“Jesus of Nazareth” is a four part miniseries directed by Franco Zeffirelli. It tells the gospels account of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. It boasts an impressive array of stars in both major and minor roles and is one of the best depictions of Jesus seen on screen.

There are some parts of this that add to the gospel accounts, though on the whole I think this is to show context and give background to the situations in the gospel. For example, we see the arrangement of Mary and Joseph’s marriage (as this would have been arranged by the family of the bride).  The gospel passes over Joseph’s dilemma once Mary tells him what has happened in a few lines, so the series manages to paint a more vivid picture of just how serious this situation could be, leading potentially to Mary being stoned. Joseph’s care to prevent this by trying to send her away secretly is thus given more weight, as is his relief when the angel reassures him that Mary is telling the truth. Herod the Great appears in extra scenes, and it might be tempting to wonder why (other than for the enjoyment of watching a scenery-chewing Peter Ustinov). However, it gives some background to his instability, his paranoia, and therefore his appalling order to murder all the baby boys in Bethlehem. History tells us Herod was quite barmy in his later life, so this makes sense. Later the addition of Zerah, a scribe of the Temple, gives a face to the ‘scribes and pharisees’ mentioned in the Bible, along with the type of attitudes they espoused.

The extension that I enjoyed most of all was relating to the wise men. Medieval tradition and songs call them ‘three kings’, mostly to do with a misunderstanding of the Biblical passage relating to them. (Three gifts must mean three wise men, for example.) By 500 AD the idea that the magi were kings was widespread, as early Christians linked them to Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah being worshipped by kings. The Bible does not identify them as kings, however, but as ‘wise men’ or magi, which would indicate they came from Persia. We don’t know how many there were and we don’t know their origin point, only that they came ‘from the east’. That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed the idea that three ‘kings’ would be necessity have had three different points of departure and then met on the road. They are depicted by three great actors – Donald Pleasance, James Earl Jones, and Fernando Rey. I have personally always been interested in the wise men, as I find their journey, following a star, to be an amazing act of faith. So they are talking about the star and what it means, and Jones’ character says he doesn’t know what the star is leading them towards. The other two, who have read Jewish scripture, have worked it out, and are surprised that he does not know. This leads me to what may be my favourite line in the whole series: ‘only that it would be something wonderful’. It sums up to me the faith of these men on their journey.

The sets and costume design are superb. I do not have the history to know if this is truly authentic, but it feels like it would be. The houses, their interior furnishing, people’s clothing, tools and Roman uniforms, it all helps to immerse the viewer in the time period. The musical instruments seem to be correct, with mainly wind instruments and percussion. In the scenes at the Temple in Jerusalem, the horns that are being blown are the correct style of ‘shofar’, traditionally made from rams horn and used for ritual purposes. Even the scrolls used in the synagogue at Nazareth look ancient and authentic. All of it helps to build the world of first century Judea.

Zeffirelli’s direction is superb throughout. I can reference a number of scenes that particularly showed this:

1)the visit of Mary to Elizabeth, resulting in a tableau-like moment that mirrored a Renaissance painting (I cannot remember which one, unfortunately.)

2) The slaughter of the innocents, which included (the only time I have seen this) the killing of a great many parents (quite logically too, as of course these mothers and fathers would defend their children.)

3) The raising of Lazarus – the scene at the tomb has the sun from behind, casting long shadows of the watching people as Jesus prays before the tomb. The shadows, Jesus alone before the door, the prayer, then he raises his hands and shouts ‘Lazarus, come forth!’ and then the reactions of the onlookers as the man shuffles out in his shroud. The disciples, in spite of everything, are constantly being amazed over and over at each new work of wonder.

4) Pilate seeing Jesus as he is framed in the light of the door, the sun behind him, bleeding and with the crown of thorns. It is eerily beautiful.

5) The crucifixion and it’s aftermath.

There is so much more, but these are moments that particularly stand out to me.

The politics and economics of the time are illustrated well. Roman attitudes ring true – their absolute incomprehension of the issues Jews find important, Pilate’s comment to Jesus about ‘what is truth’ has a philosophical edge, like he is genuinely interested in discussing this from a philosopher’s point of view, the crowd control of the Romans (brutal but effective). The Sanhedrin elders, priests, scribes have attitudes also reflective of the gospel account and the time period. They are concerned about order, how the Romans might react if there was a breakdown in order, and how this would affect their own grip on authority. They are used to being the leaders of their community and many of them find Jesus to be a threat to them., They of course have as little understanding as others that Jesus doesn’t wish to overthrow anybody and that’s not what his mission is about. They judge him by their own standards. The economy of the time is also clear in its depiction of the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’. Rich people and elders are dressed well, with dyed fabrics and elaborate outfits. The majority of people are far more plainly dressed, such as the disciples, the people in Nazareth, the crowds, Then there are the beggars, dressed in rags and begging outside the Temple. (It’s hard not to think of how little has changed over the centuries.)

Jesus is depicted by Robert Powell and he was so good in this role. He really embodied the way I always imagined Jesus, gentle when need be, louder when there was call for it (when he calls the priests and Pharisees ‘whited sepulchres’, which is a fabulous insult when you think about it.) He tells the children a story gently while the priests who it is actually aimed at stand by fuming. His acting at the crucifixion made me cry. His delivery of the sermon on the Mount was beautiful. I consider his portrayal to be the best portrayal of Jesus I have seen.

Olivia Hussey (who sadly, passed away only recently) played Mary. To be honest, I have mostly considered her to be a competent actress but not a great one. She has one moment in this where she is sublime, and that is at the crucifixion, when Jesus is taken down from the cross. She goes to his body and just has hysterics, holding him and screaming. I was already crying but that made me cry more. You could really feel her anguish and her grief at her son’s death. Brilliant.

Ian McShane is Judas, and he plays him as a politically minded young man who naively believes that Jesus can just talk to everybody and they’ll all see that he is the best thing for everybody. Judas comes across as very well-meaning and without true understanding. His betrayal stems from him thinking Jesus needed to ‘meet’ with the Sanhedrin and he is just facilitating that. He is astonished to learn Jesus is under arrest (though the presence of the guards might have clued him in) and horrified when Zerah pays him. McShane’s portrayal is such ou almost feel sorry for someone who has got everything wrong.

Peter is portrayed by James Farentino, and I enjoyed his performance immensely. Peter is often shown in the Bible to be something of a hothead, though eventually emerging as a leader of the disciples and the early Church. Farentino played it with a sarcastic edge – when Jesus suggests he go out again in his boat he invites him along as says ‘you can preach to the fish’. When Jesus goes to Matthew’s house for supper Peter and the others follow, and it’s a very fun scene where you would think there was an invisible forcefield at the threshold of Matthew’s house – they won’t step foot over the line and enter the house of a ‘sinner’. But when Jesus tells here the story of the prodigal son, it is Peter who gets it and is the first of the ‘righteous’ to step through the doorway. He is a man of courage and Farentino was so good in the role.

Ian Holm as Zerah depicts a mind of politics and power, schemes and plots. He ably portrayed the attitudes of the leadership. James Mason as Joseph of Arimathea, Lawrence Oliver as Nicodemus, Christopher Plummer as Herod Antipas, Michael York as John the Baptist, Rod Steiger as Pilate, the list goes on, not to mention the many actors and actresses who were not big names but were still superb in their roles. I cannot think of a single actor in this who was bad.

I liked that Jesus’ attitude towards women was properly shown here, as even some Christians do not understand how radical he was. When Jesus goes to the house of a pharisee for a meal, a ‘sinful’ woman comes in with a jar of perfume, which she uses to anoint Jesus’ feet. She wets his feet with her tears, and dries them with her hair. This depiction has Mary Magdalene (Ann Bancroft) doing this  who is depicted as a prostitute (which she was not in the Bible). This entire scene is foreshadowed when Mary is told by one of her ‘clients’ about Jesus and replies: ‘a man will always forgive another man. But a woman? That’s a different story.’ The  pharisee gets all huffy about it and tells her that this is ‘no place for her’. Jesus tells him to leave her alone. He praises her and says her sins are forgiven. The pharisee and others get all huffy about him saying that, of course. But Jesus didn’t care that a woman came into where pharisees were having a meal, and a sinful woman at that. He cared about the heart. The woman caught in adultery is another great moment to show how Jesus dealt with women. (On an aside, I always wondered how she was caught in adultery when clearly there was no man being accused. The accusers perhaps forget that man and woman adulterers were both supposed to be stoned according to Mosaic law.) Jesus shuts them up with one brilliant sentence: ‘let he who is without sin cast the first stone’. Even these men yelling for her blood know they are sinners, and eventually they leave. Jesus declines to condemn her and sends her away. Jesus sticks up for women.

The music throughout is really good. Again, it feels authentic, without the big orchestral scores that earlier ‘Biblical epics’ were wont to use. The composer is Maurice Jarre, who composed the score for many famous movies including “Lawrence of Arabia” and “Dead Poet’s Society”.  The score is beautiful and feels period appropriate.

“Jesus of Nazareth” is the best depiction of the life of Christ you will see. You don’t have to be a Christian to appreciate this – any lover of good movies will be able to appreciate the direction, acting, cinematography and the rest. Don’t watch the cut down ‘movie’ version of this – make the time and watch the full four-part series. You won’t regret it.