watrousjames Reviews

More American Graffiti (1979)

Not as bad as the critics thought it was but nowhere near as good as the original.

[6/10 · 12 May 2023]

The almost forgotten film MORE AMERICAN GRAFFITI, the 1979 sequel to George Lucas' masterpiece AMERICAN GRAFFITI is not as bad as critics thought, but nowhere near as good as the original. Lucas was the executive producer, but B. W. L. Norton wrote and directed this sequel. All of the cast returned except for Richard Dreyfuss.

It's actually a very ambitious films as it takes place over the course of four New Years Eve day and evening during the middle 1960's. Yet, some stories are more compelling than others. The weakest is Toad in Vietnam. It's the most farfetched story out of all of them. Compared to other films dealing with Vietnam such as APOCALYPSE NOW!, which came out the same year, it pales in comparison.

Lori and Steve story is okay but nothing great. Lori has a fight with Steve because she would like to work and not be a stay home mother. She visits her younger brother, a college student, protesting the Vietnam War and gets caught up in riot between protesters and police.

Debbie's story is more interesting as she has joined the hippie counter culture movement in San Francisco's Haight/Asbury district. The way it was filmed was interesting with multiple camera shots going on at the same time. It reminded me a bit of WOODSTOCK.

The most compelling and bittersweet story is John Milner drag.racing at the Fremont Drag Strip in Fremont, CA on New Years Eve Day 1964, the last day of his life. Between races he meets a young lady from Iceland who doesn't speak English but nevertheless they are attracted to each other and fall in love.

Overall, an uneven film with some good moments. 6/10/

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)

A very good film

[9/10 · 23 January 2023]

The film version of Ron Hansen's historical novel about Jesse James and Robert Ford starts off sluggishly, but becomes more compelling and intriguing as it progresses. The acting by everyone is really good, but Casey Affleck is excellent as Robert "Bob" Ford. Roger Deakins cinematography is excellent. It has a haunting beautiful quality to it that reminds me of Terrence Malick's films such as DAYS OF HEAVEN.

One minor flaw is the women in the story, such as Jesse James' wife played by the great Mary Louise Parker. Get short shrift in this film. I would have liked to have learned more about them. Yet, it is a story about men.

I am a fan of writer Ron Hansen. I've read the novel some years ago. From what I recall from the novel this film version does justice to it.

Translated (2018)

Intriguing premise, but uneven results

[6/10 · 8 December 2022]

This film is a low budget independent Christian film with a really intriguing premise. What if God sent St. Paul to 21st century America? The movie tries to answer that. I wondered if the film would be absolutely terrible, which it isn't. Yet, it is quite uneven. The biggest problem was that some of the acting in this film was really bad, though mostly it was smaller parts. The main actor who plays Paul was pretty good. The young American man he befriends was definitely green when it came to acting, but he wasn't terrible. The actress who becomes the young man's love interest was actually quite good.

As Paul is about to be executed he is transported (or translated as they call it in the film) to 21st century rural Oregon, where a truck driver picks him up. Paul can't speak English, but the truck driver figures out he speaks Greek (ancient Greek to be exact). The truck driver, who is a lapsed Christian who went to Bible college, takes Paul home with him to Eugene, OR. Paul learns English within two months, which seemed a bit farfetched to me. (Yes, the real Paul was a really smart man, but I still think it would take longer to learn English.) When Paul learns there are Christians in the 21st century he is happy, but he is unhappy to find out there are divisions in Christianity. He would like the various congregations to come together and pray together and start a movement to push unity. Not all pastors are keen on this. One pastor, in particular, thinks he's a fraud. Obviously, this causes conflict.

I liked the ecumenical message of the film. The film was made by Evangelical Protestant Christians. Paul does attend a Catholic mass, which I thought was good. Paul comes across as a very nice man, but Paul in his letters had a temper, which we never see. On the other hand Paul wants to work and not live by handouts, which was true. The real Paul made a living as a tentmaker while he traveled around the Roman Empire spreading the Gospel. The script itself wasn't terrible, but it could've been better in spots. As I stated some of the acting, by mostly, smaller characters, was bad.

If you are a Christian it is worthwhile seeing once. I enjoyed it despite its flaws, but I probably won't watch it again.

The Passion (2008)

Overall, a good miniseries

[8/10 · 11 November 2022]

This miniseries was hard to find. I read about it years ago in a magazine and it sounded really interesting. It's a British production that was never shown in the United States. I was able to get a copy of the DVD from Greece of all places, via Ebay. Most DVD versions won't play on American DVD players, thankfully this one does.

After watching it I think it's a good miniseries. Obviously, it will be compared with Mel Gibson's film. Gibson's film packed an emotional wallop that this film didn't. I view Gibson's film as the Stations of the Cross and the Sorrowful Mystery of the Rosary put on film focusing on the suffering of Jesus. This film focuses on the political and religious milieu of the first century Judea that lead to Jesus' death.

This film begins on Palm Sunday and the events of Holy Week. Joseph Mawle makes a good Jesus, but as not as good as other actors like Jim Caviezel or Robert Powell. The supporting cast was really good. The production values were good, too. I thought the script was mostly good, but there were times that could've been better. I think if writer had stayed closer to scriptures concerning Jesus dialogue that would have been better. I had mixed feelings about how Mary, Jesus' mother was portrayed. The actress did a good job but some of her lines I thought could've been better. The writing could have been better in spots, but it wasn't terrible by any means.

I liked the fact they made Caiaphas a three dimensional person, played by Ben Daniels, who did a good job in the role. James Nesbit made a good Pilate despite his Irish accent.

The crucifixion scenes were effective and somewhat graphic, but nowhere near as graphic as Gibson's film. I also liked the resurrection scenes, which can be tricky to do, but they did a good job on them.

It's definitely worthwhile seeing once, if you haven't seen it.

The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle (2000)

Quite funny

[7/10 · 30 November 2021]

I remember watching reruns of Rocky and Bullwinkle, once in a while, when I was a kid. When I saw this movie in the theater it was really funny. I am not the biggest fan of the cartoon (not that I have anything against it; I just never got into it), but the movie is quite clever, with some real laugh out loud moments. I rewatched recently and it's still quite funny.

Life for Life: Maximilian Kolbe (1991)

Well made film on the martyrdom of Saint Maximillian Kolbe

[8/10 · 12 November 2021]

This is an interesting film. It's not a straight up biography on Maximillian Kolbe. Those who don't know Kolbe was a Polish Franciscan priest murdered by the Nazis in Auschwitz. After a prisoner escaped he the Nazi commander condemns ten prisoners to the starvation bunker. One man despairs, so Kolbe steps and offers to take his place. By doing this he saves the man's life, but dies later in the starvation bunker.

This film is seen through the eyes of the man who escapes (played by a young Christoph Waltz). He wants to know Kolbe's story after he realizes that he responsible for his death and the death of the nine others. He suffers intense survivor's guilt because of it.

Yet, this is an interesting way to tell the story. It's definitely worthwhile seeing.

Frontline: From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians - Part 1 (1998) Season 16, Episode 4

Well made documentary

[7/10 · 19 September 2021]

Documentary focusing on Jesus, the early church, and Paul. Many of the scholars, such as John Dominic Crossan, are quite liberal and I question some of their conclusions. Wayne Meeks, one of the scholars, is the most balanced of them. At its best it goes into the first century Jewish and Greco-Roman world very throughly, with many new things to learn.. Despite some flaws, a well made documentary.

Peter and Paul (1981 TV Movie)

Well made tv movie on the lives of Peter and Paul

[8/10 · 11 July 2021]

This film probably really should have been called PAUL AND OCCASIONALLY PETER because it focuses more on Paul than Peter. This was first aired in 1981. Though not a great film by any means and, at times, uneven, it's still a good film, mostly because Anthony Hopkins superb performance as Saint Paul. Robert Foxworth mades a good, if not great, Peter. (My favorite portrayal of Peter is James Farentino in JESUS OF NAZARETH.) There are some really good supporting actors in it: Herbert Lom as Barnabas, John Rhys-Davis as Silas,David Gwillim as Mark and Jon Finch as Luke. Jose Ferrer, Raymond Burr, and Jean Peters appear in, more or less, cameos. Eddie Albert plays Roman Procurator Festus and he is nowhere near as good an actor as Hopkins. The costume designs and set designs were good. The makeup was quite good and this film won an Emmy for it. It is a long film, it was originally aired over two nights. Despite being long, I felt it was the right length for the story.

There are two things I wish were shown but weren't. One was baptism was a big part of the early church. That was and still is the initiation into most Christian churches, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. They have, at least, showed Paul being baptized, but they didn't. They also should have shown or, at least, mentioned the fire of Rome. The Romans persecuted the Christians because Nero used them as a scapegoat saying they started the fire to direct any criticism away from him. There was a rumor he started the fire.

Interesting tidbit. James Faulkner has a small role as one of the Jewish Christians who are critical of Paul preaching converting Gentiles. Faulkner would later go on to play Paul in the 2017 film PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST.

Frankenstein (2004)

The most faithful adaptation of the novel I've seen.

[7/10 · 29 June 2021]

For the most part I enjoyed this, mostly, faithful adaptation of the novel. It's a not masterpiece by any means, but it's a hansom production. The acting, for the most part, is good by Alec Newman as the Victor Frankenstein and Luke Goss as the creature. Actually Goss gives a really good performance, acutally his portrayal of the creature is probably the most sympathetic I've seen. William Hurt, Donald Sutherland, and Julie Delpy in supporting roles don't hurt the film by any means. One flaw is that the creature wasn't scary looking. He looked like someone with a skin deformity but not someone I would find scary. I thought the film could be more suspenseful than it is. At least we now have version that is at least 90% faithful to the novel, unlike most, which are usually about 5% faithful, even Kenneth Branagh's version took a lot of liberties.

Stephen's Test of Faith (1998 Video)

Good intentions can't help a flawed film

[4/10 · 3 June 2021]

The filmmakers who made this short film definitely had good intentions, but the film itself is very flawed. It's about a boy named Stephen who is bullied by classmates for being a Christian. That night he has a dream where he meets St. Stephen, the first martyr of Christianity. St. Stephen takes Stephen on a journey through the various parts of history where he meets other martyrs, including William Tyndale.

Unfortunately, the film was really heavy handed. I've heard the term Catholic guilt but this film was made by Evangelical Protestants and because of the heavy handedness of the film I now know there is such a thing as Evangelical Protestant guilt. Some of the acting was bad. Though the boy who played Stephen and the actor who played St. Stephen were pretty good.

There are some good films about martyrs, such as BECKET, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, ROMERO, OF GODS AND MEN, and SILENCE. There was also a reasonably good film about the Lutheran minsiter, theologian, and martyr Dietricch Bonhoffer titled BONHOFFER: AGENT OF GRACE. See those films instead.

I, Paul (1980 Video)

A short film based on 2 Timothy

[6/10 · 14 May 2021]

This is a short film about Saint Paul, the Apostle, in prison shortly before his execution. He recites 2 Timothy. Basically, it is a film version of the Second of Letter of Saint Paul to Timothy. It is an okay short film, but nothing great. The King James Bible's version was used. (Incidentally, the majority of New Testament doubt Paul wrote this letter or the other pastorals (1 Timothy and Titus). Though there are a minority of scholars who think he did write it.)

This would probably work better as a short one man stage play then a movie. Paul finishes writing his letter and then recites it. Paul, when he wrote letters, would recite them to a secretary who would do the actual writing. It might have been more effective if the filmmakers chose to do it that way.

The filmmaker also used Beethoven's music as the soundtrack. I have mixed feelings about it. I love Beethoven's music, but I am not sure how it really fit with the theme of the film. There is a song sung at the end that is based Paul's writing. That was more effective.

Despite its flaws it is worthwhile seeing once if you are interested in Paul or seeing one of the Pauline letters acted out.

'Master Harold'... and the Boys (1985 TV Movie)

Original film version of Athol Fugard's play

[10/10 · 13 May 2021]

The original film version of Athol Fugard's play is very powerful and moving. It deals with institutional racism in the early 1950's South Africa and how it affects two black men and one white teenager. Matthew Broderick and the late Zakes Mokae give great performances.

Master Harold ... and the Boys (2010)

Great film version of a great play

[10/10 · 13 May 2021]

This film version of South African playwright Athol Fugard's play is, like the original, quite powerful and moving. It has much to say about institutional racism and apartheid how it effected everyday normal people in South Africa of the early 1950's on both sides of the color divide. Freddie Highmore, Ving Rhames, and Patrick Mofokeng all give superb performances.

To the Ends of the Earth (2018)

Good short film about the Saint Paul

[9/10 · 1 May 2021]

This is a good short film about Saint Paul of Tarsus and his missionary activities in Philippi. The film is based on the Acts of the Apostles. It runs about 40 minutes. It actually better than some full length features I've seen on Paul's life. The acting, for the most part, is good. The set design, costume design, and cinematography are all good, too. It's directed by David Batty, who directed four word for word adaptations of each Gospel. It's worthwhile watching.

The Final Inquiry (2006)

Pretty good Biblical film if you ignore some big historical inaccuracies.

[6/10 · 17 April 2021]

A pretty good Biblical film if you ignore some big historical inaccuracies. This is actually a remake of a 1987 Italian co-production titled THE INQUIRY starring Keith Carradine and Harvey Kietel (as Pontius Pilate). I have not seen that film. It is a bit derivative of other films, such as RISEN and the film version Lloyd C. Douglas' THE ROBE. That being said it is one of the better Bible theme films I have seen recently. The acting, for the most part, is good. The sets, costumes, and cinematography are all good, too.

The basic plot is that Emperor Tiberius (Max von Sydow) sends a Roman genera, Tauro(Daniele Liotti) and his slave (Dolph Lundgren) undercover to Jerusalem to investigate the crucifixion of a "criminal" who rumor has it has risen from the dead. I wonder who that "criminal" could possibly be. I think we all know. He meets Saul/Paul of Tarsus before his conversion, making Saul a villain in this film. (I don't think Saul was persecuting Christians so close to the death of Jesus. It was probably a few years later.) He also questions Pontius Pilate (Histro Shopov, who also played Pilate in Mel Gibson's THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST). Of course the filmmakers have to throw in a love story. He falls in love with a Jewish Christian woman named Tabitha (Monica Cruz, Penelope Cruz' beautiful younger lookalike sister), whose anti-Christian Pharisee father (F. Murray Abraham) has arranged to marry a man she is not in love with.

My review makes this film sound cheesy and it is a little bit. But it is not nearly as bad as it could be. For some reason I found it compelling. Maybe I am just a sucker for these types of films. Even though the romance is derivative it was handled fairly well. It's worthwhile seeing once. I don't know that I would see it again. I am curious what the original 1987 film was like. That doesn't appear to be available on DVD or streaming.

This film was editing from a longer European tv version. That would also be interesting to see. It is not available in the United States.

Son of Man (2006)

Unique take on the Jesus story.

[8/10 · 23 March 2021]

Modern update of the Jesus story set in 21st century South Africa. Overall, it's a good film. The music is excellent. The acting, directing, and cinematography is good too. Some aspects of the film work better than others, but overall a worthwhile film.

San Pietro (2005 TV Movie)

Omar Sharif gives a good performance in a film marred by bad dubbing.

[6/10 · 17 March 2021]

The late great Omar Sharif, who was quite a good actor, gave a good performance in this film as St. Peter. Sadly, the film was marred by bad dubbing. This film was made for Italian television in 2005. I think Sharif did his lines in English, but most of the actors did theirs in Italian. The dubbing wasn't very good. Some of the voice actors used for dubbing into English weren't really good actors either. This might be a better film if it was in Italian and subtitled. There were aspects of the film I thought could be better. Saul/Paul starts persecuting the Church much to early, actually before Pentecost. In reality Saul/Paul persecuted the church 3-5 years after Jesus' crucifixion. They also combine two times that Peter is imprisoned and escaped, probably for time constraint. Stephen's defense and his stoning were too rushed. There was an aspect of the film I did like, which was Peter's relationship to the other Apostles and to Paul, after his conversion. The film even portrays Peter being at Paul's trial and execution. In reality, it's possible it could've happened, but it's also quite possible it didn't. Also ,I liked Peter's relationship to Jesus at the beginning of the film and shown in flashbacks throughout the film. Most of the last part of the movie is a fictionalized account of Peter in Rome ministering to the Christians living there. Some aspects of this worked better than others. Such as Paul's friendship to a Christian family that are slaves to a Roman official works fairly well. But a romance between the Roman official's son and a Christian woman does not work as well. It's worthwhile seeing once for Omar Sharif's performance. In fact I gave the film a 6/10 because of his performance. I would have given it a higher score if it didn't have so many flaws. It would be better if it was either in Italian and subtitled or redubbed with better voice actors.

King of Kings (1961)

Compelling, well made, but flawed film on the life of Jesus

[7/10 · 9 March 2021]

He directing, costume design, cinematography, and music score are quite good. The director, Nicholas Ray, was known for making smaller films, such as REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, dealing with flawed characters. This was his first (and I believe) only epic. Jeffery Hunter plays Jesus in it. He's not a bad Jesus, but he is underwhelming compared to other actors who have played Jesus like Robert Powell, Max von Sydow, Enrique Irazoqui, Henry Ian Cusick, and even Jim Caviezel. The supporting actors are better such as Siobhan McKenna as Mary, Harry Guardino as Barabbas, Rip Torn as Judas, Robert Ryan as John the Baptist, Carmen Sevilla as Mary Magdalene (who is portrayed as a former prostitute, even though there is no evidence she was), and Ron Randell as Rufus, a fictitious Roman soldier created for the film, who is sympathetic to John the Baptist and Jesus. The film focuses a lot on the political situation of the time. It focuses on Pilate, Herod Antipas, and Barabbas and Judas (who are friends in this film). While, interesting it should have been focusing more on Jesus. Also, we don't really get to know the twelve apostles that well, except Peter and John a little bit and Judas the most. The sermon on the Mount is the best part of the film. Even though Jesus is speaking lines not just from Matthew's Gospel, but the others as well, including John. The film is based on all four Gospel, which is always tricky. If you have never seen this film it is worthwhile seeing once. It would be nice to see on the big screen in 70mm.

St. Paul (2000– )

Mediocre film, but has some good moments.

[5/10 · 7 March 2021]

Mediocre film, but does have a few good moments. This is a film about the life of St. Paul has some good stuff going for it. The acting, for the most part, was pretty good. The film locals, costume design, setting design, and cinematography were pretty good. The script was the problem. The writer decided to create a fictitious character named Ruben, a Sadducee, who is a friend of Saul, the Pharisee. When Saul/Paul converts to Christianity, Ruben becomes his bitter enemy. I'm not against fictionalizing aspects in a film about a historical person, but it just didn't work. (The 2018 film PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST was mostly fiction dealing with the last days of Paul in prison telling Luke his story as Luke writes Acts. Even though it was fictionalized account it worked better than the fictional aspects of this film.) I would have liked the film to have spent more time on Paul and his missionary work then on the fictitious villain. The scenes that work are when Paul is interacting with Peter, James, and Barnabas. Incidentally, American character actor G.W. Bailey gave a good performance as Barnabas. Bailey might be best known for playing the recurring role of Sgt. Rizzon on M*A*S*H. If you want to see a much better film on Paul see the 1981 tv movie PETER AND PAUL (starring Anthony Hopkins as Paul and Robert Foxworth as Peter). Also, the above mentioned PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST is pretty good, too. Though this film is better than PAUL: THE EMISSARY.

St. Paul (2000– )

Mediocre film with a few good moments

[5/10 · 7 March 2021]

This is a film about the life of St. Paul has some good stuff going for it. The acting, for the most part, was pretty good. The film locals, costume design, setting design, and cinematography were pretty good. The script was the problem. The writer decided to create a fictitious character named Ruben, a Sadducee, who is a friend of Saul, the Pharisee. When Saul/Paul converts to Christianity, Ruben becomes his bitter enemy. I'm not against fictionalizing aspects in a film about a historical person, but it just didn't work. (The 2018 film PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST was mostly fiction dealing with the last days of Paul in prison telling Luke his story as Luke writes Acts. Even though it was fictionalized account it worked better than the fictional aspects of this film.) I would have liked the film to have spent more time on Paul and his missionary work then on the fictitious villain. The scenes that work are when Paul is interacting with Peter, James, and Barnabas. If you want to see a much better film on Paul see the 1981 tv movie PETER AND PAUL (starring Anthony Hopkins as Paul and Robert Foxworth as Peter). Also, the above mentioned PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST is pretty good, too. Though this film is better than PAUL: THE EMISSARY.

Empires: Peter & Paul and the Christian Revolution (2003 TV Movie)

Good documentary on two of early Christianity's great leaders

[9/10 · 23 February 2021]

This a good documentary on the lives of Saints Peter and Paul and how they spread their message of Jesus throughout the Roman Empire. A number of noted New Testament scholars and historians commented throughout the film. They included N.T. "Tom" Wright, John Dominic Crossan, Richard Horsely, Paula Fredriksen, and Amy-Jill Levine. I did question whether Paul's view of Christianity was as divided to Peter and James' view of Christianity as the documentary claimed. Levine, a scholar I admire argues that James and the Jerusalem Church did not accept Paul and his followers' donation. It's possible, but if they really needed the money, which they very well may have, I imagine they would have.

Paul, Apostle of Christ (2018)

Good historical fiction

[8/10 · 21 February 2021]

The movie really should be titled THE LAST DAYS OF PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST. We actually don't know much about Paul's last days other than he was martyred during Nero's persecution. Since he was a Roman citizen he probably was beheaded. Keeping this in mind, it's a good fictionalized account of the last days of Paul. The acting by James Faulkner as Paul and Jim Caviezel as Luke is quite good. The supporting actors are good too. The overall story is compelling, though a bit somber, and, at times, even moving. Technically, it's well made too, with good sets, costumes, music, and cinematography. The screenplay is pretty good, too, though there is one aspect of it that is predictable. Without giving too much away there is a character that recovers from a life threatening situation much too quickly. Some of the dialogue could've been a little better in a couple of scenes. These are minor flaws in a worthwhile film. As Christian movies go this is one of the better ones to come out in the last few years.

The Nightingale (I) (2018)

One of the best revenge theme films I've ever seen.

[10/10 · 21 February 2021]

One of the best revenge theme films I've ever seen. It's up there with Ingmar Bergman's THE VIRGIN SPRING. This is a violent, potent, but powerful film about a woman seeking revenge on the men who destroyed her life. This is a difficult film to watch and it's not for the squeamish, but for those who can handle it it's a masterpiece of filmmaking. It's rated R and rightly so. I wouldn't recommend anyone under 18 seeing this. It takes place in Tasmania in 1825. One could call it WALKABOUT MEETS CORMAC MCCARTHY. The woman seeks the help of a aborigine to guide her through the Tasmanian wilderness in her search for vengeance. The acting is really good. The story is absolutely compelling and I recommend it for those with strong stomachs.

The Apostle Paul: The Man Who Turned the World Upside Down (2001 TV Movie)

Good, but not great, documentary on the life of St. Paul.

[7/10 · 20 February 2021]

Good, but not great, documentary on the life of St. Paul. It was released on tv in 2001. It's only 70 minutes and they try to pack in a lot. If you don't know much about Paul this is a good place to start. It's nicely narrated by Martin Sheen. It's a follow up to the documentary THE TWELVE APOSTLES, which is also narrated by Sheen. It was produced by Paulist Productions and the History Channel. Fr. Ellwood "Bud" E. Keiser, CSP was the executive producer. He was the founder of Paulist Productions. This and THE TWELVE APOSTLES are the last two documentaries he worked on before his death in 2000.

The Visual Bible: Acts (1994 Video)

Film version of the Acts of the Apostles

[7/10 · 14 February 2021]

This is a word for word adaptation of The Acts of the Apostles. In actuality this works better as a visual audio book than an actual movie. That being said it's pretty good for what it is. The acting, for the most part, is decent. Dean Jones comes across best as Luke, who narrates the film. James Brolin makes a pleasant, if somewhat low key, Peter. (Of course any actor is kind of low key compared to James Farentino's portrayal of Peter in Zefirelli's JESUS OF NAZARETH). Henry O. Arnold is ok as Paul, but a bit of a letdown after seeing Anthony Hopkins as Paul in PETER AND PAUL. (Of course Hopkins is one of the greatest actors of all time. Almost any actor is a let down after him. Though James Faulkner made a good Paul in PAUL, APOSTLE OF CHRIST.) It's worthwhile seeing at least once if you are like me, a Bible film buff.