copy released by Image Entertainment (together with another gem, From the Manger To the Cross, 1912). It's virtually impossible to see a film that is over a century old but shows so little damage. The process of stencil colouring was a very effective one and, compared to the occasionally blurry and smeared images of hand coloured film, the colours are crisp and well defined. Filmed within the limitations of the film-making as known back in 1902 when the filming commenced, the static nature of the scenes can today be considered almost intentional, meditative and solemn. The tableaux keep moving at a steady paste, so the film never gets tedious. You might not be fascinated by this film as a work of cinematography, but it sure is handsome as a work of academic, picturesque art. If you are a religious person, the fact that you are watching anonymous, long since departed people playing long since departed characters, adds to the mystery significantly. A proper viewing for Christmas or Lent.

    P.S: I've ticked the "contains spoilers" box just for fun. As you can see, I haven't revealed the ending.
  • Few people, I think, appreciate how the bible has been reinvented in the last century. Until this very film, what we had were words, stories in words. For centuries, those written stories were illustrated in static icons and symbols complex and simple. With this film, we began a new era, where religion is cinematic. American Fundamental Christianity and Indian neoHinduism are currently in the lead, nearly completely transformed by the moving icon and the ghostly eye. Prayer has literally been redefined and no amount of thumping will restore the imagination as a personal relationship with God again. Not one with an INNER eye.

    Its why the Fundamentalist Film School down the road from me at Pat Robertson's empire is so interesting. They change the thing by bearing witness, in a sort of quantum effect.

    It all started here, but you won't find much to indicate so. What we have with this first instance are two things. First is the implicit proposal that as "the greatest story," it deserved the greatest, fullest, longest treatment.

    The second is the interesting stuff. This is literally closer to moving stained glass than films of today. Its quite beautifully painted if you see it that way. Its staged as tableaux, with little movement and none from the camera which is at eye level. There are "miraculous" appearances and disappearances, which is how the filmmakers would have seen the promise of film. The much noted fades are harder to notice. I'll take the historian's word that these French fellows invented the fade. It is remarkable how they worked it though with the color. Because you see the color fade, so they must have painted before optically splicing. Its a mystery to me.

    I'll just take it on faith.

    Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
  • The story of Jesus Christ from the proclamation of his Nativity to his crucifixion. Impressive scenes and dynamism of the actors prelude to the Italian colossal movies of the silent period.
  • Life and Passion of Christ, The (1903)

    ** 1/2 (out of 4)

    Decent telling of the story of Jesus from his birth up to the resurrection. This early French feature is full of wonderful imagination and the use of color is a real added bonus. The visual are all very nice and the set decoration is among the best I've seen in any silent film of its era. The biggest problem is that the feature runs just over 40-minutes and it seems like a bunch of short films edited together. There's really no consistent storytelling but instead just various segments from the Bible.

    From the Manger to the Cross (1912)

    * 1/2 (out of 4)

    Early Warner Bros. film is the typical telling of Jesus, as the title says, from the manger to the cross. This is a really boring, dull and pointless telling of the story but I guess the studio wanted to make a feature and stretched everything to the limit. The film uses quotes from the New Testament but this gets tiresome very quickly as well. The film was shot on location all around the world and from a historic standpoint, this here is interesting but the rest of the film isn't.
  • I was once given a 35mm hand colored nitrate print made in 1903 of "The Passion Play" it was a three reel feature, and beautifully hand colored with cut out stencils using airbrushes and special color inks. It was one of the most amazing 35mm nitrate prints that ever passed through my finger tips. It was given to me from a filmmaker who had the print in his collection since the 1920's in Boise Idaho. It was still in the original fiber shipping case, on the original reel and can sets, and a tablet worth of a one page contracts that the theater owners would sign and send back to the distributor. I gave away dozens of these copies, and I think I still have a few left. Here's the amazing story. The print, other than the normal wear of projection, was in perfect condition, and had no signs of nitrate decomposition. It wasn't shrunken at all! The filmmaker who has since passed away, on that particular day gave me all of his 35mm nitrate short films he had made in the 1920's. Every single can of film he gave me had turned to the dreaded "brown powder" some were so bad, they had ate right thru the entire stack of film cans! It was truly sad because he had no idea what was even in those cans of film. But the print of "The Passion Play" was perfect? I said; "Jim, where did you store these films of yours that you produced?" and he said he had kept them in a cool dry place, checked them once in a while. I said: "Was The Passion Play stored with these other cans of your?" Jim said: "You know whats funny, I put that film (The Passion Play) away in the attic in my house in Boise, and it's been sitting up there for fifty years, and in the summer the temperature reached over one hundred degrees, so I have no idea how this print (The Passion Play) survived in the worst possible conditions, but all of my films that I took better care of - all decomposed." The print by the way, I loaned to Morgan of Moorecraft Film Laboratories in Hollywood back in the late 1980's he was supposed to make a color dupe negative, but I never got the print back, and I never knew what happened to it? One of the most amazing films I have ever seen!
  • It is its first view. to be an useful testimony about the early cinema. in same measure, it is a great movie. for technique, for the accuracy of story, for the science to present, în 43 minutes, in clear and precise manner, the history of Salvation. and the colors and "the special effects" are more than impressive.for the trust in viewer. a lesson of cinema and one of the trips in the past , with its sensitivity and vision and ambition of a complex work who remains impressive and moving.