KingOfKings

King Of Kings

    This would change in the 1960's. Shortly after DeMille's death in 1959, Samuel Bronston announced his interest in producing a new, epic Jesus movie (Tatum 75). This movie would eventually come to be known as King of Kings* (1961), and it is where my analysis of the Jesus movie genre begins. This film was a film of transition between the Jesus cameo films of the 1950's and the full-blown Jesus films to come. It spends quite a bit of time on the Jesus story and the title of the film is named after Jesus; however, the Jesus story seems to be secondary to, or at least competing with, the story of a Roman centurion named Lucius and how he comes to grip with Jesus in his own life.
     To direct this motion picture Bronston chose Nicholas Ray. Ray had a history of making social problem films. His resume included They Live by Night (1949), Knock on Any Door (1949), and Rebel Without a Cause (1955). Thus it was not long before people started to describe Ray's Jesus as a "Rebel with a cause"** (Stern, Jefford and Debona 87). The choice for the title role was "teen heart throb" Jeffrey Hunter. He was a relatively inexperienced actor who "would have been more appropriate playing a California-surfer than a Palestinian prophet/Incarnate God" (Baugh 22). He had baby blue eyes,*** wore an auburn wig, and except for his head, had all of his body hair shaved off for his part in the film at Ray's request.
With the initial glance, King of Kings (1961) appears to be merely a traditional representation of the story of Jesus. However, with a closer examination one realizes that this is not nearly the case. An omniscient narrator, played by Orson Wells, leads us through the entire story. The birth story seems traditional enough with the census, manger, magi, and shepherds; however, it is interesting to note that there is no mention of a virgin birth. This glossing over of the supernatural is a theme that is carried out throughout the movie. There are only two miracles we witness in the movie and they both can be explained away as having "a psychological explanation" or a "natural cause" (Baugh 25). There are also other miracles reported by Lucius, but immediately dismissed by Pilate.
     There is basically only one place within the movie where we hear Jesus teach; that is "The Sermon on the Mount." Filmed rather extravagantly with over seven thousand extras****, this is a lengthy scene which is summed up by Lucius when he reports back to Pilate as, "Jesus spoke nothing but of peace, love, and the brotherhood of man."
     There is a resurrection appearance to Magdalene in the garden, and also some reported by the omniscient narrator. Also, there is a final, rather awkward, resurrection scene where we do not see Jesus, only his shadow.   Jesus' shadow intersects with some fishing nets to make a cross as he speaks to his disciples. The reason this scene is so odd is because in order for Jesus to create the shadow that he does he would have to be the size of, say, Godzilla. With this the movie ends and the viewer is left wondering what to make of this huge Jesus shadow, and what happened to the Jesus that was in the garden with Mary.
     It is clear in the film that the prevailing message of Jesus that is presented to us is one of peace. This is made clear in the Sermon on the Mount, as well as in several discussions that are contained in the film such as the one between Lucius and Pilate and also another discussion between Barabbas, who is set up as a Jewish zealot out to overthrow Rome, and Judas. This message of peace is carried out to the point that at the time of the betrayal and crucifixion, "the viewer is left wondering how such a nice guy ended up on a Roman cross" (Tatum 83). What is even more revealing than what is in the film is what is left out. There is no clash with Roman or priestly authorities (Baugh 20), no clash with Jesus' townspeople in Nazareth, no cleansing of the temple and no struggle in Gethsemane (Tatum 82). Also, within his teachings there is no prophetic or apocalyptic sayings, no call for moral responsibility, and there "is not any reference to the issues of personal or social sinfulness" (Baugh 23). We only hear Jesus tell us, "The Kingdom of God is within you" (Stern, Jefford and Debona 61).
     The best way to classify the Jesus of King of Kings (1961) is as a secular humanist. The way the movie downplays the supernatural aspects of the story and exalts the human condition leads one to this conclusion. This movie was a colossal failure both in the theater and in an attempt to portray the life of Jesus.

*Demille's estate was dead set against letting Bronston use the title of the earlier film. The two parties came to an agreement that Bronston could use it if DeMille's estate received 10 percent of the distributor's gross. However, Bronston did some research and found that DeMille never registered his title with the MPAA. Thus he could legally use it and all it cost him was six cents-the going rate of a first class stamp (Stern, Jefford and Debona 82).
**This is just one of the many creative criticisms for this film. Some of my favorites are: "A King James Version of Gone With the Wind," " [King of Kings] says: 'Take up your credit cards and follow me.'" "I Was a Teenage Jesus" (Tatum 84), "[Ray pays more attention to] mounted cavalry than on Mt. Calvary" (Baugh 21), or simply "Incontestably the corniest, phoniest, ickiest and most monstrously vulgar of all the big Bible stories Hollywood has told" (Time 55).
***A close up of Jesus' very pale baby-blue eyes is a theme that is repeated quite often in the film. So many times, in fact, that it almost gets annoying.
****It is this scene that one gets the impression that Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979) is on target when it presents people in the back of the crowd saying, "What did he say? Blessed are the cheese makers?"