“The Last Temptation of Christ,” directed by Martin Scorsese, was released in 1988 to much controversy surrounding its portrayal of Jesus Christ (Willem Dafoe). The film follows Jesus along his journey into becoming the messiah and his sacrifice on the cross, presenting a fictional version of his story by showing a deeply flawed, scared, and conflicted figure. Since its release, many have hailed it as one of Scorsese’s masterpieces, a profound film about faith from a filmmaker struggling with his own. After viewing the film, I must disagree.
As a point of reference, I am not a Christian, so I have very limited knowledge on Jesus. Thus, my issues with the film don’t stem from being offended in any way, although I completely understand any Christians who reject this film as blasphemy. Given my disconnect, I will not be analyzing the movie based on its bending of the New Testament, and will instead strictly critique it as a film in its own right.
It is blatantly apparent throughout this nearly 3-hour film that this is a personal story for Scorsese, who’s spoken at length in the past about his Catholic faith. The film certainly has a soul and artistic drive to it, which I must give it credit for. I understand the intentions, but was left disappointed nonetheless.
The key issue here is that Scorsese has never been good at telling slow burn stories like this one. His best films have always been moderately paced (e.g. “Taxi Driver,” “Raging Bull”) or rapidly paced (e.g. “Goodfellas,” “The Wolf of Wall Street”). Whenever he attempts to employ methodical, meditative storytelling, I just don’t feel he succeeds. “Killers of the Flower Moon” was a dull slog that exploited its long runtime to its detriment, “Silence” was good but forgettable outside select sequences, and “The Last Temptation of Christ” continues this pattern in his filmography. Slow pacing is tricky but worth it when done well. Some of the greatest films are gradually paced, with my personal favorite “The Godfather” being a perfect example. Slow pacing must serve a purpose in the overall experience. Mastermind Denis Villeneuve’s films take their time to tell their stories, but do so to construct a harsh world, intrigue, and/or tension. He knows how to use slow pacing to the betterment of his films. In movies like “Prisoners,” the gradual pacing makes for a more immersive and engrossing experience.
The slow pacing of “The Last Temptation of Christ” serves absolutely no purpose, or at least fails to serve one. It doesn’t successfully build intrigue but rather slogs from scene to scene, each of which lasts too long. There are so many scenes of pointless meandering dialogue exchanges without much character development. The film, at least during the first two acts, is relentlessly and brutally boring.
It doesn’t help that this fictional Jesus is a poorly written character. I find the concept of a messiah struggling to come to terms with the demands of that purpose utterly fascinating, but Jesus is written to be so lifeless and lacking in the charisma which he surely must have had to attract so many followers in the first place. He has zero traits in this film other than melancholy, which simply isn’t enough to build a compelling film on. It’s difficult to become invested in his struggle with faith when we don’t care about him. As previously mentioned, I have surface level knowledge of Jesus, but from what I do know, I understand the weightiness of his compassion in the Bible and how that became immensely inspiring to people across the globe. I don’t see how anyone could follow Scorsese’s Christ, as he feels more like a goth teen than anything else. I understand and appreciate the intention of a struggling messiah, but when the character lacks any messianic traits and doesn’t show enough emotion to actually illustrate his inner conflict, the film fails.
The other major problem here is Scorsese’s generally disastrous worldbuilding. This just doesn’t feel like it took place 2,000 years ago. The characters talk like they’re from 1980s New York, not only through the modern dialect but also the actors’ accents. For whatever reason, Scorsese cast people like Harvey Keitel as Judas, whose strong New York City accent disrupts all of his scenes. The set design likewise contributes to the faulty worldbuilding. External sets meant to evoke entire cities feel so small and unremarkable. Maybe it’s just how Scorsese framed the shots, but the settings don’t feel real. In fact, most of the film (when it wasn’t metaphysical, which we’ll get into soon) felt like a bunch of New York actors playing dress up in the desert.
The film also has this horrendously inappropriate score by Peter Gabriel, who combines the expected religion-y humming music with 1980s upbeat rock. This decision is absolutely baffling to me. Whenever the score kicked in I would instantly get jolted out of the film.
Now, the film does have some bright spots, namely Thelma Schoonmaker’s pitch-perfect editing and the supernatural moments she heightens. Whenever Scorsese delves into the metaphysical imagery like Jesus facing the snake in the desert or basically the entire final 50 minutes when the film suddenly jolts to life and picks up tremendous speed, the movie suddenly becomes transportive. The third act is absolutely phenomenal. The New York dialogue ceases and Scorsese transitions into gorgeous yet haunting Biblical imagery that stays in your brain. The final act portraying the titular “last temptation” proves those scenes are the film at its best, most confident, and most unique. I wish the whole film felt the same as the finale.
Going into “The Last Temptation of Christ,” I was incredibly excited. It crushes me to have left it so disappointed, and I just cannot recommend this film to those interested by the premise. It is not nearly as profound as it believes it is, and the majority of the movie is too bland to merit the controversial discourse in the first place. I believe that if the poster did not say “A Martin Scorsese Picture,” this would not receive the level of praise it’s gotten in recent years, but because Scorsese is heralded as the movie messiah, we’re all expected to worship the ground he walks on. As much as I love some of his work, I’m more than willing to criticize his weaker movies. He is not above criticism, not at all, and I simply cannot abide by this idea that he’s “the greatest living filmmaker.” No, he’s not. Sure, he is one of them, but certainly not at the top (I’d passionately contend that’s Steven Spielberg). “The Last Temptation of Christ” is by no means a complete and total misfire, but it is a significant disappointment that fails to reach its potential.
C
Great review!