Son of God releases this weekend. Is it a Protestant movie? Are there any heretical scenes in it, like in that Nativity Story movie, where it showed Our Lady having a painful childbirth?

I'm having my doubts Son of God will be anything as good as Mel Gibson's Passion of Christ.

Here's the USCCB's review of it:

Son of God

By John Mulderig
Catholic News Service

NEW YORK (CNS) -- As the first wide-release film in nearly 50 years to focus on the life of Jesus as a whole, "Son of God" (Fox) represents an epochal event for believing moviegoers.

Though not the most powerful mass media treatment of its subject -- that accolade continues to belong to Franco Zeffirelli's 1977 television miniseries "Jesus of Nazareth" -- director Christopher Spencer's reverent but uneven screen version of the Gospel story ranks as a worthy revival of the Hollywood biblical epic.


Diogo Morgado in "Son of God." (CNS/Fox)

The screenwriters, led by Nic Young, find an efficient entree into their narrative by entrusting it to an aged St. John the Evangelist (Sebastian Knapp) during his exile on the island of Patmos. This is theologically helpful because the opening lines of the Beloved Disciple's Gospel, as recited here, describe the Incarnation, a mystery without which all that follows could easily be misconstrued.

Early scenes leading up to and including the Nativity will remind at least some viewers that "Son of God" is an outgrowth of last year's highly successful miniseries on the History cable channel series, "The Bible." The new footage that follows is at its best in its portrayal of the events that culminated in the crucifixion of Jesus (Diogo Morgado).

Thus Judas (Joe Wredden), Caiaphas the high priest (Adrian Schiller) and Pontius Pilate (Greg Hicks) are all assigned believable motives, while Morgado succeeds in blending messianic vision with very human pain in a thoroughly compelling way -- one that accords, moreover, with the scriptural account.

Catholic viewers will also appreciate the unqualified acknowledgement of St. Peter (Darwin Shaw) as the leader of the Apostles as well as scenes highlighting Mary's (Roma Downey) closeness to her son. And, though the portrayal of the Last Supper seems somewhat noncommittal as to the meaning of the Eucharist, a rough-and-ready celebration of the sacrament is shown to be the chosen moment for the Lord's first post-Resurrection appearance to the Twelve.

As for the ministry and preaching that precede the Passion -- during which Jesus draws the disapproving attention of Simon the Pharisee (Paul Marc Davis) -- there are moments that range from the moving to the awkward.

Morgado brings the requisite gravity to bear in announcing that the passage from the Prophet Isaiah he has just read aloud in Nazareth's ѕуηαgσgυє has now been fulfilled. But the story of Lazarus' death and revivification is truncated -- and drained of much of its impact -- by the absence of any hint of Jesus' previous friendship with him and with his mourning sisters.

Despite such shortcomings, as produced by Downey, Mark Burnett and Richard Bedser, Spencer's picture offers some solid catechesis and an easy introduction to the Lord's earthly biography. That's all the more valuable given the erosion in religious literacy our society has experienced since the appearance of "Son of God's" most recent -- yet far distant -- predecessor, George Stevens' 1965 Gospel drama "The Greatest Story Ever Told."

In that context, and despite its unflinching treatment of the Redeemer's sufferings, "Son of God" is probably acceptable for older teens.

The film contains strong gory violence. The Catholic News Service classification is A-III -- adults. The Motion Picture Association of America rating is PG-13 -- parents strongly cautioned. Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.

- - -

Mulderig is on the staff of Catholic News Service.

END

_______________________________________________________________________________

So, I saw this movie, and there are many inaccuracies (list roughly from worst to less worse):

• The piercing of the side of Christ didn't show blood and water spewing out!
• Mary Magdalen was constantly a tag-along with the disciples: when they were in the tempest in the sea and even during the "laying on of hands" after the Resurrection!
• Mother Mary was not in the Upper Room!
• Peter denied Christ 3× in the morning, in broad daylight, not before the cock crow, which we didn't even hear!
• Peter's faith was portrayed as though it, not Peter himself, was the rock upon which the Church is built, as though our faith makes the Church. This is Protestant ecclesiology. The Church still exists even when we are unfaithful.
• "The gates of hell will not prevail" etc. was omitted in Jesus' saying Matt. 16:18.
• "Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil" was omitted from the Our Father.
• The renting of the veil was not explicitly shown.

I liked how the Pharisees and high priests were portrayed. I liked how Judas spit out the body of Christ after he ran away from the Last Supper (cf. 1 Cor. 11:27). I liked who they cast as Mother Mary; she looked like she was in her mid-40s, unlike Monica Belucci in Gibson's Passion. I liked the inclusion of many of Jesus's miracles.

However, the film was ecuмenical. Jєωs, Catholics, and Protestants were all consulted.

Interestingly, ADL's Abraham H. Foxman thinks it's less anti-Semitic than Mel Gibson's film. I do agree with him that the Pharisees and high priests were portrayed more deeply than in Gibson's film, although I strongly disagree that Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich was "anti-Semitic"…

Why am I not surprised that the USCCB review totally ignores The Passion of the Christ, instead showering praise on Sodomite Zeferelli's blasphemous piece of trash "Jesus of Nazareth" (which, like "The Nativity Story," shows Our Lady suffering the pains of childbirth and shows her screaming with rage and grief over the Body of Our Lord)?

No doubt the recent Bergoglian "speculations" about what Our Lady was thinking at the foot of the Cross have served as a de facto retroactive papal seal of approval on that excreable piece of celluloid.

Never mind The Passion of the Christ; I'll bet even this new piece of Protestant garbage is probably too "Traditional" and "Crypto-Lefebvrian" for these shameless modernists.

Excellent post.  However, in Mel Gibson's movie, Monica Bellucci played Mary Magdalen, not Our Lady.

The part of Our Lady in The Passion of the Christ was played by Maia Morgenstern.  I think she did a good job, but I also think that Mel could have had a more realistic actress, in terms of age alone.  According to tradition, the Blessed Virgin never appeared to be older than 15 or maybe 16.  And she lived to be over 60.  This presents a lot of difficulties for a producer like Gibson who was fighting city hall pretty much, already.  If he had portrayed the Mother of God as she really appeared, it would have been World War III.  

.