| |
|||
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|
Golgotha
Golgotha is noteworthy because it is the very first sound-picture ever made about Christ. On top of that, it is thoroughly well done and engrossing. A French film made in 1935, it was directed by Julien Duvivier and starred a cast of hundreds—perhaps the biggest ever assembled for a film at the time. Like Cecil B. DeMille’s 1927 film King of Kings, Duvivier gives his film a glossy, Hollywood look featuring terrific sets and (at the time) epic camera shots, but unlike many Hollywood incarnations of Christ’s life, the story is decidedly intimate, focusing on characters who speak quietly in closed rooms rather than over-expressive actors who wear their Shakespearian training (or lack thereof) on their sleeves. When compared to other Christ films, Golgotha surprisingly has the most in common with Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, as it skips to the end of Christ’s life and focuses exclusively on his entry and death in Jerusalem, with an emphasis on the Passion. The key difference between Gibson’s film and Duvivier’s Golgotha is the central premise surrounding these events: If Gibson focused on the brutality that Christ suffered, Duvivier focuses on the Pharisees and the Romans as they decide what to do with Christ now that he has brought his influence into Jerusalem. So much time, in fact, is spent on the Pharisees and Pontius Pilate (played by the great Jean Gabin) that the film might as well have been named after them. Indeed, though Robert Le Vigan receives top-billing for the role of Christ, he is hardly in the picture at all. Divivier follows the traditional silent-era tradition of keeping the camera a safe distance from Christ at all times, perhaps to please religious leaders who felt that Christ’s image was too sacred to be replicated on screen (also see From the Manger to the Cross). Until the Lord’s Supper, which is approximately at the film’s half-way mark, we only see Christ briefly from a far distance or from his backside. When he finally comes into center stage, his close-ups are out of focus and slightly distorted, and Divivier never works up the audacity to show his protagonist clearly. While Divivier’s reluctance to keep us at an arm’s length from Christ is distracting, his decision is also not necessarily a bad thing. His protagonist is much like the traditional depictions of Christ in artwork; in fact, he seems modeled after Da Vinci’s Lord Supper—pious, unattached from the world of men, passive, and even ghostly in appearance. As Divinier only gives us the most fleeting hints of Christ’s teaching and ministry, this Jesus must convey all of his character dynamics in his mere presence, and Divinier presents him as a bold, spiritual leader who certainly practices the humility that he preaches. While Robert Le Vigan is too old for the part (he looks around sixty due to access lighting and makeup, though he was much younger), he is effective - speaking slowly, thoughtfully, and with his eyes towards Heaven. We see barely any humanity in him at all, and his Divine presence consumes the mood of Golgotha. Christ here is totally, completely, and undoubtedly God, just as early European art always portrayed him. In a contemporary film, Christ’s stinginess would be distracting and bland, but understanding the time in which Golgotha was made, we can forgive this traditional approach, because it is well-directed and acted with inspiration. Not so easy to forgive is the King James language mixed with more contemporary dialogue. Whenever a line is spoken that is adapted the Bible (including all of Christ’s words), it is spoken in King James English, with all the “thee’s” and “ye’s” attached. Whenever the dialogue switches to what was written exclusively for the film, this style disappears. It is difficult to switch gears, especially considering that most of the dialogue in freshly-written material from the Pharisees as they contemplate what to do with Christ. Just as we are engaged with what is happening, a character straightens up and says, “Verily, verily I say unto thee…” and the conflict and suspense previously generated in the scene deflates. I suppose that some of this problem has to do with the English-dubbed version of the film, but considering that this is the only version currently available in America, I cannot ignore it. Despite Golgotha’s strong lean towards traditional dialogue and depictions, there are several fresh, completely original ideas that I have never seen in other Christ films. Besides the strong emphasis on the Pharisees and their not-altogether unreasonable motives, note how detached the twelve disciples are from Christ: Though they have traveled with him, they seem to barely know him, and as he rides into Jerusalem, they are convinced that he is here to overthrow the Romans. When he does not, they sulk and decide that he can’t be the Messiah. It is as if his message has gone through one ear and out the other, and never have the disciples looked so pathetic and ignorant. I also understood for the first time why Jerusalem was such a pivotal stage in Christ’s ministry. As we see the thousands of skeptical Jews and Romans, we realize that while it might have been easy to preach in the smaller towns of Galilee, by taking his ministry to Jerusalem, Christ placed himself in the religious and political capital of the nation. As the guards flog Jesus, they sneer, “You’re not in Galilee anymore,” and we understand exactly why both the Pharisees and the Romans want him done away with: Bringing his influential message to Jerusalem makes Christ a political threat, and if he did start a rebellion, a very bloody war could ensue—something that the Pharisees would suffer for and the Romans would have to fight in. Pilate, who really is the film’s central character throughout, is also given much more to do than in the four gospels. While he first agrees to arrest and condemn Jesus, he soon double-crosses the Pharisees and vouches for Christ’s innocence, simply to show them that he is in charge and does not make deals with Jews. As played by Jean Gabin, he is a decisive leader who understands what he wants to do with Jesus from the beginning but is unwilling to give the Jewish leaders the privilege of sharing a Roman victory. Also
unique were the references to details from some of the apocryphal
gospels, particularly the Gospel of Peter and the Book of Nicodemus.
As Christ is scourged and nailed to the cross, he seems to feel
no pain, as the Gospel of Peter records. After the crucifixion,
the Pharisees wonder if Jesus really was the Messiah after all,
as in the Book of Nicodemus. This is the only Christ film that
I have viewed that directly deals with some of these lost books
of the Bible, and it is interesting to see a serious cinematic
approach to these missing perspectives. In
the end, Golgotha is an interesting addition to the cinematic
history of the life of Christ. Watching it today, it appears static
and outdated, but it is nevertheless an engaging picture, epic
for its time and well worth comparison to the Christ films that
came after it. Though it certainly shows its age, it does not
disgrace its era and serves as a pleasant memory of decades past,
when filmmakers were still learning how to perfect their both
art and their interpretations of Christ.
A Film Union production. Written
and directed by Julien Duvivier. No M.P.A.A. rating, but fine
for kids. Running time 100 minutes. Original year of release:
1935. French language, English dubbed. Questions? Comments? E-mail me: danel_the_tinman@hotmail.com |
||
