Pier Paolo Pasolini is widely recognized as one the most important directors of cinema with the realm of film scholarship and study, but in today's world, this once tremendously controversial world figure is unlikely to ring any bells in the minds of all but a few. His films were not widely appealing, nor were they meant to be so; he was a pretentious slave to his art if there ever was one, but while his Italian "art-house" films are rarely seen by the average moviegoer, his works have had a significant influence on the state of cinema today. He first arrived on the film industry scene 1961 with
ACCATTONE!, which introduced a new and ultra-grim form of neorealism in a story about the seedy underbelly of post-war Italian society, and when he was brutally murdered in 1975, his final and perhaps most famous completed film was
SALO, OR THE 120 DAYS OF SODOM (Salo o le 120 giomate di Sodoma), an almost unwatchable quasi-adaptation of the Marqius De Sade's infamous ode to sexual perversions, torture and, well, sadism. In between those and a few other lesser-noted films, Pasolini, that figurehead of the extreme political left, an unabashed atheist, Marxist and homosexual, made what is probably still the most accurate film adaptation of the Biblical Jesus Christ:
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW (1964).
In 1962, Pasolini had been invited by Pope John XXIII to engage in a dialogue with non-Catholic figures of the art community. As described in the book
Pasolini Requiem, by Barth David Schwartz, while on that trip, Pasolini became confined to his hotel room when the pope's presence had resulted in severe traffic congestion, and in his efforts to occupy his time, Pasolini discovered a copy of the Bible in his room. After reading the four Gospels straight through, ambitions to adapt one of the them shot to the top of his priorities. As he said in regards to his personal feelings toward religious matters, "I may be an unbeliever, but I am an unbeliever who has a nostalgia for a belief."
 |
| Enrique Irazoqui, a Spanish economics student, as Jesus |
Unlike most cinematic depictions of the story of Jesus, Pasolini had no interest in creating an amalgam of the four Gospels, but instead intended to adapt only one, his choice being the Gospel of St. Matthew, preferring it to John, which he described as "too mystical", Luke, which he deemed "too sentimental", and Mark, which was "too vulgar". Using the Gospel of St. Matthew has the main shooting script, Pasolini shot the film in rural Italy on a shoestring budget. As per usual, he cast non-professional actors in the roles, with Jesus played by
Enrique Irazoqui (with dialogue dubbed by
Enrico Maria Salerno), a Spanish economics student, and his own mother Susanna as the older Mary, mother of Jesus, while the rest of the cast was assembled mainly of locals from nearby villages. With deliberate disregard for historical or cultural accuracy, Pasolini's visual approach was based on various periods of classic Christian art, often in a mishmash of elements, such as the very Byzantine-inspired look of Jesus or the Angel of the Lord (played by
Rossana Di Rocco) and the Renaissance-inspired, and entirely non-Jewish, apparel of the Pharisees.
 |
| Joseph taking Mary and Baby Jesus into Egypt |
When the finished film was released in Italy, while most film critics praised the film for its noble simplicity, figures of both the political left and right reacted harshly. At its Venice Festival premiere, right-wing Catholics picketed the film, with many outraged simply that Pasolini, that paragon of sin, had made a film about Jesus [Remember when Mel Gibson wanted to make a Maccabees film? Not even on the same level], and others perceived the film as an attack on their right-wing, pro-capitalist politics, such as the scene of the rich young man whom Jesus instructs to sell his fine things and give to the poor (Matt. 19:16-30). In contrast, the far political left of Pasolini's own persuasion were disdainful of the straightforward religious ideology, and Pasolini admitted a "disgust" for some of those elements which he labeled as "disgusting Pietism", but he also defended the religious nature of his film from his peers, accusing Marxists of a tendency toward conformity and unwilling to acknowledge the important human questions of spirituality and faith. Despite the negative reaction from far right-wing Catholics, the Vatican released a list of 45 great films divided into three categories of Religion, Values and Art, with THE GOSPEL OF ST. MATTHEW
listed among the Great Religious Films and praised as "completely faithful".
As such, there really not much sense giving a summary of the film's plot; the visual interpretation is the only thing about it that can differ from the Bible, but even that doesn't try anything too new. The use of dialogue is really quite sparse, with the better part of the story told in visuals, or "pure film", but of what dialogue there is, there is not a single line that cannot be found in the Gospel of Matthew verbatim.
When you really look at it though, it's easy to see what drew Pasolini to such fervent pursuit of the project. Pasolini was a first and foremost a poet, which alone would have drawn him to the moving prose of the Bible, as well as classical literary and myth motifs, but perhaps most of all was a feeling of relatability he found in the Christ. Here was a man outside of society, a man who strove to change the world, to change the injustices of society; an revolutionary who kept company with those whom society had shunned. His leftist leanings found an ally in Christ's progressive movement and words of comfort and promise to the poor.
It seems apparent that what Pasolini aims to convey through THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW is a question of 'What if the world had actually taken up Jesus' cause?' What if...?
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW (Il vangelo secondo Matteo)
3 out of 4 stars
Directed by: Pier Paolo Pasolini
Starring: Enrique Irazoqui, Settimio De Porto, Rossana Di Rocco, Susanna Pasolini, Ferruccio Nuzzo
Not Rated (contains some PG-level violence)
When you really look at it though, it's easy to see what drew Pasolini to such fervent pursuit of the project. Pasolini was a first and foremost a poet, which alone would have drawn him to the moving prose of the Bible, as well as classical literary and myth motifs, but perhaps most of all was a feeling of relatability he found in the Christ. Here was a man outside of society, a man who strove to change the world, to change the injustices of society; an revolutionary who kept company with those whom society had shunned. His leftist leanings found an ally in Christ's progressive movement and words of comfort and promise to the poor.
No comments:
Post a Comment