Forget all of that Easter hoopla. It looks like the skeletal remains of a very dead Jesus have been unearthed in a tomb in Israel, tucked back behind a hardware store.

That's the premise of The Body, a new movie by writer/director Jonas McCord, who previously wrote Malice. In the film, the Vatican is predictably traumatized by the apparent discovery of Christ's unresurrected bones. A priest named Father Lavelle (Derek Jacobi) starts shouting the obvious dilemma, in case the audience isn't properly coaxed to the edge of their seats: "What if it's him? The unrisen Christ? The end of Christianity!"

Enter the hero—Father Matt Gutierrez (Antonio Banderas)—a Catholic priest with a strong resemblance to Zorro. Gutierrez is exhorted by the church to investigate and to "protect the faith." But Guitierrez isn't as fretful as his fellow friars. He just wants to know the truth. This is evidence that demands a verdict.

No doubt this troubling premise has the potential to lead us into a heated discussion about the mystery of Christ's death and resurrection. What would happen to the world if such a discovery was made? Would denominations turn upon each other causing schisms throughout the church? Would nations go to war? Would Christianity truly be doomed? Ask yourself: Is your faith in carbon dating and archaeology, or in the promises of Scripture? Interesting questions.

If The Body explores these issues seriously, if it is more concerned with art than entertainment, we might have a real discussion piece on our hands. And perhaps a scandal as well. It's not hard to imagine religious protesters outside the theaters and prominent Christian apologists on 60 Minutes and Nightline reassuring us that the Resurrection is real, and rebuking Hollywood for "attacking" the church. (Whether the film ends up affirming or rejecting the Resurrection, well, that would be telling.)

Some of the same potential for trouble—and publicity—that The Last Temptation of Christ received lies in The Body's very suggestion that Jesus' resurrection was a hoax. But based on early critical response to the film, I suspect that this storm might just pass over with very little thunder. In spite of its attention-grabbing idea, and in spite of a distinguished cast that includes Derek Jacobi and John Wood (two veterans of priestly roles), it sounds like the movie isn't good enough to cause riots.

Most critics—mainstream or religious—find the film weak and even laughable. Scott Foundas describes it as a case of wasted potential. "What would the uncovering of Christ's body really mean to the church? To this man?" he asks in his Variety review. "Such inquiry stops squarely after the first reel or so, clearing the way for a windup series of lethargic, would-be thrills, in which the body itself becomes roughly as significant as a case full of cash or an elusive bit of microfilm." "Indiana Jones has never been so missed," agrees Michael Atkinson of The Village Voice, who goes on to describe the performance by Derek Jacobi as "so Sunday-hammy you want to rivet him with cloves." Kevin Thomas of the Los Angeles Times writes, "It would take genius and daring to pull off a film worthy of such a premise. That McCord is as pedestrian an adapter as he is a director further trivializes the film, which proceeds murkily and with precious little credibility. It also makes an array of Catholics, Jews, and Arabs look bad before it reaches a predictably contrived ending."

Article continues below

While The Body joins a long list of thrillers that paint unflattering caricatures of Catholic priests, Elvis Mitchell at The New York Times observes that Father Gutierrez is an exception. He's a good priest because he keeps his cool and because he's handsome. Thus, of course, there is also the suggestion that his fellow priests lust after him. Mitchell writes, "Gutierrez, an archaeologist with an ultrasultry manner and concave-of-cheek good looks … suffers a stoning while checking out the dig, which conveniently gives him a chance to take off his shirt. 'Not many of our priests are ex-combat soldiers,' Cardinal Pesci (John Wood) says admiringly—maybe a little too admiringly." In spite of the film's portrayal of a rather spooky Catholicism, The U.S. Catholic Conference avoids overreaction and posts that the film "remains shallow in its exploration … of the resurrection."

Perhaps a filmmaker will eventually explore the Resurrection in an artful manner. Or perhaps Indiana Jones will investigate the empty tomb in a worthwhile, well-made adventure that respects the integrity of its subject matter. But until then, thinking moviegoers hungry to discuss these things may have to look elsewhere. At E! Online, the critic concludes, "It'd take a miracle to raise this Body from the dead."

Hot from the Oven


Critics in the religious media seem pleasantly surprised with Jordan Walker-Pearlman's film The Visit, a drama about the redemption of a man serving a 25-year sentence after being convicted of rape.

Michael Elliott at MovieParables writes that "unneeded cinematic gimmickry such as fading to black in the middle of a scene … only distracts from the intensely powerful performances that [Walker-Pearlman] elicits from his talented cast." And then he joins other critics praising those actors, complimenting Marla Gibbs, Rae Dawn Chong, Billy Dee Williams, and especially Hill Harper (He Got Game) who plays the prisoner. The Visit, Elliot says, "puts the emphasis where God would want us to focus: The salvation that is available to all men, regardless of their past sins."

Article continues below

Roger Ebert was also moved by the film's conclusion. In his review at the Chicago Sun-Times, he writes, "The Visit is about … the fact that the prisoner we see is not the same person who was convicted. If, that is, he is lucky enough to grow and change. The last act of The Visit hurries that process too much, but the journey is worth taking."

* * *


No, you're not having a flashback. Paul Hogan really is back in theatres, starring in Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles. The hero of a couple of mid-'80s caper comedies, and more recently the star of SUV commercials, Hogan's fish-out-of-water hero is once again trying to make sense of our strange, big-city ways with his Australian outback sensibilities. Dundee's return has most mainstream critics asking "Why?"

But critics in the religious media seem happy that there's another relatively harmless family entertainment in theatres. Preview calls it "old-fashioned fun. While poking fun at the unreal world of movie making, the film also ties in messages about respecting nature and being honest with others." Movieguide says the movie is "a highly entertaining addition to the series that is probably tamer and more family-friendly than the other two movies. It's like visiting an old friend who, though he may regale you with the same old stories, is still fun to be around." But the U.S. Catholic Conference shrugged it off: "Director Simon Wincer's scenarios eke out some minor laughs but the film is mostly a snore with a paper-thin, time-worn premise." "Wincer … handles the picture like it was a paint by numbers kit," Michael Elliott similarly complains at MovieParables. "He doesn't stray from what has been used in the past and … produces nothing that is of much interest."

Roger Ebert wasn't terribly impressed either, but he did pose a good question: "It may not be brilliant, but who would you rather your kids took as a role model: Crocodile Dundee, David Spade, or Tom Green? It is a melancholy milestone in our society when parents pray, 'Please, God, let my child grow up to admire a crocodile rassler,' but there you have it." The Dove Foundation's Holly McClure has no problem with Dundee as a role model because "he lives by a code of ethics. He's got mid-20th century strong values of family, what's right and wrong, honesty and integrity. Values that have been lost in our modern day society. I loved this movie and am glad the 'Croc' is back!"

Article continues below
* * *


Tom Green's comedy Freddy Got Fingered received such incredible condemnation across the board by critics, mainstream and religious media alike, that it's hardly worth mentioning here. What is interesting, however, is how the film brought out some rather creative writing from the film's critics.

Michael Elliott summed it up at MovieParables: "Not content with pushing the envelope of taste, Green decides to simply take a bulldozer to the whole post office." Preview reports, "At least a quarter of the press-screening audience left within the first twenty minutes." Moveguide's critic writes, "Such cinematic crud may be a self-indulgent piece of trash, but it's extremely cheap to make and therefore may give a nice profit to money-hungry producers and movie financiers. Jesus says in Mark 8:36, 'What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?'"

At The Dove Foundation, Phil Boatwright was concerned: "Most of Green's audience is under-age and supposedly unable to attend an R-rated movie. So how are they going to get into the movie? In a recent interview, co-writer Derek Harvie said, 'They can sneak in.' He then proceeded to suggest how to do it. If your children insist that Green is cool, I can only suggest putting them up for adoption and beginning again."

Roger Ebert joined in with mainstream critics trying to outdo each other describing the movie's depravity: "This movie doesn't scrape the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't below the bottom of the barrel. This movie doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels." Entertainment Weekly's Owen Gleiberman aks if such criticism is irrelevant: "To raise moral objection to Green's antics is to play right into his hand. It would be like complaining that a skunk sprays you; that, quite simply, is what a skunk does. A more relevant issue might be, Why does our culture so enjoy getting sprayed?"

Anyone want to try answering that question? I have a guess. Green's movie, like his successful MTV series, is primarily a rude gesture towards authority, especially towards parental figures. Green's success on MTV has come from his ability to entertain youngsters by amazing them with his audacious attacks on all things they are told they should respect. This taps into childish and rebellious fantasies, especially in the minds of children who feel abandoned, neglected, unloved, and unnoticed by parents, teachers, churches, etc. Columnist Jeffrey Wells noted: "At the very least, Freddy isn't about idiocy for its own sake. It's about rage, revulsion at middle-class attitudes, misanthropy, fear of going out in the world, sexual role-playing, family dysfunction—real things that make young people unhappy. The other youth comedies I've seen recently are about nothing except chasing babes."

Article continues below

There are a lot of kids who relate to Tom Green's comic anger. And there are a lot of kids whose parents let them watch Green's show. While Freddy is clearly a profane and unconscionable work, we should get beyond just badmouthing the obviously juvenile antics of comics like Green and think about what the current surge of such crass movies indicates. The more involved we are with our kids, accepting them, affirming them, loving them for who they are, and talking with them about what they see and hear on television, the less they will feel that they live in a different world, one that we do not understand. Artists of conscience might also be challenged to create more that will stimulate the imaginations and the funny bones of young audiences without stooping so low.

Article continues below

Still Cooking


Kingdom Come joined Spy Kids, Bridget Jones's Diary, and several other comedies in the box office top ten. And it continued to score points here and there with critics in the religious media. Movieguide's review raves: "Kingdom Come is a low budget movie, but the characters are so wonderful that, with all their flaws, it would be nice to be with them at that church service in Lulu. These people are not polished, but they are human and compelling. The direction has a light touch, so the audience won't feel that this movie is preaching at them." But The Dove Foundation's Holly McClure caught up with the film this week and was not as satisfied. She reports, "The story has its touching and bright moments." But an overdose of high-intensity family crises wore down her patience: "Overall it seemed like a lot of arguing, fighting and drama to deal with on top of a funeral. Tense family moments related to strained marriages, the death of a family patriarch, miscarriage, and issues about smoking and drinking and jealousy of one another. There were just too many extremes that kept the story from being taken seriously."

Next week:The Claim adapts Thomas Hardy for the big screen. More responses to the sensation from Mexico, Amores Perros. And critics respond to the sex and violence of One Night at McCool's.

Jeffrey Overstreet is on the board of Promontory Artists Association, a non-profit organization based in Seattle, which provides community, resources, and encouragement for Christian artists. He edits an artists' magazine (The Crossing), publishes frequent film and music reviews on his Web site (Looking Closer), and is at work on a series of novels.






Related Elsewhere


See earlier Film Forum postings for these other movies in the box-office top ten: Bridget Jones's Diary, Spy Kids, Along Came a Spider, Blow, Joe Dirt, Enemy at the Gates, The Tailor of Panama, and Josie and the Pussycats.

Tags:
Posted: