The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965) is known for being the
first Hollywood movie in which the face of Jesus is shown. From the standpoint
of the next century, the scandal in showing Jesus could only seem antiquated,
if not outright silly. Rarely can such perspective on a scandal exist as it is
occurring. In its own time, a scandal seems all-important and critically in
need of being addressed lest life as we know it would otherwise come to an end.
Ten years earlier, Nikos Kazantzakis' novel, The Last Temptation of Christ, had also been
controversial, as was the 1988 film of the same name (and based on the novel)
because Jesus imagines himself in the sexual act and he may struggle with
mental illness. This scandal was more serious than was that which greeted The Greatest Story Ever Told even though the Jesus
of Last Temptation ends up rejecting the temptation to avoid the
cross and is thus faithful to his Father in the end. The viewer is left, however,
without a decisive answer as to whether the film's Jesus suffers from mental
fits because the film ends with Jesus dying on the cross. The theological
validation of Jesus is made in Greatest Story, though curiously not chiefly in the usual way this is
done in narratives about him. I submit that this deviation makes the film
highly significant in that it emphasizes religious experience as a reaction.
The two parts of The
Greatest Story are separated by an intermission. The climax before it
outdoes the one that comes at the end of the film. Ironically, the focus in the
first climax is on the disciples' reactions rather than Jesus' face. Jesus
walks up a hill to Lazarus' tomb to bring him back to life. Although we briefly
see Jesus' face as he looks into the tomb, the chief shot is from the
perspectives of the disciples downhill looking up. In fact, we only know that
Jesus has succeeded by the reactions of the people watching the event from
afar. We never see Lazarus. Seeing the reactions--verbal and nonverbal--is a
more powerful way of conveying the significance of the event in religious
terms. The astonishment and urgency to tell others we see suggests that the
event was not just unusual, but more crucially supernatural and thus sourced in
divine power intervening through Jesus. The reaction of the disciples to Jesus'
resurrection at the end of the film is muted in relative terms. For viewers who
are very familiar with the Passion Story of Jesus, the emotional reaction at
the end of the film may also be muted.
In retrospect, some viewers may
notice that the reactions of the disciples (and others) at Lazarus coming back
to life (as distinct from being resurrected) are not the reactions that are
typically seen in Churches during worship. Although in John (20:29) it is
written, "Blessed are those who have not seen [me] and yet believe,"
it is also true that human reactions from witnessing a miracle of the
significance of Lazarus would naturally be more intense than from hearing about
miracles from the lectern in a church. Indeed, because Christians down through
the centuries have not witnessed any such miracles of that magnitude
personally, but only through a book, muted reactions have been the norm.
That is to say, relative to the reactions of the disciples and others in the
film during the first climax, the intensity of Christians has been less in
merely hearing about the miracle. Christians may notice that the miracles that
evince a supernatural aspect are believed only in the narrative. This is not to
say that the miracles were not empirical (i.e., historical) events; rather, my
point is that Christians through the centuries have as their source the Bible,
whose inerrancy pertains to belief rather than knowledge. Empirical facts, as
from historical accounts written by historians, count as knowledge; belief does
not. For such Christians, a miracle can be a literary device because the belief
must come out of a book. The device, I submit, lends authenticity to the
principles that a religious narrative conveys, rather proffers proof of an
empirical event in the past. In short, Christians since the eye-witnesses such
as those depicted in the first climax of the film have been dependent on the
Bible sans direct experience.
I do not mean to suggest that
religious experience from a miracle depends on being an eye-witness. This is
where the film has particular value. The narrative device can trigger a
distinctly religious reaction (i.e., experience). Watching the reactions from
the Lazarus event, which itself was largely hidden from the viewer, the viewer
may have a reaction that transcends emotions. Such a distinctively religious
reaction, as for instance from feeling the hair raise on one's arms, is itself
a religious phenomenon that exists even if miracles are only a literary device
without having happened historically. None of us can know whether or not they
did. It is amazing that a mere literary device can trigger such a
distinctive spiritual (rather than emotional) reaction. Generally, symbols,
myths and rituals can trigger religious reactions. The reaction to a
significance of a type that transcends our realm is distinctly religious or
spiritual, and thus part of the human experience even if miracles are
not.
In short, the film's visual
point-of-view assumes an unusual vantage point as Jesus is performing the
miracle on Lazarus by focusing on the onlookers and thus their respective
reactions. In contrast, a traditional vantage-point is assumed as viewers look
at the raised Jesus talking with his disciples. Containing these two
different perspectives in the two climaxes of the film, it points greater
attention on the Lazarus miracle than that of Jesus' resurrection. The greater
attention is itself distinct because the reactions that people would have to
witnessing a significant, empirical miracle are highlighted. As a result, some
viewers in turn may have a novel reaction that is distinctly religious and yet
does not require that miracles occur outside of being a literary device. The
reaction itself may point to the human propensity to transcend the limits of
perception, cognition, and even emotions and thus to have a distinctively
religious or spiritual experience. Such an experience, rather than major
figures, may be the point that religions try to convey.
